Amount Released From CM Relief Fund Was Unconditional; Cannot Be Deducted From Medical Reimbursement: HP High Court

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has held that the State can't deduct money granted under the Chief Minister's Relief Fund in 2012 from the petitioner's medical reimbursement claims. 

Justice Ajay Mohan Goel remarked that:“An amount of Rs.1,25,000/-, released by the worthy Chief Minister out of his own Relief Fund, was not with any condition that the same was to be reimbursed or deducted later on upon the happening of any eventuality.”

The petitioner, Pritam Marshal, a retired Police Inspector aged 68, lost his son to chronic kidney failure in 2021 after nearly a decade of treatment.

In 2012, he faced heavy expenses and had no departmental support and sought help from the Chief Minister, who sanctioned ₹1,25,000 from the Chief Minister's Relief Fund.

However, when the petitioner submitted a claim for medical reimbursement after years of expenses, the competent Authority ordered that the medical reimbursement claim bills of the petitioner be paid after deducting an amount of Rs.1,25,000/-, which was received by him under the Chief Minister's Relief Fund.

The petitioner contended that the money received from the CM Relief Fund was not enough to meet the medical requirements of the deceased son. …

He further contended that the money received was misused, and he did not seek any windfall gain in terms of the medical reimbursement.

In response, the State contended that the deceased son of the petitioner crossed the age of 25 years, he was not eligible for reimbursement, and that on extreme compassionate grounds, the bills were processed but subject to deduction.

The Court observed that the petitioner was old and had lost a young son after years of treatment in 2021. It was painful for him not only physically but also emotionally for the child as well as the family of the petitioner. In these circumstances, the department should have shown more sympathy and compassion towards the petitioner.

Further, the Court noted that the department did not conduct any inquiry and had no basis to allege that the petitioner misused the amount.

Thus, the Court directed the State to pay full reimbursement and held that the deduction was highly arbitrary, unjust and not sustainable in the eyes of law.

Case Name: Pritam Marshal v/s State of Himachal Pradesh and others

Case No.: CWP No.341 of 2015

Date of Decision: 14.11.2025

For the petitioner: M/s Dhiraj Thakur and Priyanka Chandel, Advocates

For the Respondent: Mr. Rahul Thakur, Deputy Advocate General

Click Here To Read/Download Order