JdVVNL Directed to Reimburse Remaining Cost of Four Cardiac Stents Purchased Privately During Government Hospital Treatment
Jodhpur: The Rajasthan High Court has upheld the direction to Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited (JdVVNL) to reimburse the remaining amount spent on four cardiac stents purchased from a private shop during treatment at a government hospital.
The patient had incurred ₹2.73 lakh on angiography, angioplasty and the four stents, but was initially reimbursed only ₹1.70 lakh.
The Division Bench of Chief Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal and Justice Vinit Kumar Mathur dismissed JdVVNL’s appeal against the order directing reimbursement to Jagdish Chandra Bissa, who had undergone angiography and angioplasty at Mathura Das Mathur Hospital, Jodhpur.
Four Stents Implanted
Jagdish was admitted to the government hospital after suffering from a serious cardiac ailment. During treatment, he underwent angiography and angioplasty, in which four stents were implanted.
The total amount spent on the treatment was ₹2.73 lakh. However, only ₹1.70 lakh was reimbursed by the authorities, leaving a balance of ₹1.03 lakh.
He approached the High Court seeking reimbursement of the remaining amount bought privately.
Patient Cannot Be Denied Reimbursement for Essential Items Bought Outside
The High Court relied on its earlier decision in “State of Rajasthan v. Smt. Mohan Kanwar Bhansali”, which held that when a patient covered under a government medical scheme is admitted to a government hospital, it is the hospital’s responsibility to provide the required equipment.
The Court also noted that if a required medical consumable is not available at the government hospital or an authorised medical store, the patient may be left with no choice but to purchase it from the open market.
Right to Health Under Article 21 Includes Medical Care
The Bench also relied on Supreme Court judgments recognising the right to health and medical care as part of the fundamental right to life under Article 21.
The Court observed that, in light of this principle, provisions governing medical reimbursement have to be interpreted liberally.
The Court also observed that although the petitioner received treatment at a government hospital, the stents required for the procedure were purchased from a private shop.
HC Upholds Single Judge’s direction
The Division Bench while dismissing the appeal, held that the entire amount incurred on the four stents was liable to be reimbursed and found the Single Judge’s direction for payment of the remaining amount to be justified.