The court said medical reimbursement policies should be interpreted in a manner that advances the cause of human welfare rather than defeat it through technicalities. (AI-generated image)Invoking the ancient Sanskrit principle that the well-being of society is inseparable from the health and dignity of its people, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has called upon the Haryana government to reconsider its medical reimbursement policy amid challenges to the denial of claims for treatment taken at non-empanelled hospitals.Justice Sandeep Moudgil observed that long waiting periods, overcrowding, shortage of beds and the urgency associated with critical illnesses often leave employees and pensioners with no option but to seek treatment at the nearest available hospital, irrespective of whether it is empanelled.“In such circumstances, to reject reimbursement solely on the ground of non-empanelment would amount to placing policy procedure above human survival,” the court added. Justice Sandeep Moudgil directed the committee to examine the petitioners’ cases individually.The high court was dealing with a batch of petitions filed by Haryana government employees and pensioners challenging various aspects of the state’s medical reimbursement policy.“The constitutional promise of a welfare state draws strength from the enduring civilisational ethos of this country, encapsulated in the ancient Sanskrit principle of “सर्वे भवन्तु सुखिनः सर्वे सन्तु निरामयाः (Sarve bhavantu sukhinah)” —may all be happy; may all be free from illness. The principle underlying this timeless invocation is that the well-being of society is inseparable from the health and dignity of its people, and it embodies a foundational principle of governance,” the May 29 order read.Also Read | 24 years in Army, stroke during service: Court upholds disability pension for veteran‘Examine claims with sympathy’The court observed that the right to health and medical care is firmly recognised as an integral facet of the right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.The court mentioned that the state bears the paramount obligation of safeguarding the health and well-being of its citizens.It was added that, more particularly, those who have spent the prime years of their lives serving the Haryana state machinery itself, as a welfare entity governed by constitutional morality.The court insisted that the medical reimbursement policies should be interpreted in a manner that advances the cause of human welfare rather than defeats it through technicalities.The court pointed out that the most equitable way forward is to breathe practical life into statutory policies by viewing them through the timeless prism of our ancient foundational values.The court mentioned that the state must ensure that policies serve the cause of justice rather than obstruct it, as beneficial schemes must advance their remedial purpose.It was added that the medical reimbursement, being an instrument of social welfare, should receive a humane and purposive construction, consistent with the constitutional vision of a just and caring society.The high court directed the committee constituted to examine the petitioners’ cases individually and to take a conscious, well-reasoned decision in each matter within four weeks.It was also added that all petitions are disposed of with a direction to the authorities in Haryana to examine the individual claims of each petitioner independently and sympathetically.The high court emphasised that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the present petitions pending.‘Objective of policies’The high court stated that the policies relating to medical reimbursement are instruments fashioned to operationalise the constitutional promise of dignity and social security. The object of such policies is not simply to reimburse expenditure, but to assure the employee that illness should not reduce him to financial ruin, helplessness or indignity.Also Read | Life convict uses bathroom break to escape: What court said while rejecting his pleaThe court added that, in matters concerning health and survival, the approach of the state must be informed not by arid technicalities, but by constitutional compassion. Constitutional adjudication cannot proceed while being divorced from lived realities.Story continues below this adIt was stated that the accessibility to these institutions, both physical and practical, remains a serious impediment for a vast section of employees, particularly in moments of medical emergency.Issues raised in petitionsThe petitions raised several issues, including:whether reimbursement can be denied for emergency treatment obtained at non-empanelled hospitalswhether the state can restrict reimbursement to PGI rates despite policy provisions allowing higher reimbursement in certain caseswhether the Rs 3,500 monthly income ceiling for dependants is arbitrary and unrealisticwhether existing package rates have become outdated in light of rising healthcare costs and advances in medical science.State agreed to examine grievancesAppearing for Haryana state, advocate Deepak Balyan submitted that the government has agreed to examine the grievances and claims raised for the matters of the present nature.Also Read | Why a Balasore land loser failed in 30-year-old recruitment fight against Indian Oil despite being ‘eligible’It was further stated, upon instructions, that the various clauses and stipulations forming part of the existing medical reimbursement policy, including those challenged in the present batch of petitions, are presently under active reconsideration and revisitation by the Haryana government. This is to align the policy framework with contemporary medical realities and to ensure that the object underlying the policy, namely social security and healthcare protection to state employees and pensioners, is meaningfully achieved.Story continues below this adThey argued that Haryana has constituted a committee under the chairmanship of the additional director, health services, with the deputy director of the medical reimbursement branch and the nodal officer (empanelled hospitals).Richa Sahay is a Legal Correspondent for The Indian Express, where she focuses on simplifying the complexities of the Indian judicial system. A law postgraduate, she leverages her advanced legal education to bridge the gap between technical court rulings and public understanding, ensuring that readers stay informed about the rapidly evolving legal landscape. Expertise Advanced Legal Education: As a law postgraduate, Richa possesses the academic depth required to interpret intricate statutes and constitutional nuances. Her background allows her to provide more than just summaries; she offers context-driven analysis of how legal changes impact the average citizen. Specialized Beat: She operates at the intersection of law and public policy, focusing on: Judicial Updates: Providing timely reports on orders from the Supreme Court of India and various High Courts. Legal Simplification: Translating dense "legalese" into accessible, engaging narratives without sacrificing factual accuracy. Legislative Changes: Monitoring new bills, amendments, and regulatory shifts that shape Indian society. ... Read More