NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has slammed the Centre for its failure to specify a range of rates for availing services at the private hospitals and clinical establishments, with an ultimatum that it will fix the CGHS (Central Govt Health Services) rates as applicable for the central employees in the private hospitals.
Even though Rule 9 of the Clinical Establishment (Central Govt) Rules, 2012 mandates the government to determine the rate of fee chargeable from the patients at private hospitals and clinical establishments, it has not been enforced till now.
Issuing directions to the Union Health Secretary to hold a meeting with the state governments to come up with a concrete proposal before the next date of hearing, a bench of Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta said: “Insofar as the suggestion of the learned counsel for the petitioner with regard to adoption of the CGHS rates, as an interim measure, is concerned, in the event the Centre does not come up with the concrete proposal by the next date of hearing, we will consider issuing appropriate directions in this regard.”
The Apex Court was considering a PIL filed by NGO ‘Veterans forum for Transparency in public life” under Article 32 for a direction to the Centre to determine the rate of fee chargeable from the patients in terms of the 2012 rules.
The petitioner’s counsel submitted that the Centre itself has notified the rates that apply to the CGHS-empanelled hospitals. He sought those rates notified as an interim measure until a solution is found.
The government counsel submitted that the 2010 Act has been adopted by 12 state governments and 7 union territories. The Centre can’t fix them unless there is a response from the state governments/union territories.
While considering the matter, the top court bench referred to the judgment in the case of Paschim Bengal Khet Mazdoor Samiti vs state of West Bengal and Pt Parmanand Katara, advocate vs the Union of India where the apex court held that it is the duty of the state to provide medical assistance to the citizens.
It said the 2010 Act was enacted with an avowed object o providing medical facilities to the citizens at an affordable price. The Union of Indi cannot shirk away from its responsibility by merely stating that the communication has been addressed to the state govts/union territories and they are not responding.
—–
Have you liked the news article?