Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh
Raje Ram Lamba vs Accountant General ( A &Amp; E) Punjab on 21 December, 2018
Author: P. Gopinath
Bench: P. Gopinath
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHANDIGARH BENCH
...
ORIGINAL APPLICATION N0.060/01523/2018
Chandigarh, this the 21st day of December, 2018
...
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. SANJEEV KAUSHIK, MEMBER (J) &
HON'BLE MS. P. GOPINATH, MEMBER (A)
...
Raje Ram Lamba s/o Sh. Bisakhi Ram, aged 64 years, House No.
124, Inder Persth Colony, Opposite New Tehsil Office, Uklana,
District Hisar- Haryana - 125001.
....Applicant
(Present: Mr. D.R. Sharma, Advocate)
Versus
1. Union of India through the Comptroller & Auditor General of
India, Pocket No. 9, Deen Dayal Upadhayay Marg, New Delhi.
2. The Accountant General (A&E), Punjab Plot No. 21, Sector
17-E, Chandigarh - 160017
..... Respondents
(Present: Mr. I.S. Sidhu, Advocate)
ORDER (Oral)
SANJEEV KAUSHIK, MEMBER (J)
1. The applicant is aggrieved by the order dated 29.08.2018 (Annexures A-1) whereby his claim for medical reimbursement has been turned down on the ground that the CS (MA) Rules, 1944 are not applicable to the retirees.
2. Mr. D.R Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the issue involved in this O.A. has already been settled by this Court, negating the view of the respondents with regard to non- applicability of C.S. (MA) Rules, 1944 to retirees and the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court has approved the view taken by this Court granting similar benefit to retirees like the applicant, vide judgment dated 17.01.2018 in the case of Union of India & Ors Vs. Mohan Lal Gupta and Another, 2018 (1) SCT 687. He has also placed reliance on a decision dated 18.10.2018 of this Tribunal in a similar case of Baldev Raj Sharma Vs. Union of
-2- O.A. NO. 060/01523/2018 India & Others (O.A. No. 060/00668/2018). Learned counsel submitted that since the ground taken by the respondents denying the claim of the applicant has already been rejected in similar O.A. aforementioned, therefore, this O.A. may be allowed in the same terms.
3. Issue notice to the respondents.
4. At this stage, Mr. I.S. Sidhu, Advocate, appears and accepts notice. He is not in a position to controvert the averments made on behalf of the applicant and is not able to cite any law contrary to what has been settled in the indicated cases.
5. In the wake of above, the O.A. is allowed. The impugned order (Annexure A-1), rejecting the claim of the applicant on the ground of non-applicability of pensioners for medical reimbursement under CS (MA) Rules, 1944, is hereby quashed. The respondents are directed to reimburse the admissible medical expenses to the applicant, as per AIIMS/PGI rates, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. No costs.
(P. GOPINATH) (SANJEEV KAUSHIK)
MEMBER (A) MEMBER (J)
Dated: 21.12.2018
'mw'