The Supreme Court on Thursday lent voice to the common man’s refrain against rising cost of medical treatment. With a full blood test costing anything between Rs 6,500 and Rs 8,000, the apex court asked the Centre to ensure that the draft policy on essential drugs under consideration of a Group of Ministers should ensure that the prices of essential medicines do not escalate.

Wondering how the cost of medicines and treatment had escalated over the years, the bench of Justices GS Singhvi and SJ Mukhopadhyay remarked, “If hospitals like Ram Manohar Lohia, Safdarjung and AIIMS were not there, 10 per cent patients would have finished.” The court made the comment on a PIL filed by the All India Drug Action Network that has demanded essential drugs to be accessible to common man at low prices.

On Thursday, the two key Ministries dealing with this subject — Ministries of Health and Family Welfare and Chemicals and Fertilisers — filed separate affidavits informing the court that the Centre was willing to bring its new list of essential medicines under the price control regime.

At present, only 74 medicines are under drug price control (DPC) which was felt to be disadvantageous to citizens. In a new initiative, the Government announced that a draft National List of Essential Medicines (NLEM) 2011 was under consideration of a Group of Ministers. Under this, 348 medicines and 489 formulations have been listed on which the Government is seeking suggestions from stakeholders and other Ministries.

With a view to make more drugs affordable, the MCF affidavit said, “The Department of Pharmaceuticals had already initiated necessary action for formulation of a new policy, in which all medicines numbering 348, included in the NLEM 2011 and associated medicines will be brought under price control.”

But the Government’s attempt to win favour from the court was thwarted by the PIL petitioner, who pointed out serious flaws in the draft 2011 policy. Senior advocate Colin Gonsalves submitted that the new policy would lead to escalation of drug prices as it was not based on cost of production of medicines. Instead, the control price would be determined based on the market cost of top three selling brands in that category of drug/medicine. “This will institutionalise overcharging of medicines by manufacturers.”

Gonsalves further submitted another flaw in the policy. As against the previous practice of bulk drugs included in the NLEM, the new policy listed formulations. By this method, the manufacturer can skirt the price control order by changing the formulation using the bulk drug as the main ingredient.

With the policy expected to undergo several rounds of deliberations within the Government, the court posted the matter for hearing in January next year.