Delhi High Court: Navin Chawla, J., while addressing the present matter noted the utter apathy of the respondent hospitals that are supposed to be renowned hospitals providing healthcare services to the citizens of this State.
Petitioner on suffering acute pain in abdomen underwent a surgery at respondent 2 hospital, after being discharged a follow up procedure was conducted for a couple of months after which he regularly visited the hospital.
But due to the lockdown in view of the COVID-19 pandemic a follow-up surgery could not conducted. Petitioner was referred to respondent 3 hospital where all the medical tests were again conducted on the petitioner.
When the petitioner was taken to the operation theatre, it was suspected that the petitioner was suffering from COVID-19 and hence operation was refused.
After the above incident, petitioner went for COVID-19 test and was refused for the same on the ground that he had no symptoms of COVID-19.
In view of the above he was referred for the surgery again, though the doctors yet again refused for the same and was advised to go back to respondent 2 hospital.
On reaching respondent 2 hospital, petitioner was refused for the surgery on the ground that he might have contacted the virus from the said hospital.
Later, respondent 3 informed petitioner that it had been declared as a COVID-19 hospital, therefore it cannot perform the surgery.
Then on reaching respondent 4 hospital, again over here as well he was refused for the surgery to be performed.
Faced with this agonizing apathy on part of the respondents, the present petition was filed by the petitioner.
On 19th June, 2020 a notice was issued to the respondents in order to find out the hospital where petitioner could be operated.
On 1-07-2020, respondents counsel submitted that a follow up procedure upon the petitioner as an EWS patients can be carried out at respondent 4-hospital.
On more than one occasion, petitioner was refused for the surgery.
Though, Court again on 8-07-2020 granted an opportunity to respondent 4 – hospital , surgery was till not performed, after which petitioner was advised to visit any of the three hospitals mentioned in the status report filed by respondent 4.
With a hope that this Court can address the agony of the petitioner, the respondent 1 was directed to state on an affidavit as to which hospital can carry out the follow-up surgery on the petitioner.
In view of the above, respondent 1 in its affidavit stated that the follow-up surgery on the petitioner can be carried out at Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Hospital, Delhi.
Bench in view of the above facts and contentions stated that, it is surprising to note that, when respondent 4 hospital knew that it could not perform the surgery at all, why did it carry out test on the petitioner.
Above sequence of events shows that the respondent 1 also has absolutely no regard to the misery suffered by the citizens acted with complete apathy.
In the name of Covid-19 pandemic, the respondent 1 wishes to submit that persons suffering from other ailments do not deserve a timely treatment and can continue to suffer. Such apathy and plea can never be accepted by this Court.
In its parting note, Court stated that, the fact that respondent . 4 did not immediately report to this Court that it is incapable of carrying out such surgery but instead went ahead and carried out medical tests on the petitioner, leads to only one conclusion which is of having complete apathy on behalf of the respondent’s 1 and 4 towards the petitioner.
Respondent 1 and 4 were directed to compensate the petitioner with damages quantified at Rs 50,000 and Rs 1 lakh, respectively, for their utter failure to discharge their duties owed to the citizen.
Matter for reporting compliance to be listed on 30-07-2020. [Ishwar v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi), 2020 SCC OnLine Del 807, decided on 22-07-2020]