Punjab-Haryana High Court
State Of Haryana And Ors. vs Dr. Mrs. Amita Chaudhary on 5 September, 2003
Equivalent citations: (2004)136PLR209
Author: Hemant Gupta
Bench: Hemant Gupta
JUDGMENT Hemant Gupta, J.
1. The defendants are in appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the Courts below whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff for declaration with consequential relief of mandatory injunction was decreed.
2. Plaintiff submitted her bills for medical reimbursement on account of treatment which was necessitated. However, the said bills were not considered on various grounds. Ultimately, the plaintiff filed a suit for declaration and mandatory injunction. The trial Court decreed the suit in respect of the claim of medical reimbursement for Rs. 21457/- along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum. The said decree has been modified in appeal to the extent that a sum of Rs. 1869.00 on account of reimbursement of medical bills was not claimed by the plaintiff.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants has argued that the plaintiff has not complied with the instructions of the department regrading payment of medical reimbursement inasmuch as she has purchased the medicines without obtaining non-availability certificate from Super Bazar of Co-operative Store, Chandigarh, and also did not purchase the prescribed medicines within 2-3 days of their prescription. She has also not submitted a joint affidavit
4. However, such procedural irregularity cannot be made the ground to decline medical reimbursement. It has been so found by the courts below. However, the Supreme Court in the case of Om Parkash Gargi v. State of Punjab, (1996)11 S.C.C. 399 has held that interest on medical reimbursement is not permissible. The Supreme Court has held as under:-
"It is inexpedient and not proper to direct the State to pay interest for delay in payment of the reimbursement amount. It requires verification of the amounts spent by the petitioner and similar person. The employee's right is only to get reimbursement and it does not follow that for the delay in the payment of medical reimbursement, he should also be entitled to interest thereon."
5. In view of the aforesaid judgment of the Supreme Court, grant of interest at the rate of 18% per annum on the amount of medical reimbursement is set aside.
6. With the aforesaid modification regarding interest, the appeal stands dismissed.