'Recorded Impression as HIV+ve Without Advanced Test Result'

Published: 06th July 2015 04:39 AM  |   Last Updated: 06th July 2015 04:39 AM   |  A+A-

CHENNAI: A man here has been awarded Rs 60,000 compensation by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, after a private hospital wrongly certified him HIV-positive and thus unfit for employment, which cost him an overseas job with a Japanese firm.

The incident happened in 2007, when R Mohanan approached the hospital in Adyar for a pre-employment medical check-up as mandated by Haneda Consultants and Agencies Private Ltd, for a project in Algeria.

The hospital contended that the Japanese company had made arrangements and payments only for the rapid ELISA test, which has an element of error. There was an advice in the report to undergo the more accurate Western Blot test, argued the hospital, faulting the petitioner for not following the advice.

The ‘advice’ on Western Blot figures below the final impression, “in an insignificant manner”, without even mentioning that Mohanan should undergo the test for a  conclusive result, pointed out the commission, taking serious note of the fact that the final opinion that the person is HIV-positive and thus not fit for job was given without he undergoing the Western Blot test.

The hospital cannot plead that the employer did not make arrangements for the Western Blot test and no payment was paid, said the order, adding: “In that case, [the hospital] ought not to have recorded the final impression as HIV-positive and in a case where ELISA test alone is done and the result is HIV-positive, the opposite party is not supposed to declare the final impression.”

On the hospital’s contention that there was no privity of contract between it and the complainant as the fee was not collected from him but from the Japanese firm, the commission noted that though the hospital did not levy a charge from the petitioner, it still was not a free service. As the employer had paid for the tests, it still came under the purview of the Consumer Protection Act.

However, the body rejected Mohanan’s wife K R Parimala Mohanan’s claim to be party to the case and for compensation. The commission, presided by retired Justice R Regupathi with P Bakiyavathi and J Jayaram as members, awarded Rs 50,000 as the “appropriate and reasonable compensation for the negligence and deficiency in service and for the mental agony and sufferings”. In addition, Rs 10,000 was awarded as cost.

Stay up to date on all the latest Tamil Nadu news with The New Indian Express App. Download now
(Get the news that matters from New Indian Express on WhatsApp. Click this link and hit 'Click to Subscribe'. Follow the instructions after that.)

Comments

Disclaimer : We respect your thoughts and views! But we need to be judicious while moderating your comments. All the comments will be moderated by the newindianexpress.com editorial. Abstain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks. Try to avoid outside hyperlinks inside the comment. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines.

The views expressed in comments published on newindianexpress.com are those of the comment writers alone. They do not represent the views or opinions of newindianexpress.com or its staff, nor do they represent the views or opinions of The New Indian Express Group, or any entity of, or affiliated with, The New Indian Express Group. newindianexpress.com reserves the right to take any or all comments down at any time.

flipboard facebook twitter whatsapp