M.A Jalal v. The Government Of lndia Department Of Automic Energy

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent to reconsider the claim of the petitioner for reimbursement of the the impugned proceedings Medical Bill without reference to No.HWPM/ADMN.(8My2004/1659, dated 31.3.2004 issued by the respondent, pending disposal of the writ petition in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI KOWTURU PAVAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: SC FOR CENTRAL GOVERNMENT The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA WRIT PETITION No. 16187 of 2OO4 ORDER: This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to declare the proceedings issued by the respondent uide proceedings No.HWPM/Admin.(EM)/2O04/1659, dated

31.03.2OO4 as iltegal and arbitrary and consequently to direct the respondent to reimburse the medical bill of Rs.81,733.89/-.

2. karned Counsel for the petitioner stated that petitioner was working as Head Constable in the respondent's OrganizaLion i.e., Heavy Water Plant (Manuguru), Khammam District. As his mothcr fell sick, he applied for availing medical facility. Thereafter, respondcnt's Organization has issued a letter dated 25.O2.2OO3, stating that the competent authority has accorded approval lor availing mcdical facility to his mother at native place i.e., Trivandrum and it was also stated that medical bills will be regulated under CS (MA) Rules, 1944, as such he admittt:d his mother in a hospital at his native place. Accordingly, shc underu,cnt operation and admitted in the hospital from O3.O2.2003 to O8.O2.2003. The said hospital authorities havc raised a bill for Rs.81,733.89 /- and thus the pctitioner applicd lor mcdit zrl rcimburscment. However, the 2 respondent Organization gave a reply on f 5.07:2003 stating that the committee has opined that "the claim is not admissible as per CS (MA) Rules," against which the petitioner gave a representation on O3.09.2O03 arrd also got issued a legal notice dated 1O.03.20O3, for reimbursement.

3. I-earned Counsel for the respondent stated that petitioner's mother has taken treatment as in-patient in a private hospital and it is not permissible under CS (MA) Rules and it is allowed onty depending upon the merits of the each case. Petitioner did not reveal that his mother was already undergoing treatment in a private hospital, as such she is not entitled for reimbursement. Initially, petitioner gave an application and it rvas approved on 15.O7.2OO3, but later '"vhcn his reimbursemen[ \,as rejected, he preferred an appeal beforc the Chief General Manager on 03.09.2003.

4. In thc coun[er filed by the respondent, it is stated that they placed medical bills before the scrutiny committee and they also called for additional information from the petitioner and the petitioner had submitted the same on O9.O4.2OO3. On examination, the committee observed that the claims were not in order and hencc not admissible. 1 i\ i J

5. As per the rules of the respondent's Organization, the medical claim is applicable only to the persons who are wholly dependent on the employee and their monthly income should not exceed Rs.4,OOO/- per month. In this case, the petitioner claimed medical bills of his mother, who is dependent on him and she is a home maker. [t is not the case of the respondent that the mother ol the petitioner is an employee with a salary of more than Rs.a,OOO/- per month. The main contention of the respondent is that the petitioner's mother was treated in a private hospital. In fact, initially when she was not feeling well, she was admitted in the hospital and as it was an emergency, she underwent heart surgery in the same hospital. As per the respondent's rules, treatment can be availed in a private hospital in the case of emergency. Iiven in this case, as there was emergency, surgery was done by the private hospital, as such the claim is as per thc rules of the respondent's Organization and cannot be de nied.

6. It is also stated by the respondent rhar petitioner had never informed aL the rimc ol approval that his mother was ) ) already admittcd in thc hospitat. The parents of the petitioner were residing at their native place and the petitioner was working at Khammarn. Whcn he got information regarding the admission of his mother in the hospital, he sought for permission for approval and the approval was accorded. Accordingly, treatment was done in the private hospital and as there was emergency, surgery was conducted in the same hospital. Accordingly, petitioner submitted medical bills for reimbursement, but the respondent's Organization has rejected the same without any proper reasoning, though the claim is within their norms. Therefore, this Court frnds the said action of the respondent is patently erroneous and illegal and the proceedings No.HMPM/Admin.(EM)/20O4 1rc59, 31.03.2OO4 is liable to be set aside.

7. In thc result, the prcsent writ petition is allowed directing the respondent to re imburse Lhe medical bills of Rs.81,733.89/- to the petitioner n,ithin one month from the date of this Order i.e., on or before 07 .O5.2O25, failing which respond€nts are liable to pay the said amount along with interest @ 7.5Vo per annum from 08.05.2025 to till the date of realization. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. That Rule Nisi has made Absolute as above witness Witness THE HON'BLE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL, Monday, The Seventh Day Of April Two Thousand And Twenty Five l I //TRUE COPY// SD/.MOHD. ISMAIL DEPUW REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER ) t \ To,

1. The Government Of lndia Department Of Aut (Manuguru) Rep. by its Chief Admrnistrative a Gautaminag ar, Aswapuram Pin 507 116, Khammam District Energy , Heavy Water Plant nts Officer at Post

2. One CC to Sri KoMurU pavan Kumar, Advocate tOpUCJ 9 9n" 99 to SC for centraieoveinm-ent 'i6'e"j6i= ,"' ' 4. Two CD Copies TJ I )- HIGH COURT DATED:07104t2025 t t ORDER WP.No.161Bt ot 2OO4 {:H i\ t. I0 UJ ? 025 o.) r t .. t*1.' '..-,"i,.' t I ( : ALLOWING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS