Haryana Moves to Cancel Lease of Fortis, Gurgaon, After Rs 15 Lakh Dengue Treatment Bill

Chandigarh: Haryana Health Minister Anil Vij said on Saturday that his department had written to the Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA) to cancel the lease of land to Fortis hospital in Gurgaon due to alleged violations of the terms and conditions of the agreement.

"The land was given by HUDA to Fortis hospital in Gurgaon in 2004 under certain terms and conditions, which included conditions like reserving 20 per cent of beds for the poor, but they are not providing these beds. Therefore, we have written to HUDA to cancel their lease as they have violated the terms and conditions of the MoU," Vij told reporters in Ambala today.

A state government panel probing allegations of overcharging against the hospital had found "several irregularities", including protocols not being followed in a case related to the death of a 7-year-old girl.

Following the indictment by the panel, Vij had said that an FIR will be lodged against the private hospital while the license of its blood bank will be cancelled.

Vij told reporters that a draft of the proposed complaint to the police had been prepared.

A notice to cancel Fortis Gurgaon’s blood bank has also been given, he added.

The bill for the treatment of seven-year-old Adya Singh had shot upto Rs 15 lakh even as she died of dengue, he said.

Regarding cases of overcharging by other private hospitals, Vij said that things had changed. "People are raising their voice against the loot, goondagardi and criminal negligence of these hospitals," the minister said.

The Fortis group, had earlier said that all documents, statements and details required by the probe team of the Haryana government were provided.

A committee headed by Dr Rajiv Vadhera, Additional DG, Health, Haryana was set up by the Haryana government on November 21 to probe allegations that the private hospital overcharged the girls family.

The Centre had asked the Haryana government to initiate an urgent inquiry into the case.

The hospital had earlier refuted the charges, claiming the patient’s family was duly informed about the bill on a daily basis and that there was no medical negligence.