Central Administrative Tribunal - Kolkata
Neelam Rani vs Tourism on 16 June, 2022
1 ' --Q,A,/351/356/2021 CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH, KOLKATA re rn O.A. No. 351/356/2021 Date of Order: }h. § 22 Coram: Hon'ble Ms. Bidisha Banerjee, Judicial Member Hon'ble Dr. (Ms.) Nandita Chatterjee, Administrative Member Smti Neelam Rani Aged about 47 years W/o Shri Vijay Kumar. Roy, R/o Junglighat, Working as Workman, Office of the Directorate of IP & T,' South Andaman District-744101 . Applicant
-Versus
1. The Union of India represented through the Secretary Ministry of Tourism North Block New Delhi - 110001
2. The Chief Secretary, A & N Administration, Port Blair-744101.
a . 3. The Secretary (Tourism), Andaman and Nicobar Administration, Secretariat, Port a Blair- 744101
- . A. The Director (Tourism) Directorate of IP | & T, Port Blair- 744101
5. The Assistant Director (Admn), Office of the Directorate of IP & T, South Andaman District Port Blair- 744101 beaenes Respondents | _ For The Applicant(s): Mr. P. C. Das, Ms. T. Maity; Counsel | For The Respondent(s): Mr. R. Halder; Counsel yo | ORDERORAL | Per: Ms. Bidisha Banerjee. Member (J) Heard Ld. Counsels for both sides at length.
i 2, This application has been preferred to seek the following relief:
"(A) An order be passed setting aside the impugned Memorandum dated 10.09.2020 passed by the office of the Respondent no. 4.
{B) An order be passed directing the respondent authority for grant ; of reimbursement of medical claim in terms of the application 4 submitted by the applicant within time frame (C) Any such order or orders be passed and or direction or directions be given as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper. --
(D) Cost and incidentals to this application." \
3. The applicant has served as workman on being absorbed against a supernumerary post. when such post was created with effect . from 21.1 1.2019 vide order dated 30.03.2020, and, completed 20 years of . service. Her husband had opted for VR from government gervice with » effect from 19.08.2018 which was accepted on 02.08.2019. He suffers from "CAD Acute ST Alleviation Interior Wall Myocardial Infraction". He Was. referred to medical Superintendent of any recognized hospital in the mainland vide letter dated 98.02.2020. He underwent treatment at Apollo Hospital, Chennai from 61.08.2020 to 07.03.2020 in the Department of | 'Cardiology and incurred expenses to the tame of Rs. 6, 53, 799 raised vide 4 bills. dated 07.03.2020. When medical bills wei submitted for reimbursement, the respondent No, 4 rejected the claim on 08.06.2020 on the ground that her husband was in receipt of fixed medical allowance.
_ According to the applicant, ; the impugned order dated 10.09.2020 communicating the rejection 18 egal and violative of hie very spirit of the CCS Medical Attendance Rules inasmuch as the fixed . medical allowance for outdoor treatment favoured to spouses of Central Government employees is unable to cover the huge expenditure incurred by the applicant.
The respondents have contested the claim citing the particular provisions which forms the basis. of such rejection. They have also _ referred to the decisions of the Chandigarh Bench. of. this Tribunal rendered on 28.06.1999 in O.A. 763/CH/1998 that> "4 government emplovee ean claim medical reimbursement tor fnuily members except spouse who Is ia .receipl of ised medical allowance * and. "that, If any arders fave been lasued by the Government of India to the effect that Central Gevernment Servant can be denied of medical:
nt of histhar spouse isin receipt. of fixed medical allowance, we Aereby strike...
~ ompasi/asezt eision.an which a circular issued by the office of the Respondent Nos. 2&3 eg 0.A./351/356/2021 The respondents would contend that the employees of Central Government who are similarly circumstanced and have been extended the benefits of CSMA Rules, 1944 are made eligible for reimbursement of medical expenditure subject to a condition that the Central Government employees would not claim reimbursement of medical expenditure of their ' spouses if such spouse is or are in receipt of some fixed medical allowance. The respondents would further refer to our decision dated 15.07.2010 in K. Sarala Devi & Anr. Vs. Uol by the Ernakulam Bench of this Tribunal that, even a receipt of a nominal benefit of Rs. 110/ by the spouse, prohibits a government employee from receiving medical facilities/reimbursement under CSMA Rules, 1944. The respondents © would aver that the husband of the employee, namely Vijay Kr. Roy, is a retired government employee who is in receipt of a fixed medical allowance, and, therefore, denying the claim of the applicant is in order. The respondents have referred to the following decisions to contend that general provisions will not abrogate special provisions, when the legislature has intended to have a separate provision the presumption is that a subsequent general enactment is not intended to interfere with the special provisions. The respondents would contend that, as per CSMA Rules, 1994, a Central Government employee is eligible for . reimbursement of medical expenditure for their spouse except where the _ spouse is in receipt of some fixed medical allowance. When a special:
provision exists, the general provision of reimbursement, as cited by the
- applicant, would have no manner of application. Ld. Counsel for the applicant, on the other hand, would vociferously oppose the claim asserting that the O.M. of 2014 issued by the CGHS cannot override the CSMA Rules 1944. Mine
0.A./351/356/2021
4. Ld. Counsels were heard and records perused.
5. It would be profitable to quote the provisions of CSMA Rules, 1944. The provisions are as under:-
"Concessions for Families Families of Central Government servants are entitled to medical attendance and/or treatment as defined in the CS (MA) Rules, 1944, and the orders issued thereunder, on the scale and conditions allowed to Government servants themselves, subject to such exceptions or restrictions specified therein or in the said rules.
