[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
9Th February vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others on 9 February, 2026
2026:UHC:713-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA
AND
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHASH UPADHYAY
WRIT PETITION (S/B) NO. 453 OF 2025
09TH FEBRUARY, 2026
Vinay Anand Bourai ...... Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others ...... Respondents
Counsel for the petitioner : Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, learned Senior
Counsel assisted by Mr. Bhupendra
Bora, learned counsel
Counsel for the respondents : Mr. Gajendra Tripathi, learned
Standing Counsel for the State
The Court made the following:
JUDGMENT:
(per Sri Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J.)
1) Heard Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, learned Senior
Counsel assisted by Mr. Bhupendra Bora, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Gajendra Tripathi, learned Standing
Counsel for the respondents.
2) The present writ petition has been filed seeking a
writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to
reimburse the medical bills of the petitioner amounting to
Rs.11,12,992/- along with interest of 18% as per the State
Government Health Scheme.
2026:UHC:713-DB
3) Briefly stated, the facts are that, the petitioner
retired from the post of Principal from Shri Guru Ram Rai
(P.G.) College, Dehradun on 31.08.2022 upon attaining the
age of superannuation. The petitioner claims that he is a
Golden Card holder under the health scheme provided by
the State Government for Government employees. The
petitioner is a patient of lung cancer and was under
treatment for the said disease at Madanta the Medicity,
Gurugram. He submitted the medical bills of medical
expenses through Principal of the college on 20.05.2024 for
a sum of Rs.13,05,476.35 for the period from 19.09.2022 to
17.05.2024. The petitioner also submitted essentiality
certificate along with original bills. The claim of the
petitioner for reimbursement of the medical bills remained
pending and, consequently, the present writ petition has
been filed.
4) In pursuance of order of this Court, the
respondents have supplied written instructions through the
Chief Standing Counsel, and the same have been taken on
record. The stand taken by the respondents is that as per
Clause 22 of the Medical Department's Government Order
No. 1256 dated 25.11.2021, the reimbursement of medical
treatment expenses for Non-Government Aided Colleges is
permissible subject to certain restrictions, which are as
follows:
2026:UHC:713-DB
"(a) The concerned institutions shall be entitled to adopt
the scheme after getting the proposal passed by their
Governing Body, Board etc.
(b) The said scheme will be mandatory for all the
employees of the concerned institutions / bodies /
corporations.
(c) The concerned institutions shall make monthly
deductions from the salary / pension of the employees
/ pensioners and make the amount available online to
the State Health Agency."
5) It is stated that in order to avail the benefit of the
scheme the monthly contribution ought to have been
deducted in advance after exercising the option under the
scheme. However, in the case of petitioner, a lump sum
deduction of Rs.20,000/- was made in the month of April
2024 by estimating the monthly contribution from August
2022 i.e. one month prior to the commencement of his
medical treatment, which continued from 19.09.2022 to
17.05.2024. It is further stated that another sum of
Rs.1,000/- was deducted from the pension in November
2024. It is stated that due to non-adoption of the scheme
by the college on time and non-submission of the option for
the scheme in time by the petitioner and for the reason that
the monthly contributions were deposited in lump sum, the
claim of the petitioner for reimbursement is not admissible
and has consequently been rejected by the Medical
Department on 16.09.2025.
2026:UHC:713-DB
6) Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, learned Senior Counsel
appearing for the petitioner contends that the respondents
have themselves made lump sum deduction of the monthly
contributions from the pension of the petitioner for the
entire period for which the reimbursement has been claimed
and, therefore, they cannot now take the stand that because
of any delay on part of the petitioner in depositing monthly
contributions the claim is not acceptable. He further
submits that the petitioner having retired on 31.08.2022, it
was not within his control to compel the management of the
college to adopt the scheme forthwith, and even if there was
any delay on part of the college in accepting the scheme,
the claim of the petitioner could not have been rejected for
the said reason.
7) On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel
appearing for the State contends that since there was delay
on part of the college in adopting the scheme and since
contributions were not paid on a monthly basis, therefore,
the claim has been rightly rejected.
8) We have considered the rival submissions and
perused the material placed on record.
9) The State Government Health Scheme was
notified by means of Government Order dated 25th
November 2021. The purpose of the scheme is to provide
2026:UHC:713-DB
security to the employees towards the unforeseen medical
expenditure, for which a monthly contribution has been
contemplated.
10) It is not disputed before us that the petitioner had
suffered from the said disease, had taken treatment, and on
that basis submitted the bills for reimbursement. It is also
not disputed before us that the bills were duly forwarded by
the Director, Higher Education, Uttarakhand, Haldwani,
Nainital along with his approval for necessary sanction by
the Government. In the approval dated 11.06.2025, the
Director, Higher Education has admitted that the entire
amount towards monthly contribution for the period 19th
September 2022 to 17th May 2024 was deducted by way of
a lump sum deduction of Rs.20,000/- in April 2024, and
Rs.1,000/- in November 2024, specifically towards the State
Government Health Scheme, from the pension of the
petitioner. In the written instructions supplied by the
respondents it has not been disclosed as to how there was
any delay on part of the college in opting for or adopting the
scheme. In any event, such delay would not operate to the
prejudice of the employee, inasmuch as Clause 22 of the
Scheme makes the scheme compulsory for all the
employees.
2026:UHC:713-DB
11) The scheme in question was by way of a social
security and welfare measure intended to provide financial
protection to employees and pensioners against unforeseen
medical expenditure, and therefore deserves a purposive
and beneficial interpretation which leans in favour of the
employee. Once contribution is accepted, even belatedly or
in lump sum, the State cannot turn around and deny benefit
on that very ground. We find no justifiable reason for the
respondents to deny the claim for reimbursement.
12) Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The
respondents are directed to reimburse the claim of the
petitioner in accordance with the Scheme contained in
Government Order dated 25th November 2021, within a
period of four weeks from the date of communication of this
order.
13) Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed
of.
_______________________
MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J.
_________________
SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.
TH
Dt: 09 FEBRUARY, 2026
Negi
HIMANS
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF
UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF
UTTARAKHAND,
2.5.4.20=bb3b60774012c1ef1dae20d13aaf
116e73351fdaf6878326386908a7f90d5757,
HU NEGI
postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND,
serialNumber=75BD9D0FB7F4A80990FC51
A722A6BC552D470EB4FD2F88DDF7C18DB
2A1524A4D, cn=HIMANSHU NEGI
Date: 2026.02.11 10:39:36 +05'30'
