Kerala High Court
Ramees N.K vs State Of Kerala on 13 June, 2025
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
2025:KER:41887
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
FRIDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JUNE 2025 / 23RD JYAISHTA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 19248 OF 2025
PETITIONERS:
1 RAMEES N.K.,
AGED 44 YEARS,
S/O.ERADUTHU KALANTHAN,
SAFIYA MANZIL HOUSE, NALLAKANDY,
CHEMBILODE, MOWANCHERY, MOWANCHERY P.O.,
KANNUR DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 670613
2 SHEEJA,
AGED 42 YEARS,
W/O.VASUDEVAN, THER HOUSE, ENGANDIYUR,
KUNDALIYUR P.O., CHAVAKKAD,
THRISSSUR DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 680616
BY ADVS.
SHRI.SHAJI THANKAPPAN
SRI.SUBIN K SUDHEER
SHRI.AJAY GOPAL
SHRI.AMAL BABY
SHRI.NANDUKRISHNA D.
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,
HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 THE DISTRICT LEVEL AUTHORIZATION COMMITTEE FOR
RENAL TRANSPLANTATION
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN,
2025:KER:41887
W.P.(C) No.19248/2025
:2:
THE PRINCIPAL, GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE,
KALAMASSERRY P.O., ERNAKULAM,
KERALA, PIN - 683104
3 THE LOCAL LEVEL COMMITTEE FOR RENAL
TRANSPLANTATION,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN,
MEDICAL DIRECTOR, MEDICAL TRUST HOSPITAL,
M.G.ROAD, PALLIMUKKU, ERNAKULAM,
KERALA, PIN - 682016
4 DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
J3XC+R5F, THRISSUR RD, NEAR TALUK HOSPITAL,
KUNNAMKULAM, THRISSUR, KUNNAMKULAM,
KERALA, PIN - 680503
*ADDL.5 DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, THRISSUR RURAL.
THRISSUR DISTRICT.
*(ADDITIONAL 5TH RESPONDENT IS SUOMOTU IMPLEADED
AS PER ORDER DATED 13.06.2025 IN WP(C)
No.19248/2025)
BY ADV.
SRI.R.S.KALKURA, SC
SRI.RAJEEV JYOTHISH GEORGE, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 13.06.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:41887
W.P.(C) No.19248/2025
:3:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 13th day of June, 2025
This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:-
"i) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction, commanding the
respondents 1 to 4 to comply with the judgment in
Soubiya v. District Level Authorisation Committee
for Transplantation of Human Organs, Ernakulam
[2023 (6) KHC 293] forthwith.
ii) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction, commanding the
respondent No.3 to forward all the documents
necessary in the case of the petitioners to the 2 nd
respondent forthwith.
iii) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction, commanding the
respondent No.2 to pass appropriate final order in the
case of the petitioners within a time frame as may be
fixed by this Hon'ble Court.
iv) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction, commanding the
respondent No.4 to issue a certificate of Altruism
forthwith."
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the
petitioners, the learned Government Pleader appearing for
respondents 1, 2 and 4 and the learned Standing Counsel for
2025:KER:41887
the 3rd respondent.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the
petitioners that though an application had been preferred before
the 3rd respondent for effecting an unrelated kidney transplant, it
has not been forwarded by the 3rd respondent on the ground that
it is not accompanied by a Certificate from the 4 th respondent. It
is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the
verification by the 4th respondent is not a condition precedent for
forwarding of the application and the 2 nd respondent, who is the
Authority under the enactment, can call for reports from the 4 th
respondent, if required.
4. The learned counsel for the 3rd respondent
submits that the petitioners have not submitted application with
supporting documents to the 3rd respondent. The counsel for
the petitioners, however, refuted the said contention and states
that though the application was submitted, the officials under the
3rd respondent refused to accept the application in the absence
of a Court order.
2025:KER:41887
5. Having considered the contentions advanced
and having heard the learned counsel appearing on either side,
I am of the opinion that the application preferred by the
petitioners is liable to be considered expeditiously by the 2 nd
respondent in accordance with law.
6. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 3 rd
respondent to forward Ext.P3 application to the 2 nd respondent
for consideration within a period of one week, if the petitioners
resubmit the same with all available supporting documents. The
2nd respondent shall conduct all due verifications including by
reference to the 4th respondent, if found necessary, and shall
pass appropriate orders after considering all relevant aspects of
the matter. Orders shall be passed within a period of one month
from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH
JUDGE
SR
2025:KER:41887
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19248/2025
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P1 THE MEDICAL REPORT (OUT PATIENT REPORT)
ISSUED TO THE 1ST PETITIONER FROM THE
MEDICAL TRUST HOSPITAL, ERNAKULAM DATED
21.08.2023
Exhibit P2 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE FORM 11
APPLICATION DATED 28.03.2025
Exhibit P3 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE FORM 3
APPLICATION DATED 08.05.2025
Exhibit P4 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTARIZED
AFFIDAVIT DATED 08.05.2025
Exhibit P5 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTARIZED
AFFIDAVIT OF THE 2ND PETITIONER GIVING
HER CONSENT FOR ORGAN TRANSPLANT TO THE
1ST PETITIONER DATED 28.04.2025
Exhibit P6 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER DATED
29.01.2025 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P7 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
26.09.2023 IN WP(C) No.30365 OF 2023.
