PATIENT CARE ALLOWANCE: Entitlement for paramedics working in high-risk environments, including administrative roles during pandemics, upheld.

The applicant, Suroth Kumar Paul, joined the Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB) as a Senior Field Assistant (SFA) (Homeo) on April 17, 1998.

He was initially posted in Shillong, then transferred to Indo-Nepal Border in Bihar in 2000, and subsequently to Guwahati in 2009, where he worked in the Medical Investigation (MI) Room until September 2019.

During his postings in Shillong and Guwahati, the applicant was paid Patient Care Allowance (PCA).

In September 2019, he was transferred to Siliguri, reporting to duty on October 3, 2019.

Upon his reporting to Siliguri, the respondents stopped the payment of PCA from October 3, 2019.

While at Siliguri, an Intra Office Note dated November 27, 2019, assigned him duties including "Patient Care".

The applicant continued working at Siliguri until March 31, 2022, when he was transferred to Delhi.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, he performed duties at a Special MI Room.

His requests for sanction of PCA arrears were rejected by an order dated January 28, 2025 (Annexure A1).

Whether the respondents were justified in stopping the Patient Care Allowance (PCA) to the applicant upon his transfer to Siliguri from October 3, 2019, until his transfer to Delhi on March 31, 2022?

Whether the applicant, as a Senior Field Assistant (Homeo) performing duties including patient care and working in a medical investigation unit during the COVID-19 pandemic, is entitled to Patient Care Allowance for the period in question?

The court referred to Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, under which the application was filed.

It relied on the principle that the paramount factor for deciding the grant of Hospital Patient Care Allowance (HPCA)/ PCA is "the nature of work and the environment of work," particularly exposure to an infectious environment.

The principle was cited from *R. Santosh Kumar and Ors. vs. Union of India and Ors.* (OA No. 300/2015).

The court also acknowledged the findings in *Navin Kumar and Ors. Vs. Sashastra Seema Bal and Anr.* (W.P. (C) No. 17122/2024) and *Kamal Kishore and Ors. Vs. Sashastra Seema Bal and Anr.* (W.P. (C) No. 12921/2024), where the Delhi High Court directed PCA payment to eligible paramedical cadre/doctors based on conditions laid down in a circular dated February 4, 2004, issued by the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare.

The court also emphasized that a liberal approach is warranted in granting PCA to achieve its laudable object.

The court analyzed that the applicant was performing duties including "Patient Care" as per the Intra Office Note dated November 27, 2019, and the Charter of duties for SFA (Homeo) also prescribed attachment to MI Rooms/Hospitals and duties such as rendering first aid.

This indicated that his role was not solely administrative but involved direct patient interaction and a medical environment.

The court specifically noted that the period in question included the COVID-19 pandemic, during which even administrative work within medical units was considered highly risky, justifying PCA due to exposure to a potentially infectious environment.

The respondents' argument that PCA is only for staff with "continuous and routine contact with patients infected with communicable disease" and "routinely handle infected materials" was acknowledged.

However, the court found their insistence on a medical officer’s certificate arbitrary and that the "work distribution and Charter of duties does not only relate to handling of files/administrative work but the patient care as well".

The previous decisions of the Delhi High Court, where PCA was directed to be paid to eligible paramedical staff, also supported the applicant’s claim.

Thus, the court concluded that denying PCA based on hyper-technicalities was unjustifiable given the nature of duties and the hazardous work environment, especially during the pandemic.

It held that the impugned order dated January 28, 2025 (Annexure A1), rejecting the applicant's request for PCA, was wholly unjustifiable and set it aside.

The respondents were directed to restore the PCA to the applicant from the date of his transfer to Siliguri (October 3, 2019) until his transfer to Delhi (March 31, 2022).

The respondents were further directed to draw and disburse the arrears to the applicant within eight weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order.