[Medical Reimbursement] Employer cannot restrict employee from seeking treatment at hospital of his choice: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court recently said that circulars issued by government institutions limiting the rights of employee to seek medical treatment at a hospital of his choice would be violative of Section 4(2A) of the Employees' Compensation Act which allows reimbursement of medical expenses for work-related injuries. [The Area Manager Food Corporation of India v P T Rajeevan].Justice G Girish stated that there can be no justification to force employees to get treated at a hospital coming under a panel prepared by the institution. "When viewed upon a humanitarian angle also, there is absolutely no rationale or justification in saying that when an employee suffers injury in an accident during the course of employment, he has to prefer the hospital coming under the panel prepared by the respondent instead of seeking treatment from the hospital from where he could get the best medical care. The right of the employee to seek treatment from the hospital of his choice cannot be curtailed by the circulars issued by the officers of the appellant," the Court stated. .The respondent, a headload worker with the Food Corporation of India (FCI/ appellant), had sustained injuries during the course of his work and incurred medical expenses totaling ₹35,001.He had undergone treatment at two hospitals which were not among the hospitals listed by the FCI in a circular issued in 2005 by its Deputy General Manager.The respondent filed an application before the Employee's Compensation Commissioner claiming a compensation and reimbursement of medical bills.The Commissioner fixed the compensation at ₹50,000 with simple interest at 12 percent, to be paid by the appellant along with an amount of ₹35,001 towards treatment expenses..The appellant filed the present appeal before the Kerala High Court claiming that the employee was not entitled to be reimbursed for his medical bills as he did not seek treatment from any of the enlisted hospitals as per the circular.The respondent also challenged the order for fixing his monthly income as ₹20,000 instead of ₹29,500 claimed by him, for the calculation of the compensation due from the appellant..After analysing the facts and submissions, the Court observed that an employee has the right to seek the treatment from the hospital which provides the best medical care.It noted that under Section 4(2A) of the Employees' Compensation Act, an employer is liable to reimburse the medical expense of an employee who has incurred injuries during the course of hus employment. "No circular issued by the employer could override the mandate of Section 4(2A) of the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923, as per which the employee shall be reimbursed the actual medical expenditure incurred by him for treatment of injuries caused during the course of employment," the Court made it clear..It further explained that the Employees' Compensation Act is a welfare legislation and directives or circulars passed by employers cannot defeat its purpose of providing benefits due to an employee.The Court also termed the commissioner's compensation order as incorrect, as the evidence proved that the respondent earned a higher monthly wage than claimed by the appellant..The Court, therefore, rejected FCI's appeal and ordered the appellant to pay ₹1,00,000 in compensation with 12% annual interest for the medical expenses..The appellant was represented by advocate Vivek Varghese PJ.Advocate MR Jayalatha represented the respondent..[Read Judgment]