IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

****

Date of Decision: 08.01.2026

OMPATI ...Petitioner

Vs.

STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. …Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

Present:- Mr. Jagbir Malik, Advocate with

Mr. Shivam J. Malik, Advocate

for the petitioner

Mr. Ravi Partap Singh, DAG Haryana

***

JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioner through instant petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking direction to respondent to

reimburse medical expenses.

2. The petitioner is wife of retired ASI who passed away on 22.04.2015. She had to undergo emergency treatment on 05.12.2017 as was suffering from cancer. She obtained Chronic Disease certificate on 21.02.2018. She on 16.03.2018 submitted her claim for reimbursement of Rs.3,89,927/- towards medical expenses. She on 03.04.2018 was granted permission by DGP, Haryana to get open medical reimbursement instead of fixed medical allowance. Her claim was rejected vide orders dated 18.06.2018 (Annexure P-10) and 18.06.2018 (Annexure P-11) on the ground that bills are of prior to date of Chronic Disease certificate issued

by Civil Surgeon, Rohtak and grant of permission for reimbursement by DGP, Haryana.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent has rejected petitioner’s claim for reimbursement of medical expenses on the ground that chronic disease certificate was issued on 21.02.2018 whereas treatment was obtained in December’ 2017. At the time of treatment, she was availing benefit of Fixed Medical Allowance Scheme. She switched over to Reimbursement Scheme w.e.f. 03.04.2018. Both the grounds advanced by respondent are technical and procedural in nature. A Division Bench of this Court in ‘Raghuvir Prasad Mittal Vs. State of Haryana and Ors.’, 2008(6) SLR 32, has adverted to identical issue and held that reimbursement of medical expenses incurred on treatment of cancer cannot be denied on the ground that employee was availing fixed medical allowance at the time of treatment. A Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 17.02.2020 in LPA-55-2017 titled as ‘Gurcharan Singh Vs. State of Haryana and Ors.’ has allowed reimbursement of expenses which were incurred prior to issuance of chronic disease certificate.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel submits that respondent has reimbursed medical expenses post February’ 2018. The expenses incurred up to February’ 2018 were not reimbursed because petitioner was not possessing chronic disease certificate and was availing benefit of fixed medical allowance.

5. On being confronted with afore-cited judgments of this Court, learned State counsel expressed his inability to controvert their applicability to the instant case, however, submitted that reimbursement would be as per rates prescribed by State Government.

6. In the wake of statement of both sides, the petition is hereby allowed in terms of judgment of this Court in Raghuvir Prasad Mittal (supra). The respondent is directed to re-consider medical bills of the petitioner and release eligible claim within six weeks from today.

7. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

(JAGMOHAN BANSAL)

JUDGE January 08, 2026 Deepak DPA Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No