Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 10878
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Anindo Majumdar, Administrative Member
Lynda Vungngaihlun – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
O.A/350/1002/2023
For the Applicants: Mr. A. Chakraborty, Mr. A…r…gh…a Chakraborty, Ms. P. Mondal
For the Respondents: Ms. E. Banerjee
A legally married spouse has the right to claim medical reimbursement for expenses incurred, regardless of NOC from other heirs, under the Administrative Tribunals Act.
Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Medical Reimbursement - Claim for reimbursement of medical expenses incurred by the applicant for treatment of her deceased husband - Requirement of No Objection Certificate from the legal heirs - Court directs reimbursement upon satisfaction of incurred expenditures without insisting on NOC. (Paras 1-10)
(B) Claim - The applicant was the legally married wife of the deceased and incurred medical expenses during his treatment at Apollo Hospital, Kolkata. The court ruled that reimbursement should be made provided all requisite proofs are satisfied without insisting upon NOC from other heirs. (Paras 7-9)
Facts of the case:
The applicant, the wife of a late government official, sought reimbursement for medical expenses related to her husband's treatment as a beneficiary of a health scheme. The application was initially denied due to NOC requirements from his other heirs.
Findings of Court:
The court concluded that a legally married spouse has the right to claim reimbursement and the insistence on NOC from other legal heirs was unnecessary under the circumstances, directing the authorities to process the reimbursement.
Issues: Whether the applicant is entitled to reimbursement of medical expenses incurred for her husband's treatment despite her not providing an NOC from all legal heirs?
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that medical expenses incurred by a spouse should be reimbursed as a right and asserted that requiring an NOC from all heirs is not a legal barrier to such reimbursement when the spouse had incurred the costs themselves.
Result: The claim for reimbursement was to be processed, directing action within three months.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. tribunal's authority to dispose of the case. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. claim for the medical reimbursement and legal heirs. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's obligation to ensure reimbursement without unnecessary barriers. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. emphasis on spousal rights for reimbursement. (Para 9) |
| 5. decision to process the reimbursement claim. (Para 10) |
Per: Mr. Anindo Majumdar, Administrative Member.
1. This matter is taken up by the Single Bench for disposal in a1c0c/o0r9d/a2n0c2e 1 wiistshu etdh e unodrdeer r Soufb -Stheect ioHno n’(b6l)e oCfh aiSremctaino,n C5A T ofd attehde Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 , and since no complicated question of law is involved.
2. The applicant has approached this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985, praying for the following relief(s):-
“(a) The Office Order dated 16.02.2003 issued by the Assistant Director of Postal Service (A/C’s), West Bengal Circle, Kol- 12 cannot be sustained in the eye of law and therefore the same may be quashed.
(b) An order do issue directing the respondents to release Rs. 12,82,420/-
towards Medical Reimbursement in favour of the applicant for treatment of her husband at the Apollo Hospital without insisting her to submit no objection certificate from the legal heirs of the ex-employee. (c) To pay interest”.
3. The facts of the case are summarised as below:-
3.1 The applicant is the wife of late T. Mangmingthang , Ex-Post Master General, North Bengal Region who expired on 17/10/2022, while in service.
3.2 The deceased officer was initially admitted at Heritage Hospital at Siliguri and was thereafter admitted to Apollo Hospital at Kolkata in an emergency condition.
3.3 After the death, of her husband, the applicant had submitted a representation addressed to the Chief Postmaster General, Kolkata dated 02/12/2022 (Annexure A2) seeking reimbursement of medical expenses incurred by her for treatment of her husband at Heritage Hospital, Siliguri for 26 days and thereafter at Apollo Hospital, Kolkata. Her claim amounting to Rs. 1,51,709/- for the expenditure incurred by her at Heritage Hospital, Siliguri was assessed by the respondents as per the prescribed CGHS rate and an amount of Rs. 98,052/ as admissible was paid to her.
3.4 Since the power for sanction of medical claims exceeding Rs. 5 lakhs is vested with the Directorate of Posts, the claim of the applicant with regard to reimbursement of the sum of Rs. 12,82,420/- at Apollo Hospital, Kolkata was sent to the Directorate of Post by the office of Chief PMG, West Bengal vide letter dated 06/12/2022, along with the relevant documents.
3.5. The applicant had submitted another representation addressed to the Chief Postmaster General, West Bengal Circle, Kolkata dated 4th January 2023 seeking reimbursement of the expenses incurred by her for treatment of her husband.
3.5 The Directorate of Posts vide letters dated 13/12/2022, 09/02/2023 and 22/06/2023 sought for a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the applicant and the same was int“imated to the applicant by” the office of the Chief Postmaster General, vide letter dated 16/02/2023 and 23/05/2023.
3.6 Aggrieved by the non-reimbursement of the medical expenditure incurred by her at the Apollo Hospital, Kolkata, the applicant has filed the instant Original Application.
4. Heard the Learned Counsel for both the sides and considered the material on record.
5. At hearing, Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant had borne the entire expenditure for treatment of her husband at Heritage Hospital, Silliguri as well as at Apollo Hospital, Kolkata. He further submitted that after the applicant had submitted a claim for reimbursement of the medical expenditure incurred by her, she was asked to submit an affidavit and a No Objection Certificate (NOC) on stamp paper for onward submission o“f the same to the Directo”rate of Posts, New Delhi and that the applicant had submitted an Affidavit affirmed before the Oath Commissioner, Manipur s
