HC seeks affidavits from Punjab, Haryana & Chandigarh on medical infra
2
Chandigarh: The Punjab and Haryana high court has directed the governments of Punjab, Haryana, and the Union Territory of Chandigarh to file affidavits detailing their respective medical policies, specifically regarding the minimum infrastructural requirements at district hospitals.
The court has asked for clarity on the availability of CT scanners and MRI machines in these hospitals.
The affidavits must also specify whether the CT and MRI facilities in government hospitals are state-owned or outsourced. This directive was issued by a division bench comprising Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry, as part of an ongoing public interest litigation (PIL) filed by Bhisham Kinger.
The PIL, filed last year, highlighted the dire condition of the civil hospital in Malerkotla, Punjab.
Despite being a 130-bed facility, the hospital had only four doctors, with most specialist and paramedical posts lying vacant. Taking cognisance of the issue, the HC had sought reports from the state authorities and passed several interim orders.
During the hearing on July 17, the Punjab government informed the court that 20 medical officers had been posted at the Malerkotla hospital to fill existing vacancies - 11 of them were fresh recruits, while the remaining nine were transferred from other locations.
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Indonesia: New Container Houses (Prices May Surprise You)
Container House | Search ads
Search Now
Undo
by Taboola
by Taboola
Following this, the HC directed the principal secretary (health), Punjab, to file a fresh affidavit clarifying whether the nine transferred medical officers were surplus at their previous postings. If not, the affidavit must explain what steps were taken to fill the vacancies created by their transfer.
The bench also questioned why the state of Punjab cannot purchase CT scanners and MRI machines for every district hospital, reiterating that providing free medical aid is a sovereign function of the state.
Recognising the broader public importance of the issue, the court expanded the scope of the PIL to include all districts of Haryana and Chandigarh. The bench directed both Haryana and Chandigarh to file replies to the petition and respond to the various interlocutory orders passed by the court so far. The matter has been adjourned for further hearing on Aug 19.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Madras High Court steps in to safeguard twin foetuses of surrogate mother
The Madras High Court, on Tuesday (July 29, 2025), invoked its parens patriae jurisdiction in favour of 19-week-old twin foetuses of a surrogate mother and decided to rectify a significant procedural lapse committed by their intending parents as well as the treating hospital before commencing the surrogacy process. Justice N. Anand Venkatesh took upon himself the responsibility of issuing the 'parentage order' required to be obtained by the intending couple/intending woman and the surrogate mother, from a court of the first class magistrate or above, as mandated under Section 4(iii)(a)(II) of the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act of 2021. Stressing upon the usage of the words 'or above' in the legal provision, the judge agreed with advocate A. Shabnam Banu that the High Court too could issue the 'parentage order' in exceptional cases where the interests of the unborn babies, the surrogate mother as well as the intending parents had to be safeguarded. He directed the intending parents and the surrogate mother, involved in the case before him, to appear before the Master court, which functions in the High Court buildings, on August 1 for the purpose of recording their statements with respect to compliance of other procedures such as obtaining insurance coverage. He decided to pass further orders on the writ petitions filed by the intending couple as well as the treating hospital, after receipt of recorded statements from the Master court, on August 7. In the meantime, the hospital was directed to respond to a notice issued to it by the health department and submit a copy in the court. The judge pointed out that though the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act came into force on January 25, 2022, the statutory rules under it were framed much later and so, most people were still unaware of the procedures prescribed under it and its requirements were yet to percolate into the system. What is a parentage order? Section 4(iii)(a)(II) of the Act categorically states that no surrogacy clinic should initiate the surrogacy process unless the intending couple/intending woman and the surrogate mother obtain a 'parentage order' which shall serve as the birth affidavit regarding the custody of the surrogate child/children after birth. The judge said, before issuing the 'parentage order,' the courts generally satisfy themselves that the intending parents/intending woman do not have any child, either born naturally or through adoption/surrogacy, and that the woman was incapable of having a child naturally due to a medical condition. The courts also ascertain whether the woman who had come forward to bear the foetus was willing to be a surrogate mother for the intending couple and that she had the consent of her husband too, if she was married. Further, she must undertake not to claim parental custody of the baby after he/she is born. The surrogate mother should also agree that the birth certificate could be granted in favour of the intending parents and the latter must also make a statement before the court that they would not abandon the child/children, born through surrogacy, for any reason whatsoever. Further, all parties concerned must assure the court that there was no commercial surrogacy involved and that sufficient insurance