Supreme Court Asks Centre If Rates For Clinical Establishments Have Been Fixed Under Clinical Establishment Rules

The Supreme Court of India on Thursday asked the Centre to clarify whether it has fixed the rates of for various procedures and services that registered Clinical establishments should charge from patients as per Rule 9 (ii) of the Clinical Establishment (Central Government) Rules, 2012 [2012 Rules]. A Bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Abhay Shreeniwas Oka, in the order, observed, "It appears that the role to be performed by the Central government was fix the range of the rates …..And they have to be issued by the Central government from time to time in consultation with the state governments. It's quite apparent that this is not being done. The second aspect is the display of the rates contained in rule 9 (i). The counsel for the central government contends that the implementation has to take place by the states. But then the Central government has the responsibility to fix the rates. The Centre to file an affidavit stating if the needful has been done, insofar as the role of the Central government is concerned." The Bench also directed the Centre to file its response within 4 weeks. In case of any delay, the affidavit would be taken on record only after the Centre pays up Rs. 20,000 as costs. "Whatever time you take, 4 weeks is only 28 days. It's not the 29th day." The Bench was considering a petition seeking the implementation of the conditions for registration of Clinical Establishments. The conditions largely include the observance of minimum standards, display and observance of determined rates for procedures and services, compliance with the standard treatment protocol, as provided in Section 11 and 12 of the Clinical Establishments Act, 2010 read with Rule 9 of the 2012 Rules. During the hearing, the counsel for the petitioner took the court through the relevant provisions. "You did not come to this Court till the COVID-19 situation came. You came after seven years. So, it was COVID-19 which brought you to Court. Otherwise, you would have never come", the Bench remarked. The counsel for the Centre submitted that the states have the responsibility to implement the 2012 rules. "It is in fact our rule. The difficulty is I should have filed my counter. It is for the states to implement, states would require to be made parties over here. Because we make the rule under Article 249 (Power of Parliament to legislate with respect to a matter in the State List in the national interest)….Finally, the medical officers of the State government implement it." The advocate further assured the Court that the Centre would file its counter soon in the matter. Case Title: Veterans Forum For Transparency In Public Life Through Its General Secretary Wing Commonder (Retd) Bishwanath Prasad Singh Vs. Union Of India | Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 648/2020

Supreme Court Asks Centre If Rates For Clinical Establishments Have Been Fixed Under Clinical Establishment Rules

Rintu Mariam Biju

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Supreme Court Asks Centre If Rates For Clinical Establishments Have Been Fixed Under Clinical Establishment Rules

Rintu Mariam Biju

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers