7 Years On, Kerala Yet To Frame Rules For Periodic Inspection Of Clinical Establishments: High Court Expresses Concern

The division bench comprising Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Basant Balaji was hearing writ petitions filed calling for safety standards at public medical facilities, following the collapse of Kottayam Medical College building. The 2018 Act covers two primary areas — registration of clinical establishments and maintenance of prescribed standards.

Referring to its earlier orders, the bench noted that under Section 4(1)(e) of the Act, the State Council for Clinical Establishments is entrusted with the function of conducting periodic inspections to ensure that prescribed standards are maintained.

"Unless it is ensured that the standards are maintained it may lead to various issues, including such as the one presented before us,” the judges orally remarked.

However, an affidavit filed by the Additional Chief Secretary, Family Welfare Department, revealed that no rules have yet been framed to prescribe the manner of conducting such inspections, nor did the affidavit indicate when this would be done.

"After almost seven years, after the Act has come into force, the main function of the Council remains unguided for want of framing rules," the bench observed, directing the Government Pleader to obtain instructions on how soon the process would be initiated.

The court also noted that rules need to be framed with regard to grievance redressal mechanism envisaged under Section 36 of the Act, which allows public feedback, to ensure compliance with standards.

The State counsel submitted that the general rules framed on Kerala Clinical Establishments (Registration and Regulation) Rules, 2018 covers this aspect, particularly Rules 30, 32, and 34. The affidavit also disclosed that the State Grievance Redressal Committee, constituted in March 2021, had its term expire in 2024. No complaints have been received or public hearings conducted in the meantime.

The bench observed that the absence of complaints might not indicate the absence of issues, but rather reflect the non-functioning of the grievance mechanism itself. “If public hearings had been held, perhaps grievances could have surfaced,” the court noted.

Emphasizing that both inspection and feedback are vital components of the 2018 Act, the court directed that these mechanisms be strengthened to avoid recurrence of issues warranting judicial intervention.

The Court directed Kerala State Legal Services Authority (KeLSA) to be impleaded as a party respondent, and an amicus curiae was appointed to assist the court on these aspects.

The matter has been posted for further hearing on 15 September.

Case Title - K T Subramanian & Ors v State of Kerala & Ors and Connected matter

Case No - WP (C ) 7380/ 2025 and WP(PIL) 74/ 2025

Counsel for Petitioners - P T Sheejish, K M Shanavas, Yoosuf Safwan T Ajmal, Amrita Safal M, Parvathi, Alex K John, Satheesh T P, Jilcy Jacob, Sijin Stanley, Cyrian Elias Steen, Sreekuttan M , Suresh P N, Arun K V, Ninan Thomas, Gego George, Prathitha Maariyam Thomas

Counsel for Respondents - K A Noushad, M Ajay, N Manoj Kumar (State Attorney) 

Click Here To Read/ Download Orders