SC pulls up Delhi Hospital over false claim on court notice in EWS treatment case
New Delhi: The Supreme Court recently came down heavily on a Delhi-based private hospital for its false claim that it had not received a notice from the Court over the issue of free treatment to poor patients.
In February, the Apex Court had issued the concerned notice.
Expressing that it did not appreciate the manner of response from the hospital, the Apex Court bench of Justices PK Mishra and Shree Chandrashekhar observed, "You will have to be sent behind bars. Jail is the place for you. Look at your arrogance. If this is how you are responding to a notice issued by the Supreme Court, how will you treat patients belonging to the economically weaker sections (EWS)."
Earlier this year, Medical Dialogues has reported that the Apex Court had issued contempt notices to 51 private hospitals in the national capital for failing to provide free treatment and reserved beds to poor patients, as mandated by earlier court orders.
Back then, the Apex Court bench of Justices PK Mishra and NV Anjaria had slammed the erring institutions as well as public authorities, observing a lack of seriousness in enforcing compliance.
According to a Hindustan Times Report, a private hospital in Model Town was one of the 51 hospitals that had been issued notice by the top court bench for violating their obligation to provide free treatment to poor patients despite receiving land at concessional rates.
The proceedings arise from the monitoring of the court’s 2018 judgment, which reaffirmed that hospitals granted land at concessional rates must provide 10% of their in-patient department (IPD) beds and 25% of out-patient department (OPD) services free of cost to EWS patients. The order had also required periodic compliance reporting from these institutions.
HT has reported that the Apex Court bench took up the matter to monitor its previous orders, by which the Court had appointed senior Advocate Sanjay Jain as amicus curiae, along with Ninad Laud, for preparing a standard operating procedure (SOP) to institutionalise the free treatment clause.
Two months ago, the SOP was submitted. Consequently, the bench gave a few more suggestions after consulting with the hospitals and the Delhi government, and thereafter a revised SOP was submitted to the Court on Wednesday.
During the proceedings, the Amicus Curiae informed the Court that in the meeting convened with hospitals for framing the SOP, a total of 50 hospitals took part, except for the Model Town-based Hospital. Issuing a show-cause notice as to why the court order was violated, the Court on July 29 had summoned the medical superintendent of the hospital.
Appearing before the Court, the officer representing the hospital said that the hospital failed to attend the meeting as it had not received the notice issued by the Court on February 24.
In response, the bench observed, "All 51 hospitals received notice. This is not the way you respond to our notice."
On Wednesday, an affidavit was filed by the hospital, which stated that after conducting an internal enquiry, the management came to know that the notice was received by the hospital. However, it was not "routed" to the medical superintendent, the management or the legal department of the hospital.
The Court granted time to the private hospitals to respond to the revised SOP and posted the matter for further hearing on September 30. The Apex Court bench also suggested holding a common meeting, where a unified SOP could be drawn up with the consent of all hospitals for finalisation and approval at the next hearing.
The 2018 ruling of the Apex Court stemmed from a PIL filed before the Delhi High Court seeking free medical treatment to the poor at such hospitals. Back in 2007, the High Court had mandated all such hospitals to scrupulously abide by the same. When the ruling was challenged before the top court bench, the same was upheld by the Apex Court, which also directed the Delhi Government to submit periodic reports of compliance.
Also Read: SC warns Apollo Hospital over denying free treatment, seeks affidavit
