Murugan v. The Lt.Governor And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** WPA/210/2025 Murugan Vs.

The Lieutenant Governor and others Mr. M. K. Thakur ... for the petitioner Mr. Shatadru Chakraborty, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Rakesh Kumar ... for the respondents April 10, 2025 [SR] Item No.21 The present writ petition has been preferred challenging the inaction on the part of the respondents to reimburse the expenses incurred by the petitioner in course of his treatment at National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro Sciences (hereinafter referred to as NIMHANS).

Mr. Thakur, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner hails from a very poor family and is registered under the Ayushman Bharat Scheme which entitles him to cashless treatment up to Rs.5.00 lakhs. Drawing attention of this Court to the documents annexed to the writ petition, Mr. Thakur submits that in view of his ailments, the petitioner was initially admitted in the G.B. Pant Hospital, Sri Vijaya Puram and was thereafter referred to mainland.

Subsequent thereto, the petitioner attended NIMHANS and got admission on 23rd December, 2024. He was discharged thereafter on 17th February, 2025. For such treatment at NIMHANS, he incurred expenses to the tune of Rs.4,50,000/-. Accordingly, as per the provisions of Ayushman Bharat Scheme, he submitted a representation to the

respondent no.3 for reimbursement of the said amount but in vain. Aggrieved thereby, he had approached this Court. Mr. Thakur submits that the respondent authorities are under an obligation, in terms of the scheme, to reimburse the expenditure incurred by the petitioner towards his hospitalization and treatment.

When the matter last appeared for hearing, this Court directed Mr. Shatadru Chakraborty, learned senior advocate appearing for the respondent nos.1, 2, 3 and 5 to avail necessary instruction.

Today, Mr.

Chakraborty submits that in the representation, the petitioner has not annexed the receipts in support of his contention that he had incurred expenses up to Rs.4,50,000/-.

In view thereof, I am of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the writ petition pending and the issue needs to be relegated to the appropriate authority. Accordingly, this Court disposes of the writ petition granting liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation annexing all the payment receipts and other relevant documents to the respondent no. 3 within a period of two weeks from date along with a copy of this order.

Upon receipt of such representation, the respondent no.3 shall consider and decide the same, upon granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and communicate the decision to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of such application.

Needless to observe, in the event the petitioner's claim deserves acceptance, necessary follow up steps shall be taken by all respondents, as expeditiously as possible. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

However, there shall be no order as to costs. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, shall be supplied to the parties as expeditiously as possible, upon compliance of all formalities.

( Tapabrata Chakraborty, J. )