The Chhattisgarh High Court has held that self-preservation is an integral part of the right to health, a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Directing the authority to consider the request of the petitioner pertaining to medical reimbursement, Justice Sanjay Kumar Agarwal held that the provisions relating to the reimbursement of medical treatment have to be considered liberally.
The Court held that “right to health” includes “right to affordable treatment” and “that the provisions related to reimbursement of medical treatment has to be construed liberally”.
Factual Background
The petitioner nurse, had surgery on the spinal cord, after which she claimed reimbursement of medical expenses amounting to Rs. 99,743/-. However, the claim was rejected stating that has not intimidated surgery and thus is not entitled to reimbursement. The return of claim was justified that post-facto sanction cannot be granted based on the Chhattisgarh Civil Services Rules, 2013.
Case of the Petitioner
The Counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the surgery was emergent, after which she had to stay, after which she had to stay admitted for seven days, the rule of informing the competent authority cannot be adhered to. The return of medical bills was challenged as an arbitrary rule that was not mandatorily complied with. He also contended that the right to self-preservation is a part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
Observation of the Court
Referring to the concerned rules of medical reimbursement, the Court held that in case of emergency, intimation to the concerned department is required within 48 hours of commencement of treatment.
The Court referred to the Supreme Court decision in Consumer Education and Research Centre and Others v. Union of India and Others wherein it held that the right to health and medicine is to protect his health and vigour while in service or post-retirement is a worker’s fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Thus, Court directed the authority to consider the petitioner’s case for a grant of post-facto sanction under the concerned rules within 45 days from the date of receipt of the order.
Case Details
Before: Chhattisgarh High Court
Case Title: Khuku Biswas v. State of Chhattisgarh
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar Agarwal
Read Order@LatestLaws.com
Picture Source : https://www.newstatesman.com/sites/default/files/styles/cropped_article_image/public/blogs_2018/03/pexels-photo-143654.jpeg?itok=JR6Mz5AI
