The Allahabad High Court has supported the removal of Surgimed Hospital as it charged Rs. 9000 for two units of blood for a two-month-old child suffering from blood cancer. A division Bench of Justice J.J. Munir and Justice Indrajeet Shukla dismissed the hospital’s plea questioning the court’s decision, quoting the lapsed in scheme’s requirements and treatment documents. The court had no reasons to reconsider or change the decision, citing the proper implementation of the scheme and following necessary treatment protocols.
The State Empanelment Committee found Surgimed Hospital guilty as the hospital had charged Rs.9000 for two units of blood despite the treatment being covered under the scheme. The court also found that the blood transfusion was not mentioned in the documents related to the child's medical records, which are an important records for patients undergoing treatment and admitted to the intensive care unit. The committee removed the hospital from the panel on August 19, 2026.
The hospital received a show-cause notice on June 18, 2026, regarding the alleged lapses. The doctor representing the hospital reportedly acknowledged the procedural lapses before the State Empanelment Committee.
The judgment noted that the transfusion details were missing from the patient's Bed Head Ticket (BHT), a clinical record required for patients admitted to the intensive care unit.
The doctor representing Surgimed Hospital reportedly acknowledged the procedural lapses before the State Empanelment Committee.
The Allahabad High Court observed that although the committee's order did not explain the matter in thorough detail, the underlying records provided sufficient evidence of shortcomings in Surgimed Hospital's implementation of the scheme and its treatment protocols.
The Bench found that the material on record prima facie indicated serious lapses in the hospital's conduct. It therefore found no reason to overturn the committee's decision and dismissed the hospital's writ petition.
The court's observations concerned the material on record and the hospital's compliance with the scheme's requirements. The ruling should not be interpreted as a criminal conviction or as a finding that the hospital had lost its medical licence.
The court clarifies that the empanelment of hospitals under Ayushman Bharat is a privilege and not a legal right. Empanelment does not guarantee permanent inclusion and is provided only to eligible hospitals.
The Bench stated,“Empanelment under the aforesaid scheme is not a justiciable right, but a privilege conferred on particular hospitals.”
The ruling also reinforces that decisions concerning empanelment must comply with applicable legal requirements and cannot be discriminatory.
It further clarified that the removal of hospitals from the scheme does not obstruct hospitals or medical professionals from practicing medicine outside the scheme.
The judgment on the matter was passed by the High Court on September 28, 2026.
(Rh/AM/MSM)
