ORDER (ORAL)

Hon’ble Mrs. Pratima K. Gupta, Member (J)

The applicant was appointed as Primary Teacher with the respondents and she was serving and residing at Delhi. During that period, she has not been provided CGHS facility. On 21.08.2015, the respondents circulated the decision regarding providing of CGHS facilities to the retired employees of KVS only in Delhi/NCR region vide OM dated 21.08.2015 numbered as F.No. 11086/01/2012-KVS HQ (Admn. II)/793-805. On 28.11.2017, the applicant has applied for voluntarily retirement which was duly accepted by the respondents and she has been in receipt of her regular pension. Thereafter, by subsequent OM dated 20.03.2018 No. 11086/01/2012-KVS HQ (Admn.II)/75-85, the respondents reiterated the decision to extend the benefits of CGHS scheme to all retired employees of KVS only. In OA No. 1373/2017 decided by this Tribunal, the respondents were directed to extend the CGHS facility to all serving and retired, teaching and non teaching staff of KVS, residing in Delhi/NCR. Pursuant to the same, the respondents have complied with the directions. Thereafter, the respondents directed the applicant to submit Rs. 7800/- as subscription for availing CGHS facilities by way of a DD in favour of the respondents. However, the respondents, on 13.03.2019, have issued another OM wherein they have restricted the claim of CGHS facilities only to the retired employees who were already CGHS beneficiaries. Thereafter, the applicant had represented the respondents for seeking the CGHS card. However, the same has been rejected by the respondents vide order dated 19.11.2020. Aggrieved by the same, the applicant has filed the instant OA seeking the following reliefs:-

“A. Direct the respondents to grant the benefits of Central Government Health Scheme (CGHS), to the applicant and all the similarly situated employee in terms of OM Dated 20.03.2018, numbered as F.No. 11086/01/2012-KVS HQ (Admn.II)/75-85 from the time of retirement as well as in terms of directions contained in OA No. 1373/2017dated 25.10.2018.

B. Quash and impugned OM No. 11086/01/2012-KVS HQ (Admn.II)/291-338, dated 13.03.2019 issued by the Respondent No. 2, as being discriminatory in nature.

C. Quash the reply dated 19.11.2020, issued by the respondent No. 2, as being perverse in nature.”

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the respondents had infact extended the CGHS facility only w.e.f. 21.08.2015. The applicant was since appointed in the year 1988 and was in service till 2017, therefore, she is entitled for CGHS facility extended to all the retiral employees. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi has conclusively decided the issue at stake in the matter of Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan Vs. Rajesh Kumar in WP(C) No. 1171/2024 on 31.01.2024 and hence, the present OA be decided in light of the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents, Mr. Sanjeev Yadav drawing attention to the OM dated 06.03.2019 of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare which is annexed at Page 21 of the counter reply submits that CGHS facilities were extended to all the retiral employees of KVS who were having CGHS cards while in service in all CGHS covered cities on which retired employees of KVS were extended CGHS facilities in Delhi/NCR and the applicant was appointed in the year 1988 and sought voluntarily retirement in

2017. While in service, the applicant did not apply for CGHS card. Hence, the same was not extended to her.

4. Heard the learned counsels for the parties.

5. The short issue in this OA is that the applicant being retired in the year 2017 on voluntarily retirement is entitled for CGHS facilities in terms of the OM(s) dated 20.03.2018 or not. In light of the clarification issued by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, only those employees who were having CGHS cards while in service in all CGHS covered cities were extended CGHS facilities after their retirement. Pre