SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(Del) 1084

VUENDER JAIN, VIJENDER JAIN
M. G. MAHINDRU – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
S.JANANI, U.Hazarika

Vijender Jain

( 1 ) PETITIONER retired as a Central Government officer and under the policy of the Government was entitled to reimbursement by the Government regarding his illness. It is the case of the petitioner that in the year 1996, the petitioner was referred by consultant in rml Hospital to the Escorts Heart Institute and Research centre for coronary ; angiography. "on 1. 10. 1996 the petitioner was accorded permission for heart surgery vide letter dated 1. 10. 1996. The total cost of surgery incurred by the petitioner was Rs. 2,08,270. 00. The respondents have reimbursed only Rs. 1,27,650. 00. The balance of the amount of Rs. 80,620. 00 has not been paid to the petitioner.

( 2 ) AGGRIEVED by non-reimbursement of the expenses cm 5317/99 incurred by the petitioner, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner has raised all the amounts through loans from friends and relatives for his operation. At page 10 of the paper-book is the letter from Dr. Ram manohar Lohia Hospital with the recommendation that the petitioner was suffering from CAD with MI. He requires urgent Angiography CART/cabg. It was further recommended in





Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top