Non-COVID patients cannot be expected to run around: Delhi HC stays direction to pvt hosps to reserve 80% ICU beds for COVID-19 patients

The Delhi High Court today stayed Delhi Government's order directing 33 private hospitals to reserve 80% ICU beds for COVID-19 patients. [Association of Healthcare Providers (India) vs GNCTD].Disease itself cannot be a ground for reservation.. Prima facie, the order is arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Article 21 of the Consitituion of India.Delhi High Court said. .The order was passed by a Single Judge Bench of Justice Navin Chawla in the petition preferred by Association of Healthcare Providers (India) [Petitioner] . .It is the Petitioner's case that the order dated September 12, 2020 was issued without any prior discussion with the private hospitals and without understanding the demand-supply situation of critical care beds..Claiming that the order ignored the need of other critical non-COVID-19 patients, the Petitioner has pleaded in the petition, “Reserving 80% beds in the ICU will deny urgent care to seriously ill patients requiring vital surgical interventions and critical care.”.Appearing for the Petitioner, Senior Advocate Maninder Singh argued that the order was no less than a "Tughlaqi Farmaan" and that instead of increasing the number of ICU beds for COVID-19 patients, the Government chose to arbitrarily reserve the existing capacity. .The order is ex facie perverse, irrational and unreasonable, he contended. .In response to the challenge, Additional Solicitor General Sanjay Jain submitted that the order did not pertain to all private hospitals in the city and was subject to review. .It is a temporary and dynamic decision which was taken keeping in mind the spike of COVID-19 cases and the fact that Delhi was a "preferred destination" for treatment of non-residents as well, he said. .The Court, however, remarked, .You go to ICU not looking at the hospital to which you are going to.. When I go to ICU, I am on death bed..I will not let one patient die because of this..ASG Jain also argued that the petition was not maintainable on behalf of an NGO. .After hearing the parties at length and perusing the data on ICU beds for COVID-19 patients, the Court opined that the order ought to be stayed. .The Court noted that the effect of the order was that 80% beds in 33 private hospitals were to be kept reserved for COVID-19 patients, which would lead to a situation wherein a non-COVID patient might be refused admission to an ICU in spite of availability. .Stating that the above is against Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the Court said, .State cannot discriminate between patients suffering from COVID-19 and those who are not suffering COVID-19, both requring emergent treatment..Non-COVID patients requiring emergent treatment cannot be expected to run around, Court opined. .The Court further recorded that the decision-making process and relevant data to arrive at the decision were also not apparent. .Thus, while issuing notice in the challenge and seeking the relevant material which lead to the decision, the Court stayed the operation of the order till the next date of hearing. .The matter would be heard next on October 16..The petition was filed through Advocates Sanyam Khetarpal, Narita Yadav, Nitesh Goyal. Additional Standing Counsel Sanjoy Ghose appeared with ASG Jain.