Today, On 19th November, The Supreme Court has directed the Centre to create a national policy for organ transplantation and work with all States to ensure uniform rules. The Bench led by CJI BR Gavai also asked the Centre to encourage Andhra Pradesh to adopt the 2011 amendments.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court issued multiple directives to the Centre on Wednesday, urging the development of a national policy and standardized regulations in collaboration with the States to establish a transparent and efficient system for organ donation and allocation.
A bench led by Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran delivered these directives in response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by the Indian Society of Organ Transplantation.
In the ruling, the Chief Justice asked the Centre to encourage Andhra Pradesh to adopt the 2011 amendments to the Transplantation of Human Organs Act, 1994.
Additionally, the Court urged states such as Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, and Manipur who have yet to implement the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Rules, 2014 to do so promptly, emphasizing the significance of this matter.
The bench called for the Centre to formulate a national policy that includes “model allocation criteria” for organ transplants. This policy should tackle and reduce issues related to gender and caste biases while establishing “uniform criteria for donors across the country” to eliminate discrepancies among states.
Highlighting the absence of a State Organ and Tissue Transplant Organisation (SOTO) in regions like Manipur, Nagaland, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, and Lakshadweep, the bench instructed the Centre to create these organizations under the National Organ Transplantation Programme following consultations with the respective states.
Regarding the protection of live donors from exploitation, the Court directed the Centre to develop guidelines to ensure the welfare of these individuals after donation, preventing commercial exploitation. It also asked the government, in coordination with the National Organ and Tissue Transplant Organisation (NOTTO), to modify the birth and death registration forms (Forms 4 and 4A) to clearly indicate whether a death was classified as brain death and if organ donation options were presented to the family.
Earlier, On Tuesday, during the PIL hearings, the petitioner raised concerns about the inconsistency in applying the 2014 rules across the country, as some states like Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka adhere to their own established laws.
Senior attorney K Parmeswar, representing the petitioner, pointed out the alarming lack of a consolidated national database for donors and recipients, which is hindering the process across various states.
He noted that organ transplants remain predominantly accessible to a specific demographic, highlighting ongoing class and gender disparities.
Currently, approximately 90 percent of organ transplants occur in private hospitals, with public hospitals seeing minimal representation in the organ donor registry.
Previously, on April 21, the Court had instructed the Centre to organize a meeting with the chief secretaries and public health secretaries of all states and Union territories to collect detailed information on the adoption and implementation of organ transplant laws, including the 1994 Act, its 2011 amendments, and the 2014 rules, along with compliance with NOTTO guidelines.
The Court requested data on cadaver versus live donor ratios, gender disparities in donation and receipt, awareness campaigns, financial support, policies for swap transplantation, organ allocation methods, and the availability of hospitals equipped for single and multi-organ transplants. A consolidated report was to be presented by July 18, 2025.