Absence of a formal COVID-19 test report alone cannot defeat an ex-gratia claim supported by a hospital death certificate.

The petitioner, widow of Late Ajay Kumar Sharma, sought payment of ex-gratia compensation under the Bihar Covid Sahayata Yojana, 2022, alleging that her husband died on 21 May 2021 while undergoing treatment at City Critical Hospital, Munger.

The hospital death certificate recorded the cause of death as “Severe Covid-19”.

His name was included in the district-level list of persons who died due to Covid-19, and funds were allocated for payment.

The petitioner’s claim was nevertheless rejected because no RT-PCR, Antigen, or TrueNat test report had been annexed.

Following the Court’s earlier direction dated 25 July 2024, the District Health Committee reconsidered the matter but again declined approval on 6 August 2024 for want of the requisite test report.

Whether the petitioner’s claim for Covid-19 ex-gratia compensation could be rejected solely because an RT-PCR, Antigen, or TrueNat test report was not produced, despite the treating hospital’s death certificate recording Covid-19 as the cause of death?

Whether the authorities were required to reconsider the claim by treating the hospital-issued death certificate and other material as corroborative evidence under the applicable governmental instructions and Supreme Court precedent?

The Court applied the Bihar Government’s Covid-19 ex-gratia compensation scheme and Health Department letter no. 186(11) dated 9 March 2022, under which non-uploading or absence of a formal Covid-19 test report is not, by itself, conclusive against the claimant where reliable alternative evidence establishes Covid-19 death.

The Court also relied on Gaurav Kumar Bansal v. Union of India & Anr., 2021 SCC OnLine SC 3384, wherein the Supreme Court held that ex-gratia assistance cannot be denied solely on technical grounds relating to the absence of a formal Covid-19 death certificate or test report when other requisite documents establish eligibility.

The governing principle was that the authorities must examine credible corroborative material and cannot mechanically reject a compensation claim solely for want of a prescribed test report.

The Court found it undisputed that the petitioner’s husband died during the Covid-19 pandemic while receiving treatment and that the treating hospital’s death certificate expressly recorded “Severe Covid-19” as the cause of death.

The only reason for rejection was the absence of an RT-PCR, Antigen, or TrueNat report, and the authorities had not disputed the authenticity or contents of the hospital’s certification.

Applying the principle in Gaurav Kumar Bansal and the Health Department’s letter dated 9 March 2022, the Court held that the death certificate constituted credible corroborative evidence that required proper consideration.

The fact that the deceased’s name had already been included in the approved district list and funds had been allocated further supported reconsideration of the claim.

The concerned authorities were directed to reconsider the claim afresh, consider the death certificate and other material as sufficient corroborative evidence under letter no. 186(11) dated 9 March 2022, and provide the petitioner an opportunity of hearing within four weeks.

If found eligible, the authorities were directed to release the ex-gratia compensation under the Bihar Covid Sahayata Yojana, 2022, along with consequential benefits, within the following four weeks.

The writ petition was accordingly disposed of.