The Supreme Court on Friday sought responses from the Centre and all states on a public interest litigation seeking directions to declare cancer a “notifiable disease” across the country, with the aim of ensuring early detection, uniform reporting, and better patient care.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi took note of submissions made by advocate Gaurav Kumar Bansal, appearing for petitioner Anurag Srivastava, a renowned doctor and former head of the Department of Surgical Disciplines at AIIMS, New Delhi.
The petition highlights what it describes as the failure of the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and several state governments to notify cancer as a notifiable disease, despite its rapidly growing burden in India.
Plea Cites Violation of Articles 14 and 21
The plea seeks a writ of mandamus directing the Centre to notify cancer as a notifiable disease to ensure uniform and mandatory reporting of all cancer cases nationwide.
It argues that the continued non-notification of cancer amounts to a “grave abdication” of the State’s constitutional duties under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, as it denies equal treatment to similarly placed citizens and undermines the fundamental right to health and life with dignity.
Besides the Centre and all states, the petition has also impleaded the National Institute of Cancer Prevention and Research as a respondent.
Fragmented Data and Policy Paralysis
According to the PIL, the absence of mandatory reporting has resulted in fragmented data, weak surveillance mechanisms, and what it terms a “policy paralysis” in addressing India’s growing cancer epidemic.
The petition points out that while health is primarily a state subject, both the Centre and states have concurrent powers to notify diseases. This has created a legal vacuum, where some states have notified cancer while many others have not, leading to serious inconsistencies in reporting, surveillance, and early diagnosis.
It claims that this lack of uniformity has caused delayed diagnoses, higher treatment costs, and poor patient outcomes, with many patients being diagnosed only at advanced stages when curative treatment becomes difficult, expensive, or impossible.
Concerns Over Weak Cancer Registry Coverage
The PIL also flags major deficiencies in the National Cancer Registry Programme (NCRP) run by the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR). It states that the registry currently covers only about 10 percent of India’s population, with rural coverage as low as one percent.
This, the petition argues, severely limits the country’s ability to plan, allocate resources, and design effective cancer prevention and treatment policies.
Warning Against Unscientific Cancer Treatments
The petition raises concerns over the spread of unscientific and unverified alternative cancer treatments, including claims that Gomutra (cow urine) can cure cancer.
Referring to an RTI reply from the Rashtriya Ayurveda Sansthan, the plea states that no scientific research has established Gomutra as an effective cancer therapy. Yet, due to lack of regulation and public awareness, patients continue to fall prey to such claims, resulting in delayed treatment and avoidable deaths.
It urges the government to issue a clear policy distinguishing evidence-based treatments from untested claims, and to ensure that only scientifically validated therapies, whether modern or traditional, are permitted to be practised or promoted.
Key Directions Sought
The petition has sought directions for:
- Declaring cancer a notifiable disease across India
- Establishing a centralised, real-time digital cancer registry, integrated with the NCRP, hospital databases, state insurance schemes, and mortality records, on the lines of the CoWIN platform
- Implementing nationwide cancer screening programmes
- Taking immediate, coordinated, and legally enforceable measures to strengthen India’s national response to cancer
The Supreme Court has issued notice and sought responses from the Centre and all states. The matter will be taken up for further hearing after replies are filed.
