​IMA opposes Maharashtra Clinical Establishments Bill; warns of strike, boycott of healthcare schemes

Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar: The Indian Medical Association (IMA), Maharashtra, has opposed several provisions of the Maharashtra Clinical Establishments (Registration and Regulation) Bill, 2026, warning of a strike and boycott of govt healthcare schemes if the legislation was passed without consultations with the medical fraternity.The bill, introduced in the Maharashtra legislature on July 3, seeks to replace the Maharashtra Nursing Home Registration Act, 1949. IMA state president Dr Santosh Kulkarni said the proposed law posed a significant threat to small hospitals due to "excessive regulation, stringent penalties and multiple layers of administrative control”.“It contains unrealistic infrastructure requirements, severe penalties, coercive recovery provisions, sweeping powers to cancel registrations and multi-tiered administrative controls.

These provisions raise genuine concerns. As a result, healthcare costs are likely to increase, access to medical services in smaller towns could shrink and the rural healthcare system may face collapse,” he said.IMA has also objected to the regulatory structure proposed under the bill. Dr Kulkarni said, “The councils, authorities and appellate bodies envisaged under the legislation should include sufficient representation from practising doctors, small and medium hospitals and medical associations.”

IMA state secretary Dr Vikrant Desai raised concerns over the status of existing healthcare establishments registered under the current law. “It is unfair to downgrade hospitals that have been legally operating for years under valid registrations to the status of temporary or provisional registrations under the new law. Existing establishments should be provided clear transitional safeguards, uninterrupted recognition of their current registrations and a practical timeframe to comply with new requirements,” he said.IMA further expressed reservations over provisions relating to emergency healthcare services. Dr Desai said the obligation to provide emergency treatment must be aligned with the resources available at individual healthcare facilities. “Every clinical establishment should provide emergency care and initial stabilisation within the limits of its infrastructure, manpower, specialist services and equipment.

Compelling institutions to provide treatment beyond their capacity could compromise patient safety,” he said.The association also objected to the exclusion of govt and military hospitals from the scope of the proposed legislation. “Standards relating to patient safety, quality of care, transparency and accountability should apply uniformly to all healthcare institutions. Exempting govt-run facilities while imposing stringent regulations only on private establishments creates an unequal and discriminatory regulatory framework,” IMA Maharashtra treasurer Dr Amol Gitte said.Minister for public health and family welfare Prakash Abitkar could not be reached for his comments.