Central Administrative Tribunal - Kolkata
Abdur Rahaman vs Telecommunication on 4 March, 2019
t /ir i ^ K1\a :tf s9 .* t •s?
•^* ■:'(
pV'.t,,.'-
} \ >:
> » •
t*- ■
fr BEFORE THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
V: ''
V>.r.^:.-
?V w*1
KOLKATA BENCH
Cf /-
O.A.No.'SSO/''2-'?! of 2019 rt IN THE MATTER OF:
i- i.
An application under Section 19 of the Central Administrative li t* *» ■ Tribunal Act, 1985;
5* '
■v-
i !"' 7
•f-
T
i-
L
PARTICULARS OF THE
APPLICANT : Abdur Rahaman, son of Late Atiar Rahaman. residing at vilt:
iSK"
'b t
i
& Gouribhoje P.O: Gouribhoje, Pin Code-743445. P.S.: Maiki l I previously Basirhat) , Dist: North 24 Parganas . West i ?
$ Bengal.
■t-
fc.- Applicant f
't: i ,
I.,-: '
.r*
tv:
y
F:
t.
r
r. fcT" :
r
■r
u»
PARTICULARS OF THE l '■
(
3 RESPONDENTS
r)
i. UNION OF INDIA service through the
f. '
rz . Secretary, Ministry of Communication ^information
■!
i-r
t • Technology, Department of Telecommunication.
L •
& ■■
• I. Government of India, Sanchar Bhavan, 20. Ashoka Road, New Delhi- 110001.
£ •t & - *' ^ 2. BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED $7 ? ' ti.:. service through the Chairman-cum-Managing Director. i;
I': ■ Bharat Sanchar Bhavan, Harish Chander Mathur Lane.
yv f.-rr:.--.-.
f •
r- •
f. Janpath, New-Delhi- 110001. Bir-r--
...
v. Sr
■
It: .
■ ■ ■
3. The Chief General Manager ,West Bengal i L"
tu;
Telecom Circle Service through its Chief General )/ r v': .
Manager, 1 Council House Street, Kolkata- 700 001. t.-r:.
■t <■
. •. J
'M ■
5- ' ••
• .■ •
+r
m r.'
gore .............. ......
.Mr1
r V'
f
i
zszazxz •' M TiZ .
--' 2 •?w5,,
:
• * •• ' '. ij >•••
/
?r*. :
■ i*x
r- •
4. DGM(OP)-MIS,.CGMT, WBTC, 1 Council fprx^:
Wi: fe:
•t** i*' House Street( 2nd floor) , Kolkata- 700 001
if. •
r
y
■a- 5.. The Asst.General Manager (HR & Adm/i),
! O/O the GMT, Calcutta SSA, CTO Building. Kolkuta- KS-
la - I .
700 001.
A
■t
i: 6. Accounts officer (Medical) , O/o the General •it Manager Telecom, Calcutta SSA. CTO Building.
Kolkata- 700 001.
mmm:
■] t 1: ■ Kespondcnts ;r a■ ft -:51
' fti .
r'
i«»**r >*» s . v* • ' ■*
'fc-. , ' * f;
b ■■■
!K,. •■.••■> - •
Pv-
t:-/; &
j|£v
Ifv . 'the^BSK
fL
m
■:v-
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH .
O.A/350/271/2019 Date of Order: 04.03.2019 Coram: Hon'ble Mr. A.K Patnaik, Judicial Member ;
Abdur Rahaman -Vs^ Telecommunication For the Applicant(s) Mr. K.Sarkar, Counsel For the Respondent(s): Mr. T.K.Choudhury, Counsel ORDER (ORALl A.K Patnaik, Member LO:
Heard Mr. K.Sarkar, Ld. Counsel, leading Mr. A.K.Ghosh, Ld. Counsel for the applicant, and Mr. T.K.ChoudfrufyS LdLOouhsel appearing for the Official rs.' v.-* f':
. * \\
Respondents, in extenso. r>.a
V A\
r r'r-.'
r! v AV
This O.A. has been file^underiS.ekiondRS'f the Administrative Tribunals
2.
