HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 8995 of 2025 Court No. - 2 HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J. HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. 2. This petition has been filed with the following main prayers:- "(i) issue, a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to take decision on the application/appeal of petitioner and make payment of Rs.611356/- alongwith interest, which is admissible against treatment done by the petitioner to the Rampati @ Ramrati mother of Samjeet Rao (CRPF) Force bearing Ayushman ID No.115184122 which have been issued by the National Health Authority, Ministry of Home, under the Bharat Pradhanmantri Jan Arogya Yojana (Ayushman Bharat Scheme)." 3. It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioner's hospital is registered under the Ayushman Bharat Yojana and an agreement has been signed between the petitioners and Uttar Pradesh State Health Agency. The petitioners give treatment to the patients eligible under the said Ayushman Bharat Yojana. One Rampati @ Ramrati was treated by the petitioner's hospital on the basis of Ayushman Card issued under the Ayushman Bharat Yojana. The claim for reimbursement of Rs.9,27,230/- was submitted, but only Rs.6,11,356/- was approved. An application was moved by the petitioners before the District Level Grievance Redressal Committee, but the petitioners' application has been rejected. Now, the petitioners have made an application/appeal to respondent no.1, which is pending disposal. The Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vinay Prakash Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Advance Neuro And General Hospital Thru. Director,Dr.Vinod Tiwari And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. / Prin. Secy. Medical And Health Lko And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners is for a direction to be issued to respondent no.1 to decide the appeal. 4. Learned Standing Counsel has pointed that after the order was passed by the District Level Grievance Redressal Committee, if a person is aggrieved, he may approach the State Level Grievance Redressal Committee. Instead, the petitioner has moved an application before the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), State Agency for Comprehensive Health and Integrated Service, U.P. (SACHIS) and before respondent no.1-Additional Chief Secretary/Principal Secretary, Medical and Health, U.P. The petitioners should have approached the State Level Grievance Redressal Committee and after the said Committee passes an order, if the petitioners are still aggrieved, then they may approach respondent no.1. 5. This writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to move an appropriate application before the State Level Grievance Redressal Committee within a week from today and if such an application is moved by the petitioners, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with the Rules/Agreement within a period of six weeks thereafter. September 12, 2025 Sachin WRIC No. 8995 of 2025 2 (Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MEHROTRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench