Heirs Of Deceased Employee Shouldn't Be Denied Reimbursement Of Medical Bills On Technical Grounds Like Limitation: Allahabad High Court
While dealing with issue of reimbursement of medical bills, the Allahabad High Court has held that where there is entitlement of incidental benefits of service, the same should not be denied on grounds of delay and limitation in law.Petitioner, widow, approached the employer for reimbursement of the medical bills of her husband. Her claim was rejected as being barred by limitation....
While dealing with issue of reimbursement of medical bills, the Allahabad High Court has held that where there is entitlement of incidental benefits of service, the same should not be denied on grounds of delay and limitation in law.
Petitioner, widow, approached the employer for reimbursement of the medical bills of her husband. Her claim was rejected as being barred by limitation. Accordingly, she approached the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India pleading that she being a widow was in shock of the death of her husband and could only approach the authority after her recovery.
The Court observed that the petitioner's claim was rejected on grounds of not being filed within 90 days as per the prescribed Rules.
Justice Ajit Kumar held,
“if an employee has died during treatment, his wife/heirs should not be harassed for technical reasons. Such a rule that prescribes for submitting medical bills for reimbursement may at times be put to strict compliance where employee is alive but in case of heirs where employee has died during treatment, such rules should not be permitted to come in the way of reimbursement of genuine claims of medical bills. The provision is liable to be held directory in nature.”
The Court held that the provision prescribing 90 day period for claims is directory in nature and that there was no provision which “compulsorily” barred all claims raised after the said period.
Accordingly, the Court directed the petitioner to submit the medical bills again and directed the concerned authority to clear the bills in accordance with law.
Case Title: Smt. Maimuna Begum v. State Of U.P. And 5 Others [WRIT - A No. - 122 of 2025]
