Madras High Court: disputed medical negligence claims must go to a civil court, not a writ petition

Allowing an appeal by the Tamil Nadu Health Department against a Single Judge's order, a Division Bench of the Madras High Court (Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan) held that a claim of medical negligence, where the facts are disputed, cannot be decided in a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution and must instead be pursued through a civil suit. The respondent, whose 2018 tubectomy had failed, became pregnant again and delivered a child in 2022; her husband later died. The Single Judge had presumed negligence merely from the operation's failure and directed the government hospital's Dean to pay Rs. 3,00,000 in compensation and provide free education for the child.

The Division Bench held that whether the surgeon exercised due skill, whether natural recanalisation occurred despite a properly performed procedure, and whether termination of the pregnancy was offered and declined, are all disputed questions of fact that a writ court cannot adjudicate; a tort claim for medical negligence requires proof of fault, not merely an adverse outcome. It set aside the compensation and education directions, capped compensation at Rs. 60,000 under the State's existing sterilisation-failure indemnity scheme, and left the respondent free to sue in a civil court for any further claim within eight weeks.