The Punjab and Haryana high court has directed the Haryana government to reimburse the complete medical bill of Rs 7.42 lakh, along with 6% annual interest, to an 85-year-old petitioner who was overcharged by a private hospital. The order came as the court disposed of a civil writ petition filed by the octogenarian, who underwent treatment for coronary artery disease in Panchkula in April 2023.
Court Criticizes Artificial Lowering of Package Rates
Justice Harpreet Singh Brar, while hearing the case, strongly criticized the practice of artificially lowering package rates to attract patients, only to charge separately for essential medicines and consumables. The petitioner's counsel argued that despite being assured that the package rate would cover all procedural and admission costs, the final bill from the hospital was grossly disproportionate. According to the counsel, the angiography/angioplasty package was Rs 1.05 lakh, with an additional Rs 30,000 for the rotablation package as per the tax invoice. However, the hospital charged an extra Rs 6.02 lakh for medicines and consumables.
Directions to Director General of Health Services
The court directed the Director General of Health Services (DGHS) to verify the package rates of all empanelled hospitals, either personally or through the civil surgeon. The court stated, "In case any empanelled hospitals are found violating the policy, appropriate corrective measures should be taken, including cancellation of their licence. The director general shall further ensure that the cost of treatment is explained to the patient or their next of kin in a language they are familiar with, instead of merely obtaining signatures on cyclostyled proformas. The practice of artificially lowering package rates to attract patients initially only to later charge separately for essential procedures shall not be permitted."
Inclusion of IVL Technique in Package Rates
The court also directed the DGHS to consider including intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) technique within standard state package rates for coronary artery disease procedures. The judge instructed the DGHS to complete this exercise and file a compliance report with the court within three months.
Court's Observations on Policy Implementation
Justice Brar observed, "It appears that the respondents have chosen to adhere to the policy in its letter, while turning a blind eye to its spirit and true objective. In doing so, they have forgotten that a policy meant to preserve life cannot be allowed to become a procrustean bed of rigid literalism." The court's remarks underscore the need for healthcare policies to be implemented in a manner that truly benefits patients, rather than being exploited for profit.
