Delhi High Court
S.K. Kapur vs N.D.M.C. on 9 August, 2002
Equivalent citations: 101 (2002) DLT 347
Author: M Sarin
Bench: M Sarin
JUDGMENT
Manmohan Sarin, J.
1. Rule.
With the consent of the parties, writ
petition is taken up for disposal.
2. Petitioner was employed with NDMC as
Head Assistant and sought voluntary retirement w.e.f.
31.3.1981. Petitioner was entitled to medical benefits
while in service. NDMC did not have medical benefits
for the retired employees. A proposal to extend the
medical facilities to retired employees was put up
before the Council. This proposal was approved vide
Resolution No. 3(xviii) dated 19.12.1996. By the said
Resolution, it was decided, in principle, to extend the
benefit of medical facilities to the retired employees
of NDMC. The details of the scheme were to be worked
out on the pattern of CGHS. NDMC thereupon worked out
the detailed of the scheme and put up before the
Council for consideration and approval. The Council
vide Resolution dated 26.9.1997 approved the scheme for
provision of medical benefits to retiring and retired
employees. It was further resolved that the scheme
would be effective from the date of Resolution i.e.
26.9.1997.
3. The grievance of the petitioner is that
despite a Resolution having been passed, making the
scheme effective from 26.9.1997, the benefits under the
Scheme were not available to the retired employees.
Petitioner claims that he kept on following with the
NDMC for extending the benefits of the scheme but there
was no response. Respondent took up one excuse after
another, stating that the modalities had not been
worked out. Petitioner claims that he had offered and
was willing to make the one time payment to become
member of the Scheme, but respondents did not respond.
4. Petitioner distressed by the lack of
response to his entreaties for becoming a member under
the scheme, made a representation dated 17.2.1997 to
the Chairman of NDMC. Petitioner wrote as under :-
"The Council had decided about 6 months ago
that medical reimbursement facility will be
provided to retired municipal employees and
they will have to make some one time
contribution to the scheme. I have been
contacting the office of MOH and Pension Cell
since then but nothing concrete had been
intimated to me. I am in old age and need
medical assistance frequently. As you will
kindly appreciate that it is not possible to
afford medical treatment even from
Govt. Hospitals like Medical Institute etc. in
the merge pension.
I shall be extremely grateful if you kindly
get the scheme finalised and give me at least
an assurance that my medical claims will be
entertained by the Council from the date of
Council's Resolution irrespective of fact as
to when the Council decides about one time
contribution."
In response to this representation, the
Chairperson of the respondent made the following
endorsement:
"P.H.
MOH for comments
The applicant appears to be in distress.
Pending finalisation of scheme, he may be
provided with medicines according to
prescription.
Sd/Chairperson 28.02.1998."
5. Petitioner again, thereafter, vide his
letter of 9.7.1998 wrote to the medical officer,
stating that based on the directions given by the
Chairman, some medicines were being given to him and
for some of the medicines, he was advised to file
reimbursement claims. Petitioner, even, at this
stage, wrote to the respondent to intimate to him the
amount to be paid, alternatively, it could be deducted
from his monthly pension. It would be seen that
petitioner had categorically notified the respondents
of his desire to become member of the Scheme and had
even sought an assurance that his medical claims would
be entertained form the date of approval of the
scheme.
6. Ms. Alpana Poddar opposes the petition and
states that the petitioner knew fully well that one
time payment was to be made for securing the
membership under the scheme. He, however, did not
take steps to deposit the same with the respondent.
She submits that one time contribution was paid only
on 3.1..1998. According to her, the petitioner is,
therefore, entitled to the benefit under the scheme
from 3.1..1998.
7. I am unable to accept the submissions of
Ms. Alpana Poddar. From the foregoing narration of
facts, it would be seen that the petitioner had been
following up with respondent, for becoming member
of the scheme for medical facilities for retired
employees. Petitioner had been enquiring the amount
to be paid and had notified of his intention to become
member. Rather petitioner was concerned about the
burden of medical expenses and requested for
finalization of scheme and an assurance that medical
claims of petitioner would be entertained irrespective
of when decision is taken about the one time
contribution. Petitioner was desperate on not getting
a response and made a representation to the
chairperson, who gave directions for supply of
prescribed medicines to him. Petitioner again
(SIC) about the amount to be paid and even
authorized deduction for his pension. Petitioner
accordingly, had done all that was required to be done
by him towards completion of formalities to become
member of the scheme. The lapse in not finalizing the
modalities was that of the respondent. Considering
that even though commencement of the scheme was with
effect from 26.9.1997, petitioner is at least entitled
to reimbursement of medical expenses from 28.2.1999.
This being the date on which the Chairperson of NDMC
had directed provision of medicines according to the
prescriptions, which would tantamount to acceptance of
the petitioner's membership and eligibility under the
scheme, pending finalisation of modalities for
payment.
The writ petition is disposed of with the
direction that claims of the petitioner for
reimbursement and hospitalisation charges etc., w.e.f.
28.2.1998 under the scheme be processed within two
months from today.
