₹3,000 pension won’t block parents’ medical reimbursement for Haryana govt employees, High Court rules

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that Haryana government employees cannot be denied medical reimbursement for their dependent elderly parents solely because they receive a monthly old-age pension of ₹3,000. The court set aside rejection orders in 10 connected petitions and directed the authorities to process and release admissible claims within two months of receiving a certified copy of the order.

The ruling is significant for government employees whose parents require hospitalisation or treatment but have modest pension income. It reinforces the principle that the receipt of a small social-security benefit does not automatically establish that an elderly parent can independently meet medical expenses.

Medical reimbursement cannot be denied on a technicality

The court held that administrative instructions cannot override the statutory rules governing medical reimbursement. The Punjab Medical Attendance Rules, 1940, recognise wholly dependent family members, including parents, but the relevant provisions do not impose a rigid monetary ceiling for determining dependency.

The dispute arose after medical reimbursement claims were rejected on the grounds that the income of the employees‘ dependent family members exceeded the ceiling prescribed under government instructions.

In one case, a government employee sought reimbursement for the treatment of his 70-year-old mother, who had chronic ailments and underwent inpatient treatment at an empanelled, government-approved hospital. The medical expenses amounted to ₹3.73 lakh.

The authorities rejected the claim because the assessed income exceeded the monthly ceiling of ₹3,500 prescribed under government instructions issued in 2007. The court noted that the treatment, medical bills and expenditure were not disputed. The claim had been rejected on a technical interpretation of the income limit rather than on the merits of the treatment.

₹3,000 old-age pension does not automatically disqualify parents

The court also considered a February 3, 2025, clarification issued by Haryana’s Director-General Health Services stating that the ₹3,000 old-age pension should not be treated as income for this purpose.

It observed that the state could not extend a social-security benefit to elderly citizens and then use the receipt of that same benefit as a reason to deny them access to medical reimbursement through their serving children.

The court emphasised that dependency is not merely a question of income. It can also involve physical dependence, particularly where elderly parents suffer from serious or chronic illnesses and require care, supervision and support from their children.

The judgment also addressed a woman’s claim for medical reimbursement for her parents-in-law, holding that denying the benefit in those circumstances contravened Haryana’s medical reimbursement policy.

What the ruling means for Haryana government employees

The decision strengthens the position of employees whose medical reimbursement claims for dependent parents have been rejected solely because of a small old-age pension or a rigid interpretation of income limits.

However, it should not be read as an unconditional entitlement to reimbursement for every parent receiving a pension. The court’s reasoning concerns genuine medical expenses and the assessment of dependency under the applicable rules. Eligibility and the amount payable will still depend on the relevant provisions and the facts of each claim.

The court directed the competent authorities to process, sanction and release the admissible reimbursement amounts within two months of receiving a certified copy of the order.