Gujarat High Court
Superintendent Of Post Offices vs Mohammad Janumiya Sindhi on 19 July, 2016
Bench: M.R. Shah, A.S. Supehia
C/SCA/20315/2015 JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.20315 of 2015
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH Sd/
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA Sd/
===================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may
be allowed to see the judgment ? NO
2 To be referred to the Reporter or
not ? NO
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see
the fair copy of the judgment ? NO
4 Whether this case involves a
substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the Constitution of NO
India or any order made thereunder ?
===================================================
SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES....Petitioner(s)
Versus
MOHAMMAD JANUMIYA SINDHI....Respondent(s)
===================================================
Appearance:
MR PY DIVYESHVAR, ADVOCATE for Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR PH PATHAK, CAVEATOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1
===================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
Date : 19/07/2016
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH) (1) By way of this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitionerDepartment has prayed for appropriate writ, order or direction to quash Page 1 of 8 HC-NIC Page 1 of 8 Created On Mon Jul 25 06:12:52 IST 2016 C/SCA/20315/2015 JUDGMENT and set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 30.04.2015 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad passed in Original Application No.321/14, by which the learned Tribunal has, after following its own earlier decision dated 03.04.2014 passed in Original Application No.369/13, directed the petitioneroriginal respondent/ Department to consider the request of the original applicantretired employee for reimbursement of three medical bills for indoor treatment and reimburse the admissible amount as per the Government approved rates.
(2) That the respondent was serving as an Assistant Post Master and he retired as Assistant Post Master on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.04.2005. That on 20.10.2013 he suffered a severe heart attack and was admitted to hospital at Mehsana where he had undergone surgery on 27.10.2013. That thereafter on 15.04.2014 he submitted three medical bills of Rs.2,32,533/, Rs.12,818/ and Rs.24,477/ respectively for reimbursement for indoor treatment and requested to reimburse the same. However, vide communication dated 24.04.2014 along with letter dated 07.05.2014 his claim for reimbursement for the aforesaid three bills Page 2 of 8 HC-NIC Page 2 of 8 Created On Mon Jul 25 06:12:52 IST 2016 C/SCA/20315/2015 JUDGMENT has been rejected. Therefore, the respondent hereinoriginal applicantemployee approached the learned Tribunadel by way of filing Original Application No.321/14 requesting to quash and set aside the said communications and directed the original respondent Department, the present petitioner, to pay the amount of the aforesaid three medical bills to him.
(3) That the said Original Application was opposed by the original respondentDepartment by submitting that entitlement of the petitioner was only to avail a fixed medical allowance of Rs.300/ per month or in the alternative, to become Central Government Health Scheme (CGHS) beneficiary and avail the said CGHS facility, for which case he could avail the medical facility as indoor patient. It was the case of the original respondentDepartment that at the time of retirement the original applicantemployee opted for getting the medical allowance of Rs.300/ per month and did not opt to become CGHS beneficiary, though repeatedly asked, and, therefore, the original applicant employee shall not be entitled to the medical reimbursement of the medical bills for the treatment taken as indoor patient. The learned Tribunal negatived the above and Page 3 of 8 HC-NIC Page 3 of 8 Created On Mon Jul 25 06:12:52 IST 2016 C/SCA/20315/2015 JUDGMENT relying upon its own earlier decision dated 03.04.2014 passed in Original Application No.369/13, by which similar contention on behalf of the Department was negatived and consequently the learned Tribunal directed the Department to reimburse the medical bills of the retired employee towards the medical treatment as indoor patient, the learned Tribunal has allowed the Original Application No.321/14 and has quashed and set aside the communications dated 24.04.2014 along with letter dated 07.05.2014, by which the original applicantemployee was denied his medical claim and consequently the learned Tribunal has directed the present petitioner Department for reimbursement of the aforesaid three medical bills, however, the admissible amount as per the Government approved rates.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Tribunal, the Department has preferred the present Special Civil Application under Article 226 and 227 of the of the Constitution of India.
