223 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 12.02.2026 Sanjeev Kumar ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA Present: Mr. Umesh Kumar Kanwar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Nirmal Preet Singh Hira, DAG, Punjab.

*****

DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA, J. (Oral)

In the present writ petition, the petitioner is praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to release the arrears of medical reimbursement amounting to Rs.21,62,788/- along with interest @ 18 % per annum.

2. A perusal of the facts of the present case would show that the petitioner was admitted in Max Hospital, New Delhi, on 22.01.2022 and got the treatment of liver transplant. The petitioner was discharged on 13.02.2022 and as per the petitioner, the total medical expenses came to Rs.21,62,788/- (Annexure P-2). Thereafter, an amount of Rs.14,06,170/- was released to the petitioner as medical reimbursement for getting treatment from Max Hospital, New Delhi, for the period 22.01.2022 to 13.02.2022. As per the petitioner, as the total cost of treatment was Rs.21,62,788/-, as such, the petitioner was entitled for reimbursement of the entire amount. However, the petitioner was only paid Rs.14,06,170/- as medical reimbursement. As such, the petitioner served a legal notice dated 25.01.2024 (Annexure P-7) to respondent No.2 claiming the total medical expenses incurred by the petitioner i.e.

Rs.21,62,788/- should be paid to the petitioner.

3. Reply has been duly filed by the respondents. A perusal of the reply by way of affidavit dated 27.03.2025 filed on behalf of respondents No.1, 2 and 4 would show that the petitioner has been given medical reimbursement in terms of instructions dated 13.02.1995 issued by the Government of Punjab, Department of Health and Family Welfare Punjab. It has also been mentioned in the abovesaid reply that the cost of reimbursement in a case of live related liver transplant in All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) has been taken into consideration while releasing medical reimbursement to the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents have taken into consideration the rates fixed by AIIMS for the year 2020 whereas the liver transplant was done in the year 2022. He submits that in the year 2022, the cost of live related liver transplant was much higher than Rs.14 lakhs, as such, the petitioner is entitled for grant of enhanced medical reimbursement.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions from the petitioner, submits that he will be satisfied, at this stage, if liberty is granted to the petitioner to submit a representation to the respondent No.2 claiming higher medical reimbursement taking into consideration the fact that the treatment which the petitioner received in regard to liver transplant was in the year 2022 and not in the year 2020, which has been taken into consideration by the respondents and a direction be given to respondent No.2 to decide such representation submitted by the petitioner in a time-bound manner.

6. Learned State counsel does not oppose the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

7. In view of the above and without commenting upon the merits of the case, the present petition is hereby disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation in regard to grant of higher medical reimbursement. In case, such representation is filed by the petitioner, the same shall be considered and decided by respondent No.2, in accordance with law, within a period of 02 months from the date of submission of such representation by the petitioner.

8. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand(s) disposed of.

12.02.2026 (DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA)

JUDGE d.gulati Whether speaking / reasoned : Yes No Whether Reportable : Yes No