Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Magan Singh vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors on 21 January, 2022
Author: Rekha Borana
Bench: Rekha Borana
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5911/2017
Magan Singh
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan And Ors.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinay Jain through VC
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ravi Panwar, AGC, through VC
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA
Order 21/01/2022 The case of the petitioner is as under:-
The petitioner was a government employee who retired from his services on 31.05.1999. In the month of April 2016, Smt. Ajita, wife of the petitioner was at some relatives place at Ahmedabad and while staying there, she met with an unfortunate accident and got burnt. In the emergent circumstances, she was shifted to Anand Surgical Hospital Private Ltd., Ahemdabad and was treated there. But the wife of the petitioner could not survive and she expired on 22.05.2016. After her death, the petitioner submitted the claim towards the medical expenses with the respondent-Department on 27.06.2016, tuning to an amount of Rs.4,07,860/-. After consideration by the department, Rs.99,272/- was permitted to be reimbursed qua the bill raised by the Department. Aggrieved against the non allowance of the remaining amount of the claim, the present petition has been filed.
Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the claim of the petitioner has been considered in terms of Rule 11 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Medical Attendance) Rules, 2013 (Downloaded on 24/01/2022 at 08:48:47 PM) (2 of 2) [CW-5911/2017] (hereinafter referred as 'Rules of 2013'), which specifies the details of the claims which are re-admissible as mentioned in Appendix 13. Counsel submitted that the amount as payable in terms of Appendix 13 have not been allowed by the respondent- Department and invariable deductions from the amount has been made without any plausible reason or logic.
Counsel for the respondent has on the other hand submitted that the bifurcation as provided by the Department qua all the claims of the petitioner is perfectly valid in terms of the Appendix 13 of the 'Rules of 2013'.
Heard the parties. Perused the material available on record. A perusal of the bifurcation of the claims raised vs. the claims allowed, as placed on record shows that a huge deduction has been made qua the claim of medicines as raised by the petitioner. Besides that, there is some or the other discrepancy in the other claims too. This Court would not like to enter into the minute details of the claims as raised and the claims as allowed. Therefore, it would be appropriate that the petitioner may move a fresh representation before the respondent authorities raising all his due medical claims qua the treatment of his wife and respondent-Department would decide the same strictly in terms of Appendix 13 of the 'Rules of 2013' and the other rules governing the claims. The said representation would be filed by the petitioner within a period of two weeks and the respondent- Department would decide the same within a period of three weeks thereafter. If after the decision of the said representation, the Department reaches to a conclusion that certain amount is payable to the petitioner, the same be paid within a period of three weeks of the decision. With these observations, the present writ petition is disposed of.
(REKHA BORANA),J 95-/Akshay/-
(Downloaded on 24/01/2022 at 08:48:47 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)