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

2014 Supreme(Raj) 2037

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Sandeep Mehta, J.
Smt. Rameshwari - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors. - Respondent
S.B.C. Writ Petition No. 7638 of 2011.
Decided On : 2-12-2014

Advocates:
For the Petitioner:S.D.Goswami, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Manoj Bhandari, Advocate.

Headnote:Constitution of India, 1950 – – Article 226 – Petitioner seeks a direction to be issued to the respondents to reimburse the medical expenses occurred on account of treatment of her husband – Petitioner’s claim was denied on the ground that hospital was not in approved list of subsidiary company of employee – Order of denial is unjust and arbitrary being in contravention of Article 14 of constitution – Petition is allowed.

JUDGMENT

1. - By way of the instant writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to be issued to the respondents to reiumburse the medical expenses occurred on account of treatment of her husband Shri Ram Kumar.

2. The petitioner's husband Shri Ram Kumar Sharma was an employee of Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd.. It is stated in the petition that while Shri Ram Kumar was in service, he suffered cardian pain and was admitted at the Vivekanand Hospital, Bhadra from 14.4.2009 to 19.4.2009. Since, there was no facility to treat cardiac ailment at Bhadra, he was shifted to the Life Line Hospital, Hisar (Haryana). He remained admitted in the CCU of the said hospital from 19.4.2009 to 25.4.2009 but without improvement in his condition. In this situation, as a life saving measure the petitioner's husband was referred to Fortis Escorts Hospital, Jaipur where he remained admitted between 25.4.2009 to 7.5.2009. Under medical advise, he was subjected to surgical procedure of Mitral Valve Replacement Surgery. The petitioner's husband had earlier visited the Fortis Hospital in March 2009 as he suffered cardiac pain while visiting Jaipur. He was advised Mitral Valve Replacement surgery. Thus, he moved an application before the Assistant Engineer, Jodhpur DISCOM Bhadra requesting him to sanction advance medical expenses for his heart operation with an estimate slip dated 21.3.2009. The Superintending Engineer, Hanumangarh forwarded a letter dated 17.4.2009 Annex. 2 to the Deputy Director Personal (HQ), Jodhpur who in turn forwarded it to the Chief Account Officer, Jodhpur for sanction of medical advance to the tune of Rs. 2,20,000/- but the same was returned back vide letter dated 23.4.2009 with various objections.

3. On 7.5.2009 the petitioner's husband passed away. The petitioner served a legal notice on the respondents for granting medical reimbursement but without any response. Being dissatisfied with the inaction of the respondents, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of this writ petition.

4. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's husband was suffering from RHEUMATIC Heart Disease, Severe Mitral Stenosis Severe Mitral Regurgitation, Moderate Tribunal with normal LV function. He was advised by the Doctors to undergo emergent Mitral Valve Replacement Surgery but he was not granted medical advance. He further submits that Fortis Escort Hospital, Jaipur is an approved hospital with code number 425 and it is shown at Sr. No. 28 of list of approved hospitals (Annex. 6) for the employees of Jaipur DISCOM and thus reimbursement of the medical expenses incurred by the employee of any of the subsidiary companies of the Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. at the said hospital has to be granted.

5. Counsel for the petitioner relies upon the decision rendered by this Court in the case of Jawahar Lal Bohra v. State of Rajasthan being S.B. Civil Writ petition No. 6350/2005 decided on 26.3.2014 wherein this Court held that apparently and avowedly, the medical attendance Rules providing for reimbursement of the medical expenses to the Government servant and retired pensioners, is a beneficial and welfare legislation meant for the welfare of the Government servants and, therefore, a liberal, sympathetic and objective interpretation for the applicability of these Rules, has to be made by the Courts and a pedantic or narrow approach of the matter would not subserve the interest of justice. In the aforesaid case the employee concerned was allowed reimbursement of medical expenses in terms of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Medical Attendance) Rules, 1970 in almost similar circumstances. Learned counsel thus prays that the writ petition be accepted and while setting aside the impugned orders Annexure-6 and Annexure-8, the respondents be directed to reimburse the petitioner's medical bills in accordance with sub-clause (3) of Rule 10 of Rules of 2008.

6. Mr. Bhandari, learned counsel appearing for the DISCOM vehemently opposed the submissions advanc




























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
whatsapp-icon Back to top