Court Orders State to Reimburse Medical Expenses for Life-Saving Intravascular Lithotripsy Procedure
In a landmark judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed the State of Haryana to reimburse the full medical expenses incurred by Hukam Singh, an elderly retiree, for undergoing a life-saving advanced medical procedure not covered under routine angioplasty packages. The court emphasized the essentiality of prioritizing health and welfare over rigid policy adherence, underscoring the state's constitutional obligation to safeguard the health of its citizens.
The case centered around Hukam Singh's treatment for critical coronary artery disease, requiring an advanced procedure known as Intravascular Lithotripsy (IVL), due to heavily calcified coronary blocks. Despite the procedure's exclusion from the state's routine angioplasty package rates, the court ruled that reimbursement could not be denied for life-saving interventions. It highlighted that the state's rigid literalism in policy interpretation was contrary to the spirit of welfare policies aimed at preserving life and health.
Justice Harpreet Singh Brar, presiding over the case, observed that the state's stance adhered strictly to policy language while ignoring its fundamental objective of safeguarding life. He stated, "A policy meant to preserve life cannot be allowed to become a procrustean bed of rigid literalism."
The judgment also directed the state to consider including IVL within the package rates for coronary artery disease, ensuring comprehensive coverage for advanced medical procedures in the future. Additionally, it mandated the Director General, Health Services, Haryana, to verify package rates of empanelled hospitals and ensure compliance with policy guidelines.
The court further criticized the misclassification of advanced medical devices like the IVL catheter as "consumables," asserting that such a stance undermines the constitutional right to health. It emphasized that the state must prioritize compassion over commercial considerations in its health policies.
This decision reinforces the judiciary's commitment to upholding citizens' right to health and medical aid as fundamental, urging policy amendments to reflect advancements in medical technology and practices.
Bottom Line:
Medical reimbursement claims by government employees and retirees must be evaluated based on medical necessity and the spirit of welfare policies, rather than rigid adherence to technicalities.
Statutory provision(s): Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, Order 22, Rule 1, 2 & 3 of CPC, Section 151 of CPC, Haryana Government Instructions dated 14.07.2020
Hukam Singh v. State of Haryana, (Punjab And Haryana) : Law Finder Doc id # 2896516
