IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
AMIT RAWAL, K. V. JAYAKUMAR, JJ.
Union Of India - Appellant
Versus
M.B.Viswanathan Nair - Respondents
OP (CAT) NO. 147 OF 2019
Decided on : 03-02-2025
(A) Central Government Health Scheme (CGHS) Rules, 1944 - Medical reimbursement - The Tribunal allowed the full reimbursement of medical expenses for renal transplantation, overruling the government's restriction to the approved package amount. The court emphasized that the right to medical claim cannot be denied based on hospital recognition alone. (Paras 4 , 5 , 13 , 14 )
(B) Right to medical claim - The court reiterated that the authenticity of treatment records is paramount, and claims cannot be denied on technical grounds if treatment was necessary. (Paras 13 , 14 )
Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought reimbursement of Rs.8,21,966/- for his wife's renal transplantation at a non-empanelled hospital, which was denied based on CGHS package limits.
Findings of Court:
The court upheld the Tribunal's decision to reimburse the full amount, emphasizing the necessity of the treatment and the inadequacy of the government's mechanical denial of claims.
Issues: The main issue was whether reimbursement could be denied based on the hospital's non-recognition and the claim exceeding the sanctioned package.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the right to medical claim is not contingent upon hospital recognition, and genuine treatment records must be honored regardless of technicalities.
Result: O.P.(CAT) dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
K.V.JAYAKUMAR, J .
The present O.P.(CAT) is preferred against the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No.530 of 2017 dated 19.09.2018, whereby the following claims of the petitioner have been allowed by the Tribunal.
“i. Quash Annexure A6 letter issued by the 2nd respondent.
ii. Declare that the applicant herein is fully entitled to be reimbursed the entire amount of medical expenses sustained by him for the Renal Transplantation of his wife, Smt.K.S.Beena.
iii. Direct the respondents to sanction and disburse the entire medical expenses incurred by the applicant for the Renal Transplantation of his wife Smt.K.S.Beena at Amritha Institute of Medical Science & Research Centre, Edappally, Kochi, as per the medical bills submitted by him.
iv. To grant such other reliefs as may be prayed for and the court may deem fit to grant, and
v. Grant the cost of this Original Application.”
2. Facts of the case in brief are as follows: Wife of the respondent/petitioner Sri.M.B.Viswanathan Nair was a Kidney patient. She was taken to Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Edappally, on 22.02.2013 on account of renal failure. She underwent kidney transplantation in Amrita Hospital. Thereafter, the respondent/petitioner, submitted all the bills for claiming refund of medical expenses incurred in connection with the treatment for an amount of Rs.8,21,966/-.
3. The contention of the petitioners was that the employees of Central Government and their family members are permitted to avail medical facilities in any of the hospitals recognized by the State Government subject to the condition that they will be reimbursed the medical expenditure at rates fixed by the Government under CGHS Rules/CS (MA) Rules, 1944 or the actual expenses incurred, whichever is less. The approved package of Central Government Health Scheme (CGHS) for the treatment of Renal Transplantation & Dialysis is only Rs.1,43,000/- and which has been sanctioned.
4. The tribunal noticing the rival contentions of the counsel for the parties and allowed the claim, placing reliance on the decision reported in State of Punjab and Others Vs. Mohinder Singh Chawla (JT 1997 (1) SC 4160), Surjit Singh Vs. State of Punjab (AIR 2006 SC 1388) and Narendar Pal Singh Vs. Union of India and Others (1998 Lab IC 1861) allowed the full reimbursement to the claimant. Impugning the said order the Union of India and its officers preferred this O.P.(CAT).
5. The sole question involved in this case is that whether a claim of reimbursement be denied to Government employee or his family members on the grounds that the hospital in which he was treated is not recognized by the Government or the amount claimed is more than the package? In Shiva Kant Jha Vs. Union of India (2018 KHC 6285) the Honourable Apex Court held that right to medical claim cannot be denied merely because name of the hospital is not included in the Government Order. It was observed that real test must be the factum of treatment supported by records duly certified by Doctors/hospitals concerned. It was made clear that survival of the person is the prime consideration, and the law does not require that prior permission has to be taken in such situation. Paragraph Nos.13, 14 and 15 of the Shiva Kant Jha’s case (supra) are extracted hereunder:
“13) It is a settled legal position that the Government employee during his life time or after his retirement is entitled to get the benefit of the medical facilities and no fetters can be placed on his rights. It is acceptable to common sense, that ultimate decision as to how a patient should be treated vests only with the Doctor, who is well versed and expert both on academic qualification and experience gained. Very little scope is left to the patient or his relative to decide as to the manner in which the ailment should be treated. Speciality Hospitals are established for treatment of specified ailments and services of Doctors specialized in a discipline are availed
The right to medical reimbursement for government employees cannot be denied due to hospital non-recognition or exceeding package limits if treatment necessity is established.
Government employees' entitlement to medical reimbursements under CGHS cannot be denied based on bureaucratic restraints, especially in emergency medical situations.
Emergency medical treatments require reimbursement even if provided by non-empanelled facilities, prioritizing the necessity of treatment over technical compliance with prescribed rates.
The right to medical claim cannot be denied solely because the hospital is not included in the government order. The factum of treatment and supporting records certified by doctors/hospitals are cruc....
Government employees are entitled to medical reimbursement for treatment in non-recognized hospitals at applicable rates for similar treatments in recognized hospitals.
In emergency medical situations, full reimbursement of medical expenses is mandated regardless of any imposed ceiling limits, emphasizing the right to timely medical treatment.
Full medical reimbursement mandatory for genuine emergency treatment in empanelled hospitals, regardless of CGHS rates.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.