IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
A.K.GOSWAMI, J.
Uttam Das – Appellant
Vs.
State of Assam and Others – Respondents
W.P. (C) No. 6219 of 2013
Decided On : 03-03-2015
Assam Medical Attendance Rules, 2008 - Rules 4(3)(i) and 4(b) - Constitution of India,1950 - Article 226 - Ex-post-facto approval - Petitioner prays for a direction to respondent authorities to reimburse his medical bills amounting to case projected in the writ petition is that on while petitioner was traveling by an auto rickshaw accompanied by his wife he suddenly felt dizziness and fell down inside auto rickshaw and wife took him to nearest Hospital in said auto rickshaw - Attending doctors at Hospital admitted petitioner into Intensive Critical Care Unit (ICCU) of hospital - Original proposal was misplaced in Department of Home - Held, However, Rule 19(ii) provides that nothing in Rules shall be deemed to prevent Government from granting to a Government servant including All India Service Officers any relief relating to treatment attendance and journey for purpose of treatment which is not specifically authorised under Rules - Thus Government has the power to grant medical reimbursement even in a case where hospitalization and treatment was done in a hospital which is not a referral hospital - Power has to be exercised in a fair and reasonable manner consistent with mandate of Article 14 of Constitution of India and not in a manner which results in discrimination - In instant case Government failed to exercise power in a fair and reasonable manner resulting in gross discrimination to petitioner - Writ Petition allowed
Arup Kumar Goswami, J.
1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner prays for a direction to the respondent authorities to reimburse his medical bills amounting to Rs. 1,98,654.88. Heard Mr. D.P. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B.J. Talukdar, learned State Counsel, appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 and 4, Mr. J.M.A. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, Health, appearing for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and Mr. R.K. Neog, learned Standing Counsel, Accountant General, appearing for the respondent No. 5.
2. The petitioner retired as Deputy Commandant of Assam Commando Battalion, Mandakata, North Guwahati on 31.07.2010.
3. The case projected in the writ petition is that on 30.04.2011, while the petitioner was traveling by an auto rickshaw, accompanied by his wife, he suddenly felt dizziness and fell down inside the auto rickshaw and the wife took him to the nearest hospital, i.e., Hayat Hospital at Udalbakra in the said auto rickshaw.
4. The attending doctors at the Hayat Hospital admitted the petitioner into the Intensive Critical Care Unit (ICCU) of the hospital. Due to critical condition of the petitioner, he had to be kept in the hospital from 30.04.2011 to 07.05.2011 in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and during this period, he was advised by doctor for implantation of permanent pacemaker and accordingly, implantation of pacemaker was done. The procedure resulted in an expenditure of Rs. 1,98,654.88, including the hospital bills.
5. The petitioner had submitted medical bills and documents in original to the Commandant, Assam Commando Battalion, Mandakata, for grant of ex-post-facto approval as well as for reimbursement of the expenditure of the treatment. He, in his turn, forwarded the medical bills and documents to the Assam Police Headquarters.
6. The Deputy Inspector General of Police (A), Assam forwarded the said bills and documents vide letter dated 29.07.2011 to the Director of Health Services, Assam requesting grant of ex-post-facto approval for consideration of reimbursement to the petitioner.
7. The Director of Health Services, Assam forwarded the aforesaid letter to the Secretary to the Government of Assam, Health and Family Welfare Department vide his letter dated 25.08.2011 stating that the Directorate was not in a position to issue ex-post-facto approval for the treatment of the petitioner in Hayat Hospital since the said hospital was not a referral hospital. He, accordingly, requested the Secretary to the Government of Assam, Health and Family Welfare Department to accord ex-post-facto approval.
8. The Deputy Secretary to the Government of Assam, Health and Family Welfare (A) Department wrote a letter dated 22.09.2011 to the under Secretary to the Government of Assam, Home (A) Department requesting him to examine the proposal under the provision of Assam Medical Attendance Rules, 2008 and to furnish his views.
9. In the meantime, as the original proposal was misplaced in the Department of Home (A), the petitioner had to again re-submit the proposal on the basis of photocopies but the case of the petitioner was not considered and was gathering dust.
10. It is in these circumstances, the instant writ petition is filed praying for a writ of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to pay the medical reimbursement bills amounting to Rs. 1,98,654.88.
11. In the affidavit of the respondent No. 4, it has been admitted that original proposal in respect to the petitioner could not be traced out in the Home (A) Department.
12. In the affidavit filed by the Director of Health Services, Assam, a stand is taken that the petitioner is not entitled for medical reimbursement of his treatment at Hayat Hospital as the hospital was not a referral hospital.
13. The Accountant General (A & E), Assam, the respondent No. 5, in the affidavit, had taken a stand that the respondent No. 5 is in no way involved in the matter of sanction and payment of medical reimbursement
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.