:■ ■ u: \
Act, 1985 with the following U I
JIj f
"a) Direction ^o^tSSue'-'tlpbiiirifte'^bn-cerned respondent quashing and setting aside ^hefourpoited Medicaljeimbur^sement amount to the tune of Rs. 2307^ contaihedwjn^the-t pay/4lip^March-2016 of your applicant.' ' _______ ___ _________ <■■■'
b) Issue direction up'on-the.,respondents and their men and agents to pay the actual expenditure in accordance with the bill paid in the hospital by the applicant to the tune of Rs. 2,47,409/- (Rupees Two lakhs forty-seven thousand nine only) forthwith r c) Direction do issue upon the concerned respondent and their men and agents to pay the medical expenditure already incurred for his treatment according to the direction conveyed in the post facto permission of the CGM, WBTC, Kolkata that is as per approved rate S' of CGHS Kolkata or actual cost which is lower read with BSNL-
, LMRS clarification order dated 30.11.2015 and clarification conveyed ; by Asst. General Manager (Admn.IV), Corporate office. New Delhi order dated 20.01.2017 and AIIMS clarification dated 06.05.2014 and dated 08.02.2017 respectively.
d) Direction do issue upon the concerned respondent to produce the entire records of the case at the time of hearing •*' '2s.-
.V r-lTi-J. *;
i
e) Cost and costs incidental hereto;
f) And/or pass such other or further order or orders as to Your Lordships may deem fit and proper."
3. Brief case of the applicant as submitted by Ld. Counsel is that the applicant while working as Sr. TOA(G) under BSNL was suffering from R/K SOL and other ailments and advised by Doctor to undergo treatment at higher specialty hospital preferably at Apollo Hospital, Chennai and, as per advise, he was undergoing treatment at the said hospital. The hospital charged an amount of Rs. 2,47,409/- for the said treatment. Post facto permission of CGM, BSNL, WBTC dated 09.02.2016, for the said indoor medical treatment of the applicant for the period 30.09.2015 to 04.10.2015 was accorded^ut only .Rs. 23,077/- was reimbursed to the applicant. Ld. Counsel fdr/tne applicant submitted that no speaking order was . ';>-
■t \ | / J** \ ever communicated toshim kHthiS Iregard./Ld. Counsel^ submitted that the Li. 'Cji'' 'it-
respondents have ignored thegp|^Cf .renainders and violated the : 7 tf rules and guidelines laid down:by?B.SN'L and 'A.irMS Delhi n f *1^ .. : C P '4^ / / I \ \ %#r - ■
-'■s-i, if
4. Ld. Counsel for the^pl-ibant fairiy^fenutt^'M^alth^ugh the applicant has ^ / X, preferred a representation'dated./24.*05'r20r8 ..(Annexurer?Ay21) before the Nodal Officer, Grievance Redress^?C.err''forHR.etifedrrfE!nployee, SR Cell, Corporate Office, BSNL, Janpath, New Delhi, but till date neither any reply has been communicated to him nor his medical claim has been settled. He further submitted that the grievance of the applicant may be more or less redressed if his representation is considered by Respondent No.5 in the light of Annexure-A/22, in which the case of the applicant has been recommended by the Chief Accounts Officer (Medical), within a specific time frame.
:■ 5. Having heard Ld. Counsel for both the parties, without going into the merit of the matter, I dispose of this O.A. by directing Respondent No. 5 to consider the representation of the applicant under Annexure-A/21, if the same has been filed 4 b V V' V and is pending for consideration, and pass a reasoned and speaking order as per mles and regulations within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. I make it clear that while considering AnneauresA/a i :>■ Respondent No. 5 will also keep in mind Annexure-A/22 in which the case of the applicant has been recommended. It is further made clear that if after such consideration the applicant is found to be otherwise entitled then expeditious steps be taken within a further period of six weeks to reimburse the expenses which have been incurred by the applicant towards his medical tests and other health issues by following the due procedure of law. I also make it clear that if in the meantime the said representation has already been disposed of then the result thereof be i s fJ r communicated to the applicant,within a penbd-bft\Vo weeks.
n. \
V" "I
6.
■. r ✓aTHX
With the aforesafd^obsenvatiofr and&ifec'tfon, this^Q.X. stands disposed of.
■ f* \
No costs. * o-
= ; '
:/f | \ \\ ^¥. a? i1S'
7. As prayed for %3he Ld. I^nsd fo| the^applicant, copy of this order, along with paperbook be transrnittedi'to;pRespondent '!Np'f 5, 'for which, he undertakes to \ v-'V / ' % --------------- -i /" / deposit the cost with the Regisgy 'Within, a w^ek.1-% y V.s ,^r ... 8-. Copies of this order be handed over to the Ld. Counsel for the parties.
A-.- V' H
(A.K.Patnaik)
Member(J.)
•;
RK/PS
r.
i
■-•1--