Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdiction of West Bengal Clinical Commission

Overview of the Supreme Court’s Ruling

In a recent decision, the Supreme Court of India clarified that the authority of the Commission established under the West Bengal Clinical Establishments (Registration, Regulation and Transparency) Act to grant compensation is distinct from the authority of the State Medical Council to assess medical negligence by healthcare professionals. The Court stated, “The power to grant compensation as is given under this Act, is separate and distinct from the power of the State Medical Council to examine the presence or absence of medical negligence on the part of a professional, and it nowhere interferes with the power of the State Medical Council to adjudicate the complaints of medical negligence,” as articulated by Justices Sanjay Karol and Manoj Misra.

Background of the Case

This ruling arose from a Civil Appeal against a judgment from the Calcutta High Court, which had determined that the Commission lacked jurisdiction to address negligence and alleged deficiencies in medical practice. The Supreme Court’s two-judge bench found that the Commission acted within its jurisdiction in rendering findings that were contested in the High Court. The Court noted that the High Court granted excessive authority to the State Medical Council, thereby restricting the Commission’s operational capacity.

Details of the Treatment Case

The case involved the treatment of the appellant’s mother at B.M. Birla Heart Research Centre. After five days of treatment with no improvement, the patient was referred to the Calcutta Medical Research Institute in May 2017. Following a recommendation for transfer, a discharge summary was issued by another physician, who described her condition as ‘stable.’ Tragically, the patient passed away approximately 16 hours after being transferred.

The patient’s son lodged a complaint against the initial hospital, alleging medical negligence, which included delays in the transfer process, inadequate medication, and misdiagnosis. The Commission, under the WBCE Act, reviewed the complaint and subsequently ordered the hospital to compensate the family with Rs 20 lakh, citing serious deficiencies in the procedures performed by unqualified personnel.

High Court and Supreme Court Proceedings

Initially, a Single Judge of the Calcutta High Court recognized the Commission’s authority to address the appellant’s complaint. However, this decision was challenged before a Division Bench, which ruled that the Commission could not adjudicate on issues of negligence. The Supreme Court subsequently examined the validity of this ruling.

Supreme Court’s Observations

The Supreme Court emphasized that Section 36 of the Act mandates supervision and accountability in patient care services. It noted that the supervising doctor failed to communicate the true condition of the patient, which could have led to a different decision regarding her discharge. The Court stated, “Making a simple statement that the mother of the appellant had erroneously been described as ‘stable’ cannot and should not absolve the concerned doctor of responsibility.”

The Court further remarked that Section 38 of the Act clearly assigns the handling of medical negligence complaints to the State Medical Councils. It clarified that the Commission did not make findings on negligence but rather assessed the quality of patient care, which is allowed under the Act.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s ruling reinforces the distinct roles of the Commission and the State Medical Council in addressing issues related to medical negligence and patient care. This clarification is crucial in ensuring that the legislative intent behind the West Bengal Clinical Establishments Act is upheld.

To view the full order, click on the link below:
Supreme Court Order

Also Read: WBCERC has no authority to adjudicate medical negligence cases: Calcutta HC