(4) Shri P.Y.Divyeshwar, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has reiterated what was submitted before the learned Tribunal. He has submitted that Page 4 of 8 HC-NIC Page 4 of 8 Created On Mon Jul 25 06:12:52 IST 2016 C/SCA/20315/2015 JUDGMENT despite repeated reminders the Respondent did not opt for CGHS benefit and opt to get Rs.300/ per month towards the fixed medical allowance and, therefore, he shall not be entitled to the medical reimbursement of the aforesaid three medical bills for medical treatment taken by the Respondent as indoor patient.
(5) On the other hand Ms.Reena Kamani, learned advocate, for Shri P.H.Pathak, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the original applicantemployee, has submitted that as such the judgment and order dated 30.04.2014 passed by the learned Tribunal in Original Application No.369/13, upon which reliance has been placed by the learned Tribunal, has been confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 18.06.2015 passed in Special Civil Application No.15702/14.
(6) It is further submitted by Ms.Reena Kamani, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the original applicantemployee, that as such identical question came to be considered by Hon'ble Madras High Court in Writ Petition No.32770/04 and other allied writ petitions and after considering the entire scheme and even considering the recommendation of the 5th Pay Commission, it is held by Hon'ble Madras Page 5 of 8 HC-NIC Page 5 of 8 Created On Mon Jul 25 06:12:52 IST 2016 C/SCA/20315/2015 JUDGMENT High Court that the payment of monthly allowance of Rs.100/ (now enhanced to Rs.300/ per month) to retired employees is only to provide for daytoday treatment. However, payment of such allowance cannot be a ground to deny the benefit of reimbursement for medical expenses incurred as indoor patient. It is submitted that it is further held that denial of CGHS Card to a retired employee on the ground that he has retired from a place not covered under CGHS is improper. Therefore, relying upon the decision dated 18.06.2015 of Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Special Civil Application No.15702/14 as well as decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court (supra) it is requested to dismiss the present petition.
(7) Heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties at length and perused the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Tribunal.
(8) At the outset it is required to be noted and it is not in dispute that the original applicant is a retired employee. It is also not in dispute that after his retirement he suffered a severe heart attack and was admitted to the hospital at Mehsana where he had taken treatment as indoor patient and Page 6 of 8 HC-NIC Page 6 of 8 Created On Mon Jul 25 06:12:52 IST 2016 C/SCA/20315/2015 JUDGMENT undergone surgery. The aforesaid three medical bills for indoor medical treatment is denied on the ground that the original applicantemployee did not become CGHS beneficiary and he opted to avail fixed medical allowance of Rs.300/ per month. However, relying upon its own earlier decision dated 03.04.2014 in Original Application No.369/13, which has been confirmed by this Court vide order dated 18.06.2015 passed in Special Civil Application No.15702/14, the learned Tribunal has directed the petitionerDepartment to reimburse the medical bills for indoor medical treatment, however, as per the Government approved rates. At this stage it is required to be noted that the aforesaid decision has been accepted by the Department and the matter is not carried further.
(9) Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case when relying upon the decision in Original Application No.369/13 in which similar submission was made and negatived by the learned Tribunal, which has been confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court, when the learned Tribunal has directed the original respondentDepartment to reimburse the medical bills for the treatment taken by the Page 7 of 8 HC-NIC Page 7 of 8 Created On Mon Jul 25 06:12:52 IST 2016 C/SCA/20315/2015 JUDGMENT retired employee as indoor patient, it cannot be said that the learned Tribunal has committed any error which calls for any interference of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
(10) At this stage it is required to be noted that as such identical question came to be considered by the Hon'ble Madras High Court (supra) and the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 18.06.2015 passed in Special Civil Application No.15702/14, after considering the entire scheme and even the plight of the retired employees, who need medical treatment at the advanced stage, more particularly as an indoor patient, have negatived the similar contention.
(11) In view of the above and for the reasons recorded hereinabove, we see no reason to interfere with the judgment and order passed by the learned Tribunal. Under the circumstances, the petition deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
Sd/ [M.R.SHAH, J] Sd/ [A.S.SUPEHIA, J] Bhavesh[pps]* Page 8 of 8 HC-NIC Page 8 of 8 Created On Mon Jul 25 06:12:52 IST 2016