HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7689/2015

Baedri Narayan Bhootra S/o Late Shri Kripa Krishana Bhootra,

Aged about 75 years, R/o 124-E, Nehru Park, Jodhpur

----Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Rajasthan through its Secretary, Finance

Department, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

2. The Member Secretary-cum-Director, Pension & Pensioners

Welfare Department Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

3. The Joint Secretary, Rajasthan State Pensioners Medical

Concession Scheme, Directorate Pension & Pensioners

Welfare Department Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

4. The District Treasury Officer (Rural), Jodhpur, Rajasthan.

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. L.S. Udawat

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Anil Kumar Gaur, AAG

Mr. Ravi Panwar, AGC

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Order

06/09/2022

The present petition has been filed with a relief for grant of

sanction of complete medical claims submitted by the petitioner

for the treatment of his wife who underwent a Carotid Angioplasty.

The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner’s wife was

admitted in the MDM Hospital, Jodhpur and after undergoing the

Carotid Angioplasty was discharged on 16.11.2014. Maximum of

the medicines were obtained from the Sahakari Upbhokta

Wholesale Bhandar Medical Shop but those which were not

available with the shop, a Non Availability Certificate was obtained

(2 of 3)

[CW-7689/2015]

and then the same were bought from the private shops. A medical

claim amounting to Rs.1,67,909/- was filed by the petitioner on

25.11.2014 qua which an amount of Rs.93,132/- was reimbursed

on 04.06.2015. The remaining amount of Rs.74,777/- was not

reimbursed. No ground for denial of the said amount was given by

the respondents and therefore, the present writ petition has been

preferred.

In the reply it has been submitted on behalf of the State that

the amount as permissible in terms of the Rajasthan Civil Services

(Medical Attendance) Rules, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as

“Rules of 2013”) was reimbursed. Learned counsel submitted that

the amount qua the stents was paid in terms of the Rules of 2013

and therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to anything over and

above the Rules of 2013.

Heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

A perusal of Appendix 9 to the Rules of 2013 clarifies that

the amount reimbursable qua a DE Stent is Rs.70,500/- and qua a

Bare Metal Stent is Rs.44,000/-. In the present case three stents

were implanted and therefore, even going by the Rules the

minimum amount payable qua the stent would be Rs.1,53,000/-.

In Smt. Mohan Kanwar Bhansali Vs. State of Rajasthan; S.B.

Civil Writ Petition No.13482/2013 wherein an exact similar

controversy was in issue, the coordinate Bench of this Court held

as under:

“…… Reimbursement in full of the expenditure

incurred on treatment and purchase of

medicines, Stent as well on Angioplasty at

recognized Government MDM Hospital, cannot be

denied to her by a welfare State, more so when

the Stents and other accessories were not

(3 of 3)

[CW-7689/2015]

available with the Govt. authorized pharmacist

shop and Non Availability Certificate was issued

for its purchase from private shops. The attitude

of the authority concerned of a welfare State in

denying full reimbursement of the expenses

incurred cannot be appreciated in the given

circumstances.”

In the present matter, it is clear that a Non Availability

Certificate was also obtained and submitted by the petitioner

regarding the medicines/stents not available with the government

shop. Therefore, there cannot be any valid ground available to the

Department to deny the reimbursement of the complete claim of

the petitioner.

In view of the above observations, the present writ petition

is allowed. The respondent-authorities are directed to

reimburse/deposit the amou