( 1 ) AT the joint request of learned advocates appearing for the parties, this petition was heard at the admission stage for final disposal. I have heard learned advocates appearing for both the sides at considerable length.

( 2 ) IN the present petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction against the respondents for payment of full reimbursement of medical expenses incurred by the petitioner for the treatment which the petitioner had to undergo in the month of February and March, 2001.

( 3 ) SHORT facts leading to the present petition can be noted at the outset.

( 4 ) THE petitioner, who was employed by the respondent No. 1-Bank of India (hereinafter to be referred to as the Bank), was discharging his duties on the post of Manager (MMG-III ). On 1-11-2000, respondent No. 1-Bank circulated a voluntary retirement scheme and interested officers of the Bank were required to opt for voluntary retirement by 15th November, 2000. The petitioner, desirous of accepting voluntary retirement opted for the same and his option was accepted by the Bank. It is the case of the Bank that the petitioner retired with effect from 28-2-2001, in terms of his option as accepted by the Bank and, therefore, with effect from 28-2-2001, the petitioner stood retired from service. Though the petitioner has raised certain disputes regarding actual effective date of his retirement in this petition, and contended that he had not retired before 19th March, 2001, learned counsel for the petitioner has not pressed this contention in service and has made submissions on the premise that the petitioner had in fact retired with effect from 28-2-2001.

( 5 ) IT is the case of the petitioner that on 19-2-2001, he developed some heart problem on account of which he had to receive medical attention. The petitioner complaining of chest pain had to consult his doctor on 19-2-2001 itself, and his doctor advised him to undergo stress test and other checkups. On 19-2-2001, the petitioner was in Mumbai and he, therefore, sent a telegram to the respondent No. 1-Bank explaining about his absence from duty. The petitioner made a formal application for leave on 21-2-2001 along with doctors certificate.

( 6 ) ON 22-2-2001, the petitioner underwent stress test at P. D. Hinduja National Hospital and the result of the stress test was that the petitioner required further treatment and the blood cholesterol and blood sugar level of the petitioner were abnormally high. Therefore, the petitioner contacted a heart specialist, viz. , Dr. Dhiren Shah and he was advised to undertake stress test once again under his supervision at Bhatia General Hospital. Thus, on second medical opinion, the petitioner once again underwent stress test on 5-3-2001. His doctor, viz. , Dhiren Shah, upon conclusion of the stress test, advised the petitioner to undergo angiography urgently, which the petitioner underwent at Cumbala Hill Hospital on 7-3-2001. The petitioner was advised rest upto 17-3-2001 and he was declared fit for resumption of his duties on 19-3-2001. In the meantime, however, the respondent No. 1-Bank had already retired the petitioner from service and, therefore, there was no question of permitting the petitioner to resume his duties.

( 7 ) THE petitioner submitted his medical bills to the respondent No. 1-Bank on 20th March, 2001, of an amount of Rs. 27,122. 38 ps. , which expenditure he had to incur for the above mentioned treatment. The respondent No. 1-Bank, however, paid an amount of Rs. 4,793/- to the petitioner as Bank found that total expenditure incurred by the petitioner for the above treatment upto 28-2-2001 was Rs. 5,325. 20 ps. , and since the Bank regulations permitted expenditure incurred for medical treatment to be reimbursed to the extent of 90% of actual expenses, the Bank released the reimbursement of Rs. 4,793/-, as mentioned above.

( 8 ) THOUGH the respondents in affidavit-in-reply had not admitted the fact of treatment having been taken by the peti