Ready to file your RTI for Medical Reimbursement?
Expert drafting and filing starts at ₹399. Pick your tier (Basic or Expert) at checkout.
- ₹399 all-inclusive
- Adv. Chary-reviewed
- 50,000+ RTIs filed
- Refund if filed wrong
When a medical reimbursement claim — under CGHS, ECHS, ESIC, a state-government health scheme, or a PSU/employer medical cell — has been silently delayed, partially sanctioned, or returned for "deficiency" without a written reason, an RTI compels the department to disclose the exact status of your claim, the officer handling your file, and the precise rule or sub-rule under which any deduction or rejection has been computed. The Right to Information Act 2005 converts a "still under process" deflection into a date-stamped, signed reply within 30 days — or within 48 hours under Section 7(1) when the claim concerns ongoing medical treatment.
✓What you'll receive
- Current sanction-stage status of your claim (with file number and date stamp)
- Name, designation, and contact of the officer handling the file
- Specific reasons for any deduction, capping, or rejection — citing the exact sub-rule
- Certified copies of internal sanction notings and authorising orders
- Where a claim is held for "deficiency," the precise document(s) the department says are missing
- Expected timeline for resolution under the scheme's own SLA
👤Who typically files this
- Central / state government employees and pensioners with stuck CGHS or scheme reimbursements
- Defence personnel, ex-servicemen, and dependants under the ECHS scheme
- Private-sector employees under ESIC whose claim is stuck at the regional office
- PSU and bank employees whose employer medical cell has silently capped or rejected a claim
- Anyone with an ongoing or imminent medical treatment where Section 7(1) 48-hour disclosure applies
🏛Common PIO / departments
- CGHS Wellness Centre and the Additional Director (concerned city) for central employees
- ECHS Regional Centre and Polyclinic for armed-forces beneficiaries
- ESIC Regional / Sub-Regional Office for organised-sector private employees
- State health-scheme cell (CMRF / Aarogyasri / state employee schemes etc.)
- PSU / employer medical reimbursement cell and its designated PIO under Section 5(1)
- First Appellate Authority — typically a senior officer in the same scheme office
What questions will your RTI actually ask?
A well-drafted RTI asks specific, dated questions the PIO can't evade. Below is the structure our advocates typically use for this matter — drafted line by line in your final application.
- What is the current status of the Medical Reimbursement application / matter filed on (date)?
- What is the name and designation of the officer assigned to handle this matter, along with their contact number and email?
- What are the specific reasons for the delay / inaction beyond the statutory / internal timeline applicable to this matter?
- Please provide certified copies of all file notings, correspondence, and orders related to this matter to date.
- What is the expected timeline for resolution and the action plan going forward?
Typical timeline — from draft to government reply
Why RTIs sometimes take longer than the 30-day statutory window
Even though the RTI Act 2005 mandates a 30-day response, real-world delays are common. Understanding the typical bottlenecks helps us draft the RTI so these causes are minimized from the start — and escalate faster when they occur.
- Missing or incomplete supporting documents in the file. The PIO cannot release information about a matter if the underlying file is incomplete. Our drafting explicitly asks for the file-completion status, forcing disclosure.
- PIO transferred, retired, or on long leave — file not reassigned. When the originally notified PIO is unavailable and the department has not formally reassigned the PIO role, RTIs get stuck. Our advocates cite Section 5(4) to demand immediate deemed-PIO action.
- Jurisdictional confusion between offices. Some matters touch multiple offices (for example, property matters that span SRO + Tehsildar + Municipality). Our drafting addresses all relevant PIOs in parallel to prevent "not my department" deflection.
- Inter-departmental correspondence pending. The PIO may need information from a sister department. Under Section 6(3), the receiving PIO must transfer the application within 5 days if it concerns another public authority — we explicitly invoke this section to avoid silent forwarding.
- File physically misplaced at the office. Surprisingly common with older matters. An RTI asking specifically for the file's physical-tracking movement (who last handled it, where it currently is) forces the department to either locate or formally acknowledge the loss — which in itself triggers reconstruction.
