What a PMJAY Hospital List Update Really Tells You

What the 19 October source check found

We compared published source evidence with the directory’s retained captures. The important result was no confirmed change in these hospital lists, rather than a new claim that their hospitals were currently accepting patients.

These observations cover the named files and tables only. They are not a complete national audit, a list of recommended hospitals or an assessment of care quality.

Haryana: a recent download does not make the list recent

The official Haryana index labels its district lists from 3 August 2026 onwards. The separate de-empanelment page also describes evidence as of 3 August. Retrieving those documents in October did not replace the dates the authority supplied.

An identical file tells us that the downloaded evidence has not changed. It cannot establish that nothing happened at the hospital after August. If you use an older list to identify a branch, ask the Ayushman desk to confirm today’s scheme acceptance and the procedure proposed by your treating team.

Read the date beside the hospital’s source trail, rather than treating a webpage footer or the date on your downloaded PDF copy as a new decision.

Kerala: unchanged rows can still have unknown freshness

The SHA Kerala hospital index links separate public and private tables by district. Our comparison covered 27 Thiruvananthapuram public rows, 18 Ernakulam public rows, 28 Ernakulam private rows and 29 Thrissur private rows. Names, contacts and addresses matched the retained capture; the tables did not supply a list date.

That is useful identity and contact evidence, with a clear limitation. “Retrieved on 17 September” means we captured the table then; “checked again on 19 October” means we compared it again. Neither statement supplies a missing source as-of date.

Some tables contain several branches with the same brand name. Ahalia Foundation Eye Hospital appears more than once in the Ernakulam private table, with different contacts and addresses. Matching only the name could send you to another branch. Match the locality, address and number together before keeping a contact in your shortlist.

Compare Ernakulam source records or compare two specific branches. This is a comparison of evidence, not a ranking.

A blocked search is an access problem, not a status decision

On 19 October, HEM returned an access refusal to our retrieval environment. We could not verify its current hospital data. That observation says nothing about whether a particular hospital has closed, been suspended or stopped participating. It also does not prove that the public portal is unavailable on your network.

Try the official NHA hospital search directly. If it does not load, use the relevant state authority’s hospital list to identify the branch and ask the hospital or official help channel how to confirm current status. Keep the unresolved question visible instead of marking the hospital as removed.

For a treatment-access concern, use the official complaint and helpline guide. A correction sent to this directory is a separate request and does not register an official grievance.

Choose your next step from the missing evidence

Prepare a private call checklist. You can print the questions and note what is still unanswered. Do not send patient documents or card identifiers to this directory.

How we prepared this case study

Published by Arsh Kapoor with AI assistance. This is an explanation of our dated evidence comparison, not first-hand hospital experience or a clinical review. Haryana PDF checks compared downloaded bytes using SHA-256 fingerprints. Kerala checks compared published table text with the retained capture after normalizing spacing. These methods detect changes to the checked evidence; they do not certify a hospital’s status.

The Thiruvananthapuram public, Ernakulam public and Thrissur private tables complete the Kerala sources described above. The 102 rows are a scoped table count, not all Kerala hospitals.

No telephone calls were made, no admissions were arranged and no packages were verified during that review. The case study was published on 22 October; its observations remain dated 19 October. See live catalog coverage and missing fields, retained source snapshots and our correction rules.