coverage too had been taken in favour of the surrogate mother for a period of 36 months to cover the postpartum delivery complications. Therefore, the 'parentage order' was a very important document aimed at declaring the intending couple as the lawful parents of the child/children to be born and it was essential to obtain it before the surrogacy process could be commenced by the treating hospital. The procedural lapse In the present case, the surrogacy process had been initiated without complying with the legal requirement, by Chennai-based GG Hospital which was a pioneer in fertility research. Its counsel contended the hospital had committed a 'bona fide mistake' without giving due attention to the provisions of the new law. The hospital intimated the failure to obtain 'parentage order' to the intending couple only on May 30, 2025 and by that time, the embryo transfer had taken place and the twin foetuses inside the surrogate mother's womb were already 11-weeks old, the court was told. To ensure the efforts taken by the court in the present case to safeguard the bodily autonomy of the surrogate mother and the interests of the unborn babies must not be misused by others in future, Justice Venkatesh made it clear his order could not be cited as a precedent.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Governor Shiv Pratap Shukla briefs PM Narendra Modi on monsoon disaster, ‘Drug Free Himachal' campaign
Shimla: Governor Shiv Pratap Shukla on Tuesday met Prime Minister Narendra Modi in New Delhi and apprised him of various developmental initiatives being taken up in Himachal Pradesh, the impact of recent natural disasters on the state, and the progress of the 'Drug-Free Himachal' campaign. Shukla informed the Prime Minister about the massive damage caused by cloudbursts and landslides in Mandi district during the ongoing monsoon season and highlighted the tragic loss of lives and property. He also noted that many families lost their homes and agricultural land due to these calamities. The PM assured the governor of all the possible assistance to the affected areas to ensure relief and rehabilitation. The PM was also briefed about the state-wide anti-drug campaign, which is being implemented down to the panchayat level. The governor said significant steps were taken to create awareness against substance abuse and to encourage community participation in the effort to make Himachal Pradesh a drug-free state. The governor also shared details of the recently held three-day national conference on 'Nasha Mukt Yuva for Viksit Bharat'. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Brain tumor has left my son feeling miserable; please help! Donate For Health Donate Now The event was organised by the Union ministry of youth affairs and sports in Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh. Shukla said the event would play a pivotal role in building a drug-free society by the year 2047. The 'Kashi Declaration' adopted at the conference emphasises addressing substance abuse through a comprehensive and multi-sectoral approach, viewing it not only as a criminal or legal issue but as a critical challenge to public health and social well-being, he said. MSID:: 122974436 413 |
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
Insurer rejects claim citing break in policy renewal, consumer forum says ‘unjustified'
Ghaziabad: The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (DCDRC) in Ghaziabad has directed Star Health and Allied Insurance Company Limited to pay Rs 2.1 lakh to a Bulandshahr resident after rejecting his insurance claim on what the forum called "unjustified grounds". In its order dated July 15, the commission, headed by Praveen Kumar Jain, ruled that the Chennai-headquartered insurer must pay the amount via its Ghaziabad office within 45 days. Failing to do so would attract an interest of 6% per annum until the claim is settled. The forum also imposed Rs 5,000 as litigation costs and compensation for mental harassment caused to the consumer. You Can Also Check: Noida AQI | Weather in Noida | Bank Holidays in Noida | Public Holidays in Noida The case was filed by Rajendra Prasad, a resident of Bulandshahr, who approached the consumer forum in Sept 2021. Prasad said he purchased a Family Health Optima insurance policy in 2018 that covered him, his wife Sarla Devi, and son Akshay Tomar. The Rs 5.5 lakh family floater policy, purchased from the insurer's Ghaziabad branch, had been renewed each year without fail, he said. In early 2021, Prasad was admitted to Narendra Mohan Heart Hospital in Ghaziabad with chest pain from Jan 5 to 10, followed by a second hospitalisation at Shankar Lal Hospital from Jan 16 to 21 due to high fever and complications. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like The Secret Lives of the Romanovs — the Last Rulers of Imperial Russia! Learn More He spent around Rs 1.9 lakh at the first, empanelled hospital and Rs 50,000 at the second. However, Star Health rejected his claim, citing a "break in policy renewal". Prasad challenged the insurer's stand, stating that he never allowed the policy to lapse and had renewed it well in time. When served notice, the company initially failed to respond, prompting the commission to initiate ex-parte proceedings. Later, the insurer argued that the claim was rightly rejected as Prasad renewed the policy when he was already unwell. After reviewing the case, the commission concluded that this was not a valid reason to deny the claim. "The complainant was admitted on Jan 5, and even if he fell ill on Jan 3—the date of policy renewal—the policy was in force on the date of admission," the commission observed. Since both hospital stays fell within the policy's validity period, the commission held the insurer responsible for inadequate service and ordered it to settle the full claim.