[GI, F.D., O.M. No, 12 (6)-W. 11/45, dated the 18th April, 1945, G.1., M.F., O.M. No. F.44 (4)-E. V/54, dated the 27th February, 1954; G.I, M.H., O.M. No. F. 8 (1)-54-H. Il, dated the 12th August, 1955 and G.I, M.F., O.M. No. F. 17 (Vill)-35-57-H. 1., dated the 18th June, 1957. } NOTE 1.-The provisions of this section apply mutatis mutandis to female Government servants also.
NOTE 2.- The Authorized Medical Attendant of the family of a Government servant is the same as the Authorized Medical Attendant of a Government servant.
NOTE 3.-The family of a Government servant is. entitled to receive medical attendance and treatment at the hospital at which the Government servant himself is entitled. A list of hospitals recognized for the purpose of medical attendance and treatment of Central Government servants and members of their families is given in Appendix-l.
|. Definition of Family
1. General conditions - The term 'family' for. the purpose of the Central Services (Medical Attendance) Rules, 1944, shall mean a Government servant's wife or husband, as the case may be, and parents, sisters, widowed sisters, widowed daughters, minor brothers, children, stepchildren divorced/separated daughters and stepmother wholly dependent upon the Government servant and are normally residing with the Government servant. ;
NOTE 1.-A member of the family is treated as dependent only if his/her income from all sources including pension and pension equivalent of DCRG benefit and exclusive of Dearness Relief on pension sanctioned after December, 1995 and Dearness Pension sanctioned from 1-4-2004 is less than 1,500 p.m. The condition of dependency both in the case of the husband or the wife of the Government servant has been dispensed with."
That, "son of the Central Government employee who is a beneficiary under either CGHS or CS(MA) Rules, 1944)/pensioner CGHS beneficiaries who is married, cannot be included in the definition of "family" for the purpose of extending medical facilities under CGHS/CS (MA) Rules, even when he is below 25 years of age and dependent upon the Central Government employee/pensioner."
[GI, M.H., O.M. No. 4-24/96-C&P/CGHS/CGHS (P), dated the 25th February, 2009] "(d) When spouse employed in State Government, etc. - The husband or wife of the Government servant as the case may be, employed in a state government or in the Defence/Railway services or corporation/bodies financed partly or wholly by the Central or the State Government, local bodies, and private organizations, which provide medical services would be entitled to choose either the facilities under the Central Services (Medical Attendance Rules, or the medical facilities provided by the organization in which he/she is employed.
(e) When both are Government servants- In case where both husband and wife are Central Government servants, they, as well as eligible dependants may be allowed to avail of the medical concessions according to his/her status For this purpose, they should furnish to their respective authorities a joint declaration as to who will prefer the claim for reimbursement. of medical expense incurred on the medical attendance and treatment in respect of wife / husband and the children. The above declaration should be submitted in duplicate and copy of each shall be recorded in the personal file of each of them in their
0.A,/381/356/2021.
ces. This declaration shall remain: in force {ff such time as its revised on ihe squest in writing by both the husband and the wife, e.g., in the event of promotion, esignation, etc., of either of the two. in the absence of such a jeint declaration, the' concessions shail be availed of by the wife and the children according to the status
(f) When spouse governed by different medical rules, stationed residing. at different
- stations. Ithas been decitied that in the case of Gavernment servants covered under CS . (MA) Rules, 1944. and whose spouses are employed in other organizations providing diferent medical facilities and stationed and residing at different places separately at thelr respective duty stations, the Government servant concerned can avail medical faciiities under CS (MA} Rules, 1944, in respect of himself/herself, as the case may be and the - family members resicling with hinvher and covered under the rules, provided (a) his/her spouse employed in other organizations is not in receipt of fixed monthly family medical allowance, and (b) he/she produces a certificate fram the employer of his/her spouse that he/she is not claiming medical facilities in respect of his/her spouse and their family -
"members. , Lee {G1, Min of Health & F, Welfare, O.M, No. 5. 14025/59/88-MS, dated the 20th December, 1988.]° it has been clarified that -
"(g) Government employees can claim medical reimbursement for family members except.
_ Spouse who is in receipt of fixed medical allowance.- The Hon'ble Central Administrative' . Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, has delivered @ judgment on 28-6-1999 in the case of Shri Dnram Pal, Assistant, Directorate of Census Operations, Union Territory, Chandigarh (0.4. No. 763/CH of 1998) stating that "if any orders have been issued by the Government of. india to the effect that Central Government servant can be denied claim for reimbursement of medical atiencance / treatment if spouse isin receipt of fixed medical allowance, we . hereby strike down such order / decision en which a circular issued by the Office of the employees wif also be eligible for reimbursement of medical expenditure except the spouse. whe iS in receint of medical allawance.
This issues with the concurrence of Finance Division vide Dy, No. 2445/Director (IFV2000, dated 9-8-2000.
IG, MLH., OWMNo, 2, 2B013/8/96-MS, daled the 26th May, 2000.7" - . ee _ , {Emphasis supplied} ~ In view 'of the aforesaid clear and unambiguous provisions in the CSMA :
Rules, 1944 itself, the claim for retmbursement is not tenable. However, if the husband desires, and if permitted, he can always ask his organisation -- to revise his option to be governed by CS (M&A) Rules, 1944 in terms of | para (d) and "(e) above.
6. Accordingly, this O.A stands disposed of. No Costs.
(Nandita CHatteree) (Bidisha Banerjee) Member (A) Member (I) . me :