Punjab and Haryana High Court raps HVPNL for ‘insensitive’ approach

Tribune News Service

Saurabh Malik

Chandigarh, April 11

Rapping the Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Ltd (HVPNL) for the “utterly insensitive and perverse” approach in case of a widow, whose husband died of cancer nine years back, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has imposed Rs 50,000 costs. For the purpose of paying the amount to the widow, Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri of the Punjab &Haryana High Court set a two-month deadline.

The Nigam was further directed to pay the balance amount of the medical reimbursement, along with 6 per cent per annum interest. The non-payment of the amount within the prescribed two-month period would entail 9 per cent per annum interest, Justice Puri said.

Medical Reimbursement in cancer Death Case

Petitioner’s husband was admitted to an approved hospital, got operated, discharged and soon after died. There was no question of surgery being elective. Rather this court is of view it was compulsory surgery. Such kind of reasoning given in the impugned order and that too by the MD is deprecated, being insensitive to human life, besides being contrary to own policy. The reason was also not only perverse, but appeared to be without application of mind . —Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri

The ruling came on a petition filed against the Nigam and other respondents by Genda Devi. She was seeking directions for quashing the impugned order dated December 24, 2015, whereby medical reimbursement of Rs 1, 89,2 93 was refused.

Justice Puri’s Bench, during the course of hearing, was told that the petitioner’s husband, working as a junior engineer with the Nigam passed away in April 2015. The bills were submitted, but the Nigam did not pay even single penny. Following high court orders in October 2018, Rs 56,058 was paid during the petition’s pendency.

Appearing before Justice Puri’s Bench, the Nigam’s counsel submitted that the petitioner’s husband was required to be moved to the nearest government hospital as it was a case of prolonged treatment. He was not entitled to medical reimbursement since he took treatment from a private hospital.

Referring to the impugned order, Justice Puri asserted its perusal showed that the bills were returned by the Nigam on the ground that the petitioner’s husband underwent elective surgery for ‘squarmous cell carcinoma’.

The reason was also not only perverse, but appeared to be without application of mind and was insensitive in nature, the judge said. “The petitioner’s husband was admitted to an approved hospital, got operated, discharged and soon after died. Therefore, there was no question of surgery being an elective surgery. Rather this court is of the view that considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, it was a compulsory surgery. Such kind of reasoning given in the impugned order and that too by the Managing Director is deprecated being insensitive to human life, besides being contrary to their own policy,” Justice Puri asserted.

Before parting with the order, Justice Puri observed the petitioner was denied the medical reimbursement due to non-existent reasons. The poor widow not only lost her husband, but also had to face financial difficulties, apart from repeated frivolous objections by the Nigam. “The approach was absolutely insensitive and perverse in nature,” the order read.

About The Author

Tribune News Service

The Tribune News Service brings you the latest news, analysis and insights from the region, India and around the world. Follow the Tribune News Service for a wide-ranging coverage of events as they unfold, with perspective and clarity.

Join Whatsapp Channel of The Tribune for latest updates.

#Cancer