A Single Judge Bench of the Madras High Court comprising Justice N. Anand Venkatesh observed that R.T.P.C.R. Test is incapable of detecting the infection of Covid and authorities should not rely solely on that when more evidence, namely CT-Scan report was available. (B.Varalakshmi v. UOI & Ors)
The Bench held that,
“the Authorities must not stick to technicalities and the claim must be considered with more humanness with the available documents which clearly substantiates the fact that the husband of the petitioner was suffering from COVID-19.”
Background of the Case
The Petitioner is the wife of the deceased doctor. The husband of the petitioner, who was treating COVID-19 patients, started feeling the symptoms of the Virus and a "C.T. Chest COVID Screening Test" was performed and it was deduced that the husband of the petitioner was infected with COVID- 19. Her husband died on the same day.
The Central Government had announced the “Pradhan Mantri Garib Package Insurance Scheme for Health Workers Fighting COVID-19” which covers the insurance of Rs. 50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs) for both Public Healthcare Providers as well as the Doctors and staffs belonging to Private Hospitals, if they die due to COVID-19.
On the basis of the scheme, the petitioner started making representations to the respondents in this regard. One of the documents that were insisted by the respondent was the R.T.P.C.R. (Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction) Test result. Unfortunately, the petitioner was not in possession of this document since her husband was directly subjected to the "CT-Chest COVID Screening Test" by the private hospital.
Therefore, this Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to provide petitioner the Insurance Coverage of Rs. 50,00,000/- covered under the “Pradhan Mantri Garib Package Insurance Scheme for Health Workers Fighting COVID-19” on account of the death of her husband/ Private Medical Practitioner who undertook private practice during the pandemic period and lost his life to COVID-19 infection by considering petitioner's representations dated 11.09.2020 and 16.09.2020.
Submission of the Petitioner
The Counsel on the behalf of the Petitioner submitted that she (petitioner) handed over all the documents to the fourth respondent except the R.T.P.C.R. Test result.
Submission of the Respondent
The learned Assistant Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the first respondent submitted that the fourth respondent has to forward the claim to the second respondent and the second respondent in turn must recommend the claim and forward it to the first respondent. The first respondent, on receipt of the same, will make a decision and once the claim is sanctioned, necessary directions will be issued to the fifth respondent Insurance Company, which is the Nodal Agency and the payment will be made to the concerned claimant.
Reasoning and Decision of the Court
First and foremost the Court lauded the selfless services of the Doctors in this pandemic and expressed that the entire World and particularly India, is facing an unprecedented situation due to the untimely attack of the COVID-19. It is the Doctors and the Frontline Workers who in spite of knowing about the risk involved through exposure to this Virus are selflessly and tirelessly working to save the lives of millions of citizens of this country, the Court observed.
Thereafter, the Court looked into the scientific study of R.T.P.C.R. report from which the Court deduced that,
“one requires R.T.P.C.R. to detect COVID -19 and a CT scan to detect if progressive pneumonia is present. A CT scan is useful when the infection has spread to the lungs and detection by nose or oral swabs is not possible. R.T.P.C.R. Test is incapable of detecting the infection if it has reached the lungs and is causing further decay”.
Perusing all the facts, the Court held that,
"It is very clear from the “CT-Chest COVID Screening Test" that the husband of the petitioner was afflicted with COVID-19. When such a clinching document is available, there is no requirement for insisting on the RTPCR Test result. In cases of this nature, the Authorities must not stick to technicalities and the claim must be considered with more humanness with the available documents which clearly substantiates the fact that the husband of the petitioner was suffering from COVID-19.”
The Court ordered the fourth respondent to process the claim made by the petitioner without insisting on the R.T.P.C.R. Test result and if it otherwise satisfies the requirements, the fourth respondent is directed to process the claim form and forward the same to the second respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
The Bench disposed of the matter and directed the Respondent to provide the necessary compensation to his family under the laudable scheme that has been introduced by the Central Government.
Case Details
Case: - W.P.(MD) No.7997 of 2021
Petitioner: - B.Varalakshmi
Respondent: - Union of India & Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner: - Mr.R.Maheswaran
Counsel for Respondent: - Mrs.L.Victoria Gowri, Mr.M.Lingadurai, Mr.N.Dilipkumar
Judge: Justice N. Anand Venkatesh
Read Order@LatestLaws.com
Share this Document :
Picture Source :
