Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi This the 06^th day of February, 2026 Hon’ble Dr. Anand S Khati, Member (A) Harbhagwan, Aged- 55 Years, S/o Sh. Ram Kumar, Working as Senior Cashier DRM Office, New Delhi. R/o D-83, Mayur Lane, Ashok Vihar, Gurugram, Haryana 122022.

...Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Yogesh Sharma)

Versus

1. Union of India through The General Manager, Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi. – 110001.

2. The Principal Chief Medical Director, Northern Railway Headquarter Office, Baroda House, New Delhi. 110001.

3. The Chief Medical Superintendent, Northern Railway, Divisional Hospital, Delhi. – 110001.

4. The Divisional Railway Manager, Northern Railway, Delhi Division, State Entry Road, New Delhi. – 110006.

...Respondents (By Advocate: Mr. K M Singh)

ORDER (ORAL)

Hon’ble Dr. Anand S Khati, Member (A)

In the present Original Application, filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicant has prayed for the following relief(s):

“That the Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to pass an order of quashing the impugned order dated 23.03.2023 (Annex.A/1), order dated 19.09.2019 & 04.11.2019 (Annex.A/3 & A/2) declaring to the effect that same are illegal, arbitrary and against the rules and consequently, pass an order directing the respondents to consider the full reimbursement of the claim of the applicant for full amount of Rs.1850060/- and consequently, pass an order directing the respondents to grant the balance amount of Rs.981362/- to the applicant with interest.

(i) Any other relief which the Hon'ble Tribunal deem fit and proper may also be granted to the applicant along with the costs of litigation.”

2. Highlighting the facts of the case, learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is second round of litigation. In the earlier round of litigation, this Tribunal, vide order dated 11.10.2022 in O.A. No. 503/2020, passed the following directions to the respondents:

“10. In view of present facts and circumstances let a fresh decision be taken on the appeal of the applicant in so far as denial part of the claim by virtue of impugned order. In view of the same, the impugned order is set aside. So far as the decision with regard to denial of the remaining claim of the applicant is concerned, let a fresh decision be taken by the Railway Board with regard to remaining claimed amount for the purpose of which the applicant shall make an appropriate appeal along with detailed documentation regarding medical reimbursement within fifteen days from today to the Railway Board/Competent Authority, who may pass a detailed reasoned and speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. A copy of the order so passed, be given to the applicant.

11. Needless to say, if there is a Committee to be constituted by the Railway Board for the purpose of adjudication of reimbursement of the applicant the same shall be considered in accordance with Rules and law more specifically in light of para 648 (1)(b) of the Railway Board's Advance Correction slip.”

3. He submits that in compliance with the order of this Tribunal dated 11.10.202, the respondents vide impugned order dated 23.03.2023 (Annexure A1) rejected the claim of the applicant. Hence, the present O.A.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant relies upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Shiva Kant Jha v. Union of India (2018) 16 SCC 187, highlighting para 17, which reads as under:

“17. It is a settled legal position that the government employee during his lifetime 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