BHAWANI SHANKER vs NORTH WESTERN RAILWAY on 13 October 2026

ORDER

Per Dr. Hukum Singh Meena, Member (A)

Being aggrieved by not releasing the advance money for lung transplant of the son of the applicant, the applicant has filed present Original Application seeking direction against the respondents to take immediate action to refer the son of the applicant to KIMS Hospital Hyderabad for lung transplant alongwith facility to move the patient in well equipped ambulance and under supervision of appropriate doctor. Since, during the course of hearing, the son of the applicant died on 14.03.2026, learned counsel for the applicant while alleging the delay on the part of the respondents in taking immediate action, prayed for issuing direction against the respondents to act with promptitude in cases of real emergency situation.

2. Brief facts of the case are as under :- 2.1 As per discharge summary prepared by the Department of Pulmonary Medicine, AIIMS, Jodhpur dated 08.09.2022 son of the applicant remained admitted in AIIMS, Jodhpur from 25.08.2022 to 08.09.2022. The patient was known case of b/I bronchiectasis with type 2 RF on home based oxygen therapy and NIV therapy since 2021. He had history of COVID-19 infection in November, 2020. He was discharged in a stable condition with some medical advice with plan for lung transplant. Thereafter, on 10.06.2024, patient in critical condition was again admitted in AIIMS Jodhpur. He remained admitted

Songara

Location:

Radhe Shyam Songara

3 OA No.542/2024

intermittently in AIIMS Jodhpur from 10.06.2024 to 10.09.2024. During that period, on 20.07.2024, the patient was referred to KIMS (Krishna Institute of Medical Science) Hospital at Hyderabad for evaluation of lungs transplant. On the advice of AIIMS, Jodhpur, the applicant vide letter dated 23.09.2024 requested Railway to refer his son to KIMS Hyderabad, but not finding any response from the respondents, the applicant filed the present OA before this Tribunal on 21.10.2024. 2.1 The matter was listed on 22.10.2024, on that day considering the prayer made by the counsel for the applicant, the respondents were directed to make necessary arrangement for proper treatment of son of the applicant as per the extant rules. Meanwhile, the condition of the son of the applicant became critical, therefore, on the advice of KIMS Hospital, Hyderabad, the applicant decided to treat his son at KD Hospital, Ahmedabad instead of KIMS Hospital, Hyderabad. In Ahmedabad, he was admitted to Apollo Hospital from where he was shifted to CIMS hospital Ahmedabad. Meanwhile, he remained in contact with KD Hospital, Ahmedabad for registration for lungs Transplant. 2.2 On the request of the applicant, the respondents sanctioned Rs.25,00,000/- for lung transplant surgery of his son as per the extant rules. The sanction was intimated to the KD Hospital, Ahmedabad vide letter dated 10.01.2025. Thereafter the amount was deposited in the account of KD Hospital, Ahmedabad. However, on account of non- availability of the suitable lungs, the surgery could not be taken place.

Songara

Location:

Radhe Shyam Songara

4 OA No.542/2024

Therefore, the amount deposited with the KD Hospital was refunded by the KD Hospital, Ahmedabad to Railway on later request. 2.3 Since, the son of the applicant was still struggling for life, the applicant on 19.11.2025 made fresh request to release amount for lungs transplant. He sent various reminders to release the amount. In one of the letter 16th February, 2026, the applicant mentioned that the condition of his son is very critical after remaining admitted in SAL Hospital, Apollo Hospital and CIMS Hospital Ahmedabad. Disclosing financial crisis, the applicant requested to release the Rs.25,00,000/- in favour of KD Hospital, Ahmedabad so that the surgery of lung transplant be taken place. 2.4 This bench also directed the respondents on various heading dates to release the advance of lung surgery without any further delay to the concerned hospital.

3. It is the reply of the respondents that advance money Rs.25,00,000/- was sanctioned and deposited in the bank account of the KD Hospital, Ahmedabad on 05.03.2026. However, unfortunately before lung transplant, the patient died on 14.03.2026.

