Punjab-Haryana High Court
Employees State Insurance Corporation vs Rambir Singh & Anr on 26 September, 2012
Author: Rajan Gupta
Bench: Rajan Gupta
FAO No. 621 of 2009 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
FAO No. 621 of 2009
Date of decision : 26.09.2012
Employees State Insurance Corporation
....Appellant
V/s
Rambir Singh & anr.
....Respondents
BEFORE : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA
Present: Mr. Vikas Suri, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. Shiv Kumar, Advocate for the respondent no. 1.
RAJAN GUPTA J. (ORAL)
Present appeal has been preferred by the appellant- Corporation to impugn the award passed by the tribunal whereby it was directed that medical reimbursement bills submitted by respondent no. 1-workman be reimbursed within a month.
Learned counsel for the appellant has assailed the findings on the ground that respondent no. 1 ceased to be an employee of respondent no. 2 at the time he underwent treatment. According to him, his medical bills could not be directed to be reimbursed by the authority.
Learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 1, however, submits that services of employee were never terminated by respondent no. 2. He further submits that order has been executed and the amount of `15,000/- which is ordered to be reimbursed has already been paid to the employee. Thus, authority has rightly allowed reimbursement of medical bills. FAO No. 621 of 2009 2
I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petition was preferred by Rambir Singh under section 75 of the Act claiming that he was entitled to reimbursement of medical bills as he underwent treatment for cancer in All India Institute of Medical Sciences. As respondent no. 1 was an employee at that time, he claims that he was entitled to all benefits towards sickness and medical reimbursement etc. He also produced certificates from the medical officer with regard to his treatment. Plea of the appellant-Corporation before this court is that respondent-Rambir Singh had ceased to be employee of M/s Jhalani Tools India Ltd. Thus, he was not entitled to claim reimbursement of medical bills. Order dated 23.11.2007 has already been executed and amount has been disbursed to the employee. Meager re-imbursement of `15,000/- has been paid to the workman. There appears to be no infirmity with order requiring reappraisal of evidence. Appeal is without any merit and is hereby dismissed.
September 26, 2012 (RAJAN GUPTA) Ajay JUDGE