Listen To This Post
Court Says Bureaucratic Rules Cannot Restrict Emergency Treatment.
Court Orders Rs 2.16 Lakh Additional Payment with Interest to Retired Engineer
The ruling came while hearing a petition filed by a retired Chief Engineer whose medical reimbursement was restricted to ₹1.38 lakh, despite incurring ₹3.54 lakh in treatment costs during a neurological emergency that left him in a coma.
The court quashed the State’s reimbursement calculation sheet and directed authorities to pay the remaining ₹2.16 lakh along with 9 per cent annual interest from the date of discharge.
Justice Moudgil criticised the State’s “mechanical practice” of capping reimbursements regardless of medical urgency, declaring that the constitutional right to life is “not a right to partial survival,” but a right to meaningful preservation of life and dignity.
The court noted that expecting patients or families to verify empanelment lists during life-threatening emergencies was unrealistic and unjust.
“To expect bureaucratic compliance from the brink of mortality is unreasonable. Decisions must be taken forthwith if precious life has to be saved,” the Bench observed.
Court Invokes Constitution and Ancient Texts to Emphasise Sanctity of Life
In a rare and philosophical reflection, the High Court invoked both constitutional principles and ancient Indian scriptures, including verses from the Garuda Purana, to underline that preservation of life is a sacred and constitutional duty.
Justice Moudgil observed that policies are tools of governance and cannot override fundamental rights.
“Policies are instruments of governance; they are not fetters upon justice,” the court said, warning that administrative convenience cannot eclipse the right to life.
Linking the issue to India’s broader developmental vision, the court remarked that a truly developed nation is measured not just by economic growth, but by its social security and healthcare protections.
The court directed the State government to revise its medical reimbursement policy to incorporate flexibility in genuine emergencies, ensuring that citizens are not forced to choose between survival and financial hardship. The ruling marks a significant step toward strengthening healthcare rights for pensioners and government employees, while reinforcing the constitutional mandate to protect life above procedural rigidity.