4. In the above background, learned counsel for the applicant contended that in the present case, the respondents has not acted promptly on account of which the applicant could not save the life of his son, who was struggling for life for last more than 5 years. He contented the respondents committed error in taking refund of Rs.25,00,000/- deposited earlier on 28.10.2025 in bank account of KD Hospital,

Songara

Location:

Radhe Shyam Songara

5 OA No.542/2024

Ahmedabad. After taking refund of Rs.25,00,000/- by the Railway, the applicant again requested the Railway to release the amount on 19.11.2025, which was released after a delay of three months. In such types of cases delay of even some days may be fatal to the life of the patient. Therefore, he requested that direction be issued to the respondents so that in future on account of procedural delay on the part of the respondents one has not to lose his life.

5. On the contrary, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that there was no delay on the part of the respondents. They were ready to release the amount as and when they get intimation of availability of lung. The respondents were not informed about the availability of lung. However, the amount was sanctioned to the applicant on 05.03.2026.

6. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and material available on record, the point for consideration before this Bench is how to curtail the delay in sanctioning the amount for organ transplant so that delay may not be reason for death of a patient entitled for medical treatment under Government Scheme. In this regard, counsel for the applicant has filed Office Memorandum dated 01.12.2023 wherein guidelines and ceiling rates for Lung Transplant, Heart Transplant surgery in respect of CGHS/CS (MA) beneficiaries has been issued. 6.1 Perusal of the above office memorandum suggests that no time frame has been issued for granting permission for lung transplant, heart transplant surgery by the competent authority. In such types of cases

Songara

Location:

Radhe Shyam Songara

6 OA No.542/2024

timely action is very essential to save the life of a patient. Secondly, since composition of Standing Committee for CGHS beneficiaries and CS (MA) beneficiaries consists of so many members, delay is likely to cause in convening the meeting on the request made by the beneficiaries for seeking permission for lung/heart transplant surgery. Therefore, guidelines should be framed so as to complete the procedure with promptitude within stipulated time in issuing sanction for organ transplant. 6.2 In the present case almost more than three months were spent in sanctioning advance to the applicant for lungs transplant of his son, which could be curtailed by taken timely action. In the instant case, when earlier the advance amount of Rs.25,00,000/- was sanctioned for lungs transplant of the son of the applicant, we do not see any justification in taking so much time for granting fresh sanction. We are of the view that while keeping alive the earlier sanction, the amount should have been re-transferred to the KD Hospital Ahmedabad immediately on the request of the applicant. We should not forget the practical realities of the life that without depositing the amount in advance, no private hospital would care to proceed sincerely with the plan of organ transplant. We are of the opinion that in such cases Government/Respondents shall issue specific written assurance to the private hospital regarding releasing the amount in case delay is anticipated in issuing sanction letter so that on account of non-release of the amount in time, no one has to lose his life.

Songara

Location:

Radhe Shyam Songara

7 OA No.542/2024

6.3 The note may also be endorsed to treating Hospital categorically mentioning that the sanction as per ceiling would follow. However, they should advice and give direction to the treating hospital that treatment should be carried out as per the requirement of the patient. They may also indicate the ceiling prescribed to the different diseases to the concerned hospital with a note that over and above of the prescribed ceiling may be borne by the employee. 6.4 Coming to the facts of the present case, we are of the view that the son of the applicant died on account of non-availability of the suitable lung to be transplanted to him. Time spent in releasing the amount may not be a reason for loss of life of the son of the applicant. In one of the letter dated 16.02.2026, the applicant himself appreciated the cooperation given by the respondents in treating his son. 6.5 Accordingly, the OA is disposed of with the aforesaid observation. No order as to costs.

(Dr. HUKUM SINGH MEENA) (RAMESHWAR VYAS)

MEMBER (A)

MEMBER (J)

Rss

Songara

Location:

Radhe Shyam Songara