M.Pasupathi Pandian, v. The Secretary to Government

ORDER This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to pay compensation for the medical negligence of the 4th respondent resulting in the failure of the kidney transplant surgery and also to the petitioner's mother who has lost one kidney due to the negligent surgery, based on the representation of the petitioner dated 19.02.2026.

2.Upon perusing the material records of the case and hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, the grievance of the petitioner is that when the petitioner was in need of a kidney, and was admitted in the 4th respondent hospital, after verifying all credentials and concluding that the petitioner's mother's kidney is matching and will work for the petitioner, the transplantation surgery was conducted by the 4th respondent hospital. However, immediately within four days thereof, the same was proved wrong and they had to perform further surgery to take out the kidney. In the process, the petitioner is still ailing and the mother had also lost one kidney. Therefore, the petitioner seeks compensation.

3.I have also heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 to 4.

¶4To claim compensation for medical negligence, the petitioner must first establish that there was any medical negligence on the part of the fourth respondent hospital or the surgeons or the physicians. In a case of this nature, this cannot be straight away established or concluded in these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, as it requires consideration by the appropriate experts. The petitioner is entitled to make a complaint as per Sections 27 and 30 of the National Medical Commission Act, 2019, and the Indian Medical Council (Professional conduct, Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations, 2002, read with the Tamil Nadu Medical Council (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations, 2003. Complaints are to be preferred to the Tamil Nadu State Medical Council as per Regulation 8.2. Depending on the outcome, the petitioner can pray for compensation, which can be considered thereafter.

¶5Keeping open the liberty of the petitioner to make such a complaint and directing the State Medical Council to process the complaint in the manner known to law and pass orders as expeditiously as possible, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

25.03.2026 NCC:Yes/No Ns To

1.The Secretary to Government, Health and Family Welfare Department, Secretariat, St George Fort, Chennai-600 009.

2.The Secretary to Government Home Department, Secretariat, St George Fort Chennai-600 009

3.The District Collector, O/o.District Collector, Madurai District.

4.The Dean, Government Rajaji Hospital, Madurai.

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J. Ns

25.03.2026

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 25.03.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY M.Pasupathi Pandian ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Secretary to Government, Health and Family Welfare Department, Secretariat, St George Fort, Chennai-600 009. 2.The Secretary to Government Home Department, Secretariat, St George Fort Chennai-600 009 3.The District Collector, O/o.District Collector, Madurai District. 4.The Dean, Government Rajaji Hospital, Madurai. ...Respondents Writ Petitions are filed under article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to pay fair compensation to the petitioner for the medical negligence of the fourth respondent resulting in the failure of the kidney transplant surgery and also to the petitioner's mother who lost one kidney due to the negligent surgery based on the representation of the petitioner dated 19.02.2026. For Petitioner :Mr.S.Ramasundarvijayraj For R1 to R4 :Mr.P.Thambidurai, Government Advocate