Key Points

The Delhi High Court has delivered a landmark ruling supporting a retired railway employee's right to full medical reimbursement for Covid-19 treatment. By rejecting government rate restrictions, the court affirmed that medical compensation is an enforceable right, not a charitable gesture. The judgment sets a significant precedent for government employees' healthcare entitlements during medical emergencies. This decision underscores the importance of comprehensive medical support for retired workers in India's welfare state framework.

Key Points: Delhi HC Backs Full Covid Reimbursement for Railway Employee

  • Delhi HC upholds CAT order for complete medical expense reimbursement
  • Court emphasizes emergency treatment cannot be restricted by rate caps
  • Retired railway employee wins full compensation for Covid treatment
  • Ruling supports employee medical rights in welfare state framework
3 min read

Delhi HC upholds full Covid medical reimbursement to retired railway employee

Delhi High Court mandates full medical expense coverage for retired railway worker's Covid-19 treatment, rejecting government's rate restrictions.

"Medical reimbursement is not a concession or charity but an enforceable right - Justice Navin Chawla"

New Delhi, Sep 28

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by the Union government against a Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) order directing full reimbursement of medical expenses to a retired railway employee for Covid-19 treatment.

A Bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Madhu Jain upheld the CAT's February 13 order in favour of Ayodhya Prasad, a former Office Superintendent-II who retired from Banaras Locomotive Works in 2004, observing that medical reimbursement is not a matter of "concession or charity but an enforceable right".

Respondent-Prasad, a beneficiary under the Retired Employees Liberalised Health Scheme (RELHS), was admitted in April 2021 to Apollo Hospital in Ahmedabad during a severe Covid-19 infection. While his total treatment bill amounted to Rs 7,46,657, the Railways reimbursed only Rs 3,92,939, citing ceilings fixed by the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation.

His review application and appeal for the balance were rejected, prompting him to move to the CAT. The Tribunal directed reimbursement of the remaining Rs 3,53,718, which the Union government challenged before the Delhi High Court.

Rejecting the Centre's reliance on Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation rate caps, the Justice Chawla-led Bench held that reimbursement could not be curtailed in emergency medical situations.

"The plea that reimbursement has already been made strictly as per the rates notified by the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation cannot be sustained in the present factual matrix," it said.

"Once it is undisputed that the respondent had to undergo treatment during a medical emergency, the rigidity of rate fixation cannot stand in the way of full reimbursement," the Delhi High Court observed, adding that medical reimbursement is not a concession or charity but an enforceable right flowing from the employer's duty in a welfare state.

The Justice Chawla-led Bench, citing the Supreme Court's ruling in Shiv Kant Jha v. Union of India, said: "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... Once it is established, the claim cannot be denied on technical grounds."

Refusing to interfere with the CAT's order, the Delhi High Court directed the Railways to reimburse the balance amount along with 8 per cent interest. "The petitioners shall release the balance payment of the medical expenses to the respondent, along with interest at the rate of 8 per cent per annum, within a period of eight weeks," the Justice Chawla-led Bench ordered.

- IANS

Share this article:

Reader Comments

P
Priya S
Finally some justice for our retired employees. My father is also a retired government servant and we faced similar issues during his treatment. The government should not make retired people run from pillar to post for their legitimate dues.
R
Rohit P
Good decision but why did the government waste public money fighting this case? They should have accepted CAT's order instead of dragging a retired employee to court. This shows insensitivity towards senior citizens.
S
Sarah B
As someone working in healthcare, I've seen many retired employees struggle with medical reimbursements. During Covid emergency, private hospitals charged premium rates. Government rate caps are unrealistic in such situations.
V
Vikram M
The 8% interest is justified! When government delays payments, they should pay interest. Retired employees have limited income and medical emergencies can wipe out their savings completely.
M
Michael C
While I support the judgment, I hope this doesn't lead to misuse. There should be proper verification to ensure genuine cases get full reimbursement while preventing fraud. Balance is important.

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50