Allahabad High Court says legal heirs are entitled to claim reimbursement if govt employee dies in treatment

Facts and Background 

The ruling came in the writ petition whereby Petitioner's father, a retired deputy registrar (a government servant/pensioner), was undergoing treatment at private hospitals in Lucknow and died during the course of treatment. Petitioner as a legal heir, submitted a claim for reimbursement of the medical expenses incurred. The concerned department rejected the claim on technical grounds, primarily arguing that:

Under the Uttar Pradesh Government Servants (Medical Attendance) Rules, 2011, only the “beneficiary” (i.e., the employee or pensioner themselves) is eligible to claim reimbursement.

The succession certificate produced by Petitioner mentioned a ₹5,000 limit, which the department said further disqualified him.

 Court Held

A Division Bench rejected the department’s stand. The court held that:

Legal heirs cannot be denied the right to claim medical reimbursement merely because the beneficiary (the employee/pensioner) has died or is unable to file the claim.

Rule 16 of the UP-Government Servants (Medical Attendance) Rules, 2011 — which appeared to restrict claims only to the beneficiary — is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.

The Court applied the well-established principle of reading down the rule. This means interpreting Rule 16 in a manner that includes legal heirs, especially in cases where the employee/pensioner has died during treatment and no other eligible beneficiary exists. This interpretation prevents the rule from becoming unconstitutional while preserving its core purpose.

The Bench emphasized that once legal heirship is undisputed, the claim should not be rejected on mere technicalities. Denying reimbursement in such situations would defeat the very object of the medical attendance rules, which are meant to provide financial relief for treatment expenses.

Directions Issued by the Court

The Court directed the concerned authorities to:

 Reconsider Petitioner's reimbursement application within two months.

If found in order, process and release the reimbursement within one month thereafter.

Broader Implications

This judgment is significant for families of Uttar Pradesh government employees and pensioners covered under the 2011 Medical Attendance Rules. It ensures that:

Reimbursement claims are not automatically rejected just because the employee died midway through treatment.

Legal heirs (sons, daughters, spouse, etc., as per succession laws) can step in and claim the benefit.

Technical or procedural hurdles cannot override substantive rights when heirship is clear.

The ruling aligns with the welfare-oriented intent of medical reimbursement schemes and prevents undue hardship to dependents.