The Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Tuesday stayed its three-day suspension of the blood-bank licences at Mumbai’s JJ Hospital and BYL Nair Hospital after hospital officials raised concerns about disruption to patients and scheduled surgeries. The action followed an April blood donation camp where donors were given watches, which the FDA said violated rules governing voluntary blood donation.
The camp was organised by the Young Star Committee, associated with the annual Altamont Road Cha Raja celebrations, for the birthday of a corporate executive. JJ Hospital, Nair Hospital and the Red Cross Blood Bank participated in the drive. Hospital officials said they had objected during the event and were assured by the organisers that no freebies would be distributed.
FDA officials later inspected all three participating blood banks in late August and September. They reported finding discrepancies in documentation and record-keeping. Officials also said that, during cross-checking, several donors confirmed receiving watches at the camp.
The FDA’s suspension orders were issued on Tuesday and were stayed later the same day following the intervention of FDA minister Narhari Zirwal. Dr Shailesh Mohite, dean of Nair Hospital, said the hospitals were informed abruptly in the afternoon that their licences would be suspended. He said the decision threatened to disrupt treatment at a major public hospital that conducts close to 50 surgeries a day and receives patients from distant villages.
“Lack of signatures on a document cannot justify shutting down the blood bank of a tertiary care municipal or govt hospital,” Mohite said, adding that licence suspension should be reserved for serious failures such as major infection-control lapses. He said hospital deans contacted Zirwal after FDA officials declined to withdraw the action and that the minister understood the potential disruption, following which the suspension was stayed.
JJ Hospital officials said they had refused to participate in such camps and that the incident took place despite assurances given to the hospitals. The hospital maintained that the distribution of watches occurred without its knowledge.
FDA officials defended the original action, saying that rules apply equally to government and private facilities. An FDA official acknowledged that the violations were minor but said enforcement was necessary to prevent a practice in which donors begin expecting gifts for blood donations.
The episode leaves the participating blood banks facing questions over documentation, supervision and responsibility at privately organised donation camps. It also highlights the operational consequences of regulatory action at government hospitals, where blood-bank availability is directly linked to surgeries and emergency care. The FDA’s next steps on the inspection findings and the reported record-keeping discrepancies were not specified in the supplied report.
