Kamla Devi Vs the UOI and Others

Whether approved for reporting?¹ For the petitioner: Ms. Anubhuti Sharma, Advocate, vice Mr. Jyotirmay Bhatt, Advocate. For the respondents: Ms. Sheetal Vyas, CGC, for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajat Choudhary, Assistant Advocate General, for respondents No.4 to 9.

¶10

Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J.

¶11

Petitioner is a cancer patient. She is a duly enrolled beneficiary of Ayushman Bharat Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana as well as the HIMCARE Scheme of the respondent-State. Petitione has grievance against the action of the respondents in denying her excess to the treatment on account of non-availability of drugs, exhaustion of financial limits and blocking of packages.

¶12

1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶13

2

¶14

2. On 16.06.2026, respondents were directed to place on

¶15

record instructions with regard to petitioner’s grievance pertaining to inclusion of U-100 (unspecified package) for cancer patients.

¶16

Pursuant to above, during hearing of the case on 19.06.2026, learned Advocate General assured that endeavour shall be made for resolving the grievance of the petitioner. When the matter was taken up today, learned Assistant Advocate General placed on record office instructions dated 20.06.2026 from the Chief Executive Officer H.P. Swasthya Bima Yogna Society, H.P.-respondent No.7 conveying as under: -

¶17

“Subject: Regarding CWP Number 9552 of 2020 titled as Kamla Devi & Ors Vs UOI & Ors

¶18

This is with reference to the CWP Number 9552 of 2025 titled as Kamla Devi & Ors Vs UOI & Ors listed at Honble High Court of Himachal Pradesh. In this regard, it is intimated that the petitioner is suffering from Cancer Disease and the medicines prescribed by the hospital (as per petition) are not covered under HIMCARE scheme due to which the patient is not able to avail the cashless treatment under the scheme. It has been assured in the Hon'ble High Court on 19.06.2026 that the grievance of the petition is being looked into and shall be resolved immediately. The matter is again listed on 22.06.2026. Keeping in view the condition of patient, it has been decided that the cashless treatment under HIMCARE should be provided to her by blocking the unspecified package i.e. U100.

¶19

Hence, you are requested to provide the cashless treatment to Smt. Kamla Devi under HIMCARE by blocking the unspecified package immediately under intimation to this office.”

¶20

3

¶21

Taking note of the decision of the respondents to provide cashless treatment to the petitioner under HIMCARE by blocking the unspecified package U-100, the grievance raised in the present petition stands redressed. The respondents are directed to do the needful within two days by providing the requisite facilities so as to enable the petitioner to undergo the necessary treatment.

¶22

With the above observations, the instant petition to stand disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.

¶23

Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge

Kamla Devi v. the UOI and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamla Devi v. the UOI and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhagwan Dass Vs Financial Commissioner(Appeals)

Dhan Bahadur Vs Union of India

Paras Ram and Others Vs Hrtc and Another

Pushkar Raj and Another Vs State of Hp and Others

Gupt Ram and Another Vs Ashish Kumar Kohli

Faruk Shek and Ors. Vs Commissioner (Holding) Post of Dc Shimla and Ors.