IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the obligation of the state to ensure timely medical treatment and the need for a compassionate and sympathetic consideration of medical reimbursement claims in emergency situations.

JUDGMENT

Anoop Kumar Mendiratta, J. - The challenge in this petition is to an order dated August 27, 2015 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter, referred to as the 'Tribunal') in OA No. 2187/2014, whereby the OA preferred by the petitioner for reimbursement of medical expenditure incurred for treatment of his late mother Sujan Kaur, in a non-empanelled hospital at Gurgaon was disposed of in terms of directions in paragraph 15 as under:

'15. In view of the aforesaid discussion, I dispose of the OA directing the Director General, Railway Health Services i.e. respondent No.2, to consider the said appeal filed by the applicant, in the light of the medial papers already submitted by him as well as the Railway Board circular dated 31.01.2007 and pass necessary order relating to the claim of the applicant for reimbursement of the medical expenses incurred for treatment of his mother for the periods from 23.11.2012 to 02.12.2012 and from 22.12.2012 to 30.12.2012. The said exercise is directed to be completed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The claim for balance amount towards the reimbursement of medical expenses for the period from 05.10.2012 to 26.10.2012, however stands rejected.'

2. In brief, the father of the petitioner was working with the Railways and retired on May 31, 1985. On demise of father of the petitioner on January 20, 1995, his mother Sujan Kaur was receiving family pension and also entitled to avail medical facilities being a family pensioner.

On October 05, 2012, Sujan Kaur was admitted in emergency in Neurosurgery Unit of Paras Hospital, Gurgaon and was operated for 'Left parieto occipital horse shoe shaped craniotomy and evacuation of Intracerebral Hematoma' on October 06, 2012. An intimation was forwarded by the petitioner to competent authority on October 08, 2012 regarding the treatment of his mother in emergency, who was finally discharged on October 26, 2012. A claim for reimbursement of medical expenses of Rs.3,21,574/- was accordingly made by the petitioner, on behalf of his mother.

3. Sujan Kaur again developed some complications and was admitted in emergency in ICU in Paras Hospital on November 23, 2012 and was diagnosed as case of 'Urosepsis and Pneumonitis'. She was thereafter discharged on December 02, 2012. Reimbursement Bill for Rs.1,75,814/-was thereafter raised with respondents.

4. Unfortunately, Sujan Kaur had to be again admitted at Paras Hospital on December 22, 2012 and was diagnosed with 'Septicemia with UTI and Hypernatremia and Shock' and expired on December 30, 2012 during the course of treatment. A bill for reimbursement of medical expenditure of Rs.2,14,579/- was further raised by the petitioner.

5. In nutshell, petitioner claims reimbursement of medical expenditure for Rs.7,11,967/-(Rs.3,21,574/-+Rs.1,75,814/-+Rs.2,14,579/-) incurred by him for the treatment of his mother Sujan Kaur in emergent condition. However, only an amount of Rs.45,643/- was reimbursed by the Chief Medical Director/respondent vide order dated June 04, 2013, out of the medical bill of Rs.3,21,574/- in respect of first treatment received in between October 05, 2012 and October 26, 2012 and the balance amount of Rs.2,75,931/- was rejected. Similarly, in respect of remaining two claims, for admission in the hospital from November 23, 2012 to December 02, 2012 and December 22, 2012 to December 30, 2012, the claim was rejected by the respondents on the sole reason that emergency is not justified as per Railway Board circular dated January 31, 2007. The same was reiterated vide order dated September 26, 2013.

6. Aggrieved against the rejection of medical claims, the petitioner preferred O.A. No. 2187/2014 before the Tribunal, which was disposed of by the Tribunal vide order dated August 27, 2015 for considering the representation filed by the petitioner in the light of medical documents already submitted as well as circular dated Janu