State Employee's Emergency Treatment at Private Hospital Without Prior Sanction Must Be Reimbursed: Rajasthan High Court

The petitioner, a ward boy at a government hospital, suffered severe chest pain on 11.08.2007 and was first taken to the hospital where he worked (para 2.1). On 12.08.2007, a Sunday, its doctors found his condition critical and referred him to SMS Hospital, Jaipur; as no surgery was being performed there that day, his family took him to Soni Hospital, Jaipur, where he underwent angioplasty and stenting (paras 2.2-2.3). His reimbursement claim of Rs.1,53,635 was declined by a note of 19.02.2008, which he challenged in this writ petition (paras 1, 2.4). The respondents' reply said the claim had not been denied; the petitioner had only failed to submit complete bills and had filed a premature petition (para 3).

The Court found that the Department did not question the admissibility of the reimbursement; its only stated impediment was non-submission of the bills, which were annexed to the petition (para 5). The reply took no explicit stand that treatment at a private hospital was not reimbursable, but the CMHO's impugned note of 19.02.2008 expressly rejected the claim on that ground, also calling the bills incomplete (paras 6, 8). Apart from a bald assertion that the bills were never furnished, the reply did not dispute the petitioner's account of his treatment or the annexed bills, so the petition merited acceptance for reimbursement of the private-hospital treatment (para 9). Following Surjit Singh v. State of Punjab, the Court held that the right to health and self-preservation by medical treatment in an emergency is akin to the right to life under Article 21; State employees may take steps to preserve their lives when faced with a threat in an emergency (para 10). Given the apparent threat to his life, the petitioner could seek treatment at a private hospital without awaiting prior sanction or his turn at a government or authorised hospital (para 10).