CAT allows plea of 30 pensioners

CHANDIGARH: The Tribunal came down heavily on the authorities for adopting a casual approach observing that right to health is a fundamental right and Article 21 includes within its ambit the right to health and medical care

Updated At : 07:49 AM May 12, 2018 IST

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, May 11

The Central Administration Tribunal (CAT), Chandigarh Bench, has allowed the plea of 30 petitioners, including government pensioners and their kin, for medical reimbursement in respect of the treatment taken by them in private hospitals.

The application was moved in the Tribunal by 30 petitioners who are either retired government employees or are kin of the retired government employees who have now died.

One Dharminder Sharma had approached the Tribunal claiming medical reimbursement for treatment taken by his father in a private hospital, which was declined by the authorities on the ground that retired employees/pensioners are not covered by the Central Services (Medical Attendance) Rules – 1944. As such they are not entitled to parity with serving employees.

While rejecting the stand taken by the respondents, the Bench headed by Justice MS Sullar allowed his claim.

The Tribunal came down heavily on the authorities for adopting a casual approach, observing that right to health is a fundamental right and Article 21 includes within its ambit the right to health and medical care. Having a good treatment for dangerous diseases from a good hospital indeed is a step in aid. No fetters can be placed on the rights of citizens to claim medical reimbursement, post retirement.

The Bench observed, “Perhaps, the welfare state thinks that the moment a person retires, he cease to be a citizen of India, which indeed cannot prudently be accepted in any manner”.

Similarly, levelling a variety of allegations and narrating the sequence of events in detail, in all, all applicants have challenged their respective orders and claim that they are entitled to medical reimbursements spent on treatments, on the similar grounds, but their claims have been wrongly, illegally and arbitrarily rejected by the relevant authorities. The applicants then sought to assail the orders and action of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and claimed medical reimbursements.

The counsels of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and Principal Accountant General Department argued that medical reimbursement bills of the applicants were rightly rejected by the competent authority on the ground that there is no provision in the CS (MA) Rules, 1944, for medical reimbursement to retired officers/officials. These rules do not provide for medical reimbursement to the retired government servants/pensioners. While it was further pleaded that the medical claim of only serving employees are settled, as per the CS (MA) Rules, 1944, and the department does not entertain the claim of retired employees/pensioners.

The retired officers/officials have the option to get their names registered with the nearest CGHS authorities for taking medical treatment under the CGHS Scheme, after retirement, in which they are eligible for cashless medical treatment as per instructions. But since the applicants have taken treatment from private hospitals, they are not entitled to medical reimbursement. It was also claimed that reputed government hospitals are also available near the residences of the retired employees/pensioners, so they are not entitled to the medical expenditure spent by them in private hospitals.

The Tribunal held that the applicants, who are retirees/pensioners, are indeed also entitled to reimbursement of medical claims of the amounts spent on their treatment and any redundant rule or instructions or order having the effect of denial of such reimbursement of medical claims to them are arbitrary, illegal inoperative and hit by the Constitutional provisions.

Tribunal comes down heavily on authorities