HC rejects Ruby Hall’s plea to open IPF for all

With less revenue in pandemic, hospital feels this fund could be used for treating all COVID-19 patients, but court asks to use part of Rs 68-crore FD if necessary

Bombay High Court (HC) has rejected a petition filed by Ruby Hall Clinic, Pune, run by Grant Medical Foundation trust, seeking permission to use the Indigent Patients Fund (IPF) amount for treating COVID-19 patients, who do not belong to economically weaker section. The trust has pleaded that it is running into financial crisis and asked for urgent relief, but the court said they can use funds by liquidating part of its Rs 68-crore fixed deposit to meet monetary emergency.

The bench of Justice SJ Kathawalla stated that IPF can be used to treat COVID-19 patients who fall in economically weaker section. The court further asked the authority concerned – deputy charity commissioner – to decide the said representation within two weeks, without influencing the court’s observations.

In its writ petition, the hospital pleaded that no planned surgeries, procedures and operations (apart from the emergency ones) can be carried out during this period of pandemic. The outpatient department (OPD) is completely shut and income or revenue from this source is also not available. Even as all income sources are dried up, staff salaries, maintenance costs and municipal taxes and charges are to be paid.

The request was made to the chairman of monitoring committee at the district level – the deputy charity commissioner. However, the deputy charity commissioner has strongly opposed the urgent relief and rejected it, stating whatever its financial status, it is bound to have its monetary plan for emergency. His office also mentioned that the trust’s stand is vague and does not inspire any confidence. IPF is exclusively for the benefit of weaker section patients and grant of any permission to use the funds earmarked for the purpose will defeat the very purpose of creating such a corpus, and would open floodgates for making similar applications by other hospitals, said his office.

Earlier, Ruby Hall Clinic’s managing trustee Dr PK Grant had approached the state government. On April 27, he wrote to the Chief Minister, deputy chief minister and chief secretary. The trust had asked permission to defray out the expenses of treating patients by using the money available in IPF. However, it approached the high court before any response from the government.

The court pointed out that the trust is attempting to avoid providing specific particulars of its income and expenses. Instead of making general statements, the trust could clearly have set out in its written note the amounts required to be paid/defrayed under various heads for April and May, and the amounts already paid so far. It also observed that the trust, in the petition, did not mention anything about fixed deposits of Rs 68 crore.

The trust tried to explain that these are long-term fixed deposits earmarked for capital expenditure and shown reluctance to utilise it. “The trust, instead of using Rs 3 crore from IPF, can liquidate the same from its fixed deposits of Rs 68 crore. Hence, the urgent relief sought by the trust permitting them to use the amount lying in IPF is rejected. The trust is always free to use the IPF amount to treat indigent patients suffering from COVID-19 or any other sickness, in consonance with the scheme,” said Justice Kathawalla.

However, Bomi Bhote, CEO, Ruby Hall Clinic, said they had asked for permission whether they could treat poor patients suffering from COVID-19 but not having required documents to furnish for availing the IPF benefit. “Several patients come from outside and cannot provide documents, even if they fall under the IPF category. The request was made so that such patients don’t suffer during the pandemic,” said Bhote.