Deeply troubling: Delhi High Court on State's denial of full medical reimbursement for court staffer

The Delhi High Court recently expressed displeasure over the Delhi government's refusal to grant a court staffer a complete reimbursement of medical expenses incurred by him for the treatment of his critically-ill wife.

In a judgment delivered on May 29, Justice Neena Bansal Krishna stated that it was deeply troubled by the manner in which a legitimate medical claim by the ahlmad (court staff) was handled by the Delhi government.

“This Court considers it necessary to observe that the manner in which, a legitimate medical reimbursement claim of the Petitioner has been handled by the Respondents is deeply troubling.”

The Court was dealing with a plea by one Jeet Singh, an ahlmad at the Tis Hazari Court in a matter concerning the medical treatment of his wife.

In 2006, Singh’s wife was admitted to Sir Ganga Ram Hospital in a comatose condition due to the onset of liver failure. For this purpose, the Tis Hazari court authorities sanctioned an advance of ₹ 2,25,000. Whereas, the medical expense at the hospital amounted to ₹1,89,324.

However, the Court noted that the Delhi government applied a 2002 reimbursement ceiling and capped the medical expense reimbursement to ₹1,17,456. Therefore, the Tis Hazari court later sought the recovery of the excess amount of ₹71, 868 from the ahlmad through a demand notice.

The ahlmad then approached the High Court, challenging the demand notice issued by the District and Sessions Judge of Tis Hazari Court Complex and sought complete coverage of the medical expenses.

The High Court stayed the demand notice in 2007 and made the stay absolute in 2011.

In the verdict delivered now in 2026, the Court observed that the capping of medical reimbursement as per a 2002 notification is legally unsustainable and constitutionally impermissible.

“There is nothing before this Court to suggest that the 2002 Rate Schedule bore any rational nexus to the actual costs of intensive emergency treatment, at a specialised hospital in 2006," the Court said.

The Court allowed the ahlmad’s plea and quashed the Delhi government’s demand notice. It directed the full reimbursement of the actual medical expenditure of  ₹1,89,324 as against the restricted reimbursement of ₹1,17,456.

The government’s deduction of ahlmad’s salary to recover the medical expense was arbitrary, the Court added.

“The denial of full reimbursement on the ground of rate ceilings, is precisely the kind of inhuman and mechanical approach deprecated by the Supreme Court," it held.

It directed the district court to refund in full the amount deducted from his salary with simple interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum within eight weeks from the date of the judgment.

The ahlmad had stated that he and his dependent family members are entitled to medical benefits under the Central Services (Medical Attendance) Rules, 1944. 

On the other hand, the State alleged fraud on part of ahlmad in assessing the medical expense. The State’s submission was rejected by the Court.

“That the final bill of Rs. 1,89,324/- was lower than the estimate of Rs. 2,50,000/-, far from suggesting fraud, rather demonstrates the petitioner's bona fides, since the unutilized balance was promptly returned to the Department. Such an allegation of fraud against an employee who fought to save his wife's life, is without any basis as the Respondent is not questioning the treatment or the expenditure, but only the extent of reimbursement," it observed.

Standing Counsel Avnish Ahlawat, with advocates Nitesh Kumar Singh, Aliza Alam, Mohnish Sehrawat, appeared for the Delhi government. 

Advocates Vishal Thakur and Amita Singh appeared for the Sir Gangaram Hospital.

[Read judgment]