⏱ If the department delays beyond 30 days
If the scheme office does not respond within 30 days (or 48 hours where Section 7(1) life-and-liberty applies), we file a First Appeal under Section 19(1) at no additional cost. Persistent non-compliance is escalated to the Central Information Commission (CGHS / ECHS / ESIC / central PSUs) or the State Information Commission (state schemes), where Section 20 personal penalties of up to ₹25,000 against the PIO are routinely available for documented stonewalling.
What the government reply typically looks like
Under Section 7(1) of the RTI Act, the PIO must provide information as requested, reject it citing a specific Section 8 exemption, or transfer the application to the correct PIO under Section 6(3). A compliant reply arrives by post or email and includes:
We forward the reply to you within 24 hours of receiving it, translate any legalese into plain language, and flag whether a First Appeal is warranted based on the substance of the reply.
Legal basis & binding precedent for this RTI
CGHS, ECHS, ESIC, state-government health schemes, and PSU medical reimbursement cells are all "public authorities" under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act 2005. A reimbursement file — bills, sanction orders, internal correspondence, file notings — is "information" under Section 2(f). Critically, Section 7(1) compresses the response window to 48 hours where the information concerns a person's life or liberty — directly applicable to ongoing or imminent medical treatment.
The Supreme Court in Surjit Singh v. State of Punjab (1996) 2 SCC 336 and a long line of subsequent rulings has held that timely reimbursement of medical expenses incurred by government employees is part of the right to life under Article 21. The Central Information Commission has repeatedly directed CGHS and ESIC PIOs to disclose pending claim status, sanction-stage notings, and officer details on the applicant's own claim file — and has imposed personal penalties under Section 20 in cases of wilful delay.
Our drafting cites Section 2(h), 2(f), and 7(1) explicitly — and where the claim concerns active treatment, escalates to the 48-hour life-and-liberty window. Questions are framed around the applicant's own file (file number, sanction stage, officer-in-charge), removing any Section 8(1)(j) personal-information defence. Where reimbursement has been silently denied or capped without a written sanction order, we ask for the specific sub-rule and the file noting authorising the deduction — which the department must either produce or admit it does not exist.
Section references are to the Right to Information Act, 2005. Case citations refer to reported judgments of the Supreme Court of India, High Courts, and the Central Information Commission. This is a general statement of law — our advocates tailor it to the specific facts of your matter.
Frequently asked questions about this RTI
How long can a medical reimbursement RTI take?
Under Section 7 of the RTI Act 2005, the PIO must respond within 30 days. Where the information concerns ongoing or imminent medical treatment — i.e. the claim relates to a person's life or liberty — Section 7(1) compresses the deadline to 48 hours. Our drafting flags this clause explicitly when applicable.
Can I file an RTI if my claim has been only partially sanctioned without explanation?
Yes — and this is one of the highest-yield use cases. Most partial sanctions are imposed via internal capping rules that the department never sends to the applicant. An RTI asking for the exact sub-rule, the file noting authorising the deduction, and the named officer who approved it almost always either produces a written record (which can then be appealed on merits) or forces the department to revisit the calculation.
Will filing an RTI affect my future claims with the same department?
No. RTI is a statutory right. Retaliation against an RTI applicant is itself a violation of the Act and grounds for further escalation, including disciplinary referral and Section 20 penalties. Tens of thousands of government employees and pensioners file medical reimbursement RTIs each year without consequence to subsequent claims.
Do I need to be the original employee, or can a dependant or family member file?
A dependant covered under the same scheme can file in their own name where they are the beneficiary on the claim. Where the original employee is incapacitated or deceased, an authorised family member can file with appropriate scheme-issued identification. Our drafting clarifies the relationship and authorisation in the application itself to avoid pre-emptive Section 8(1)(j) deflection.
Login / Sign up
Login With Google
Continue as GuestOr use your email Address
*We value your trust. Your information remains private and protected with FileMyRTI