Delhi High Court
Ravinder Kaur vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi And Anr on 14 March, 2013
Author: Valmiki J. Mehta
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 3237/2012
% 14th March, 2013
RAVINDER KAUR ..... Petitioner
Through : Mr. Naresh Thanai, Adv.
versus
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR ..... Respondent
Through : Mr. D. Rajeshwar Rao, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA
To be referred to the Reporter or not?
VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)
1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner who is working with
respondent No. 2 and is employed by respondent No. 1. The petitioner
claims reimbursement of medical expenses incurred of Rs.33,369.80 on
account of the medical ailment suffered on 09.08.2011.
2. On behalf of both the parties, it is said to be an undisputed position
that the petitioner was not treated for the ailment in any of the hospitals
which is on the approved list. That being so, it is agreed that the Circular
dated 02.02.2010, issued by respondent No. 1 will apply.
3. Counsel for the petitioner states that the case of the petitioner is
covered under para 3(II)(a) of the Circular which provides that if a person is
severely incapacitated and was hospitalized for a prolonged period, the same
is enough for getting reimbursement.
4. Counsel for respondent No. 1 disputes this position and states that the
petitioner was not hospitalized for a life threatening ailment and hence she
could not be entitled to the benefit of para 3(II)(a) of the Circular.
5. The only order which has been passed by the Technical Committee of
the respondent refusing to grant the reimbursement of the medical expenses
is the order dated 10.02.2012 and which is reproduced as under:-
" A meeting was held on 10.2.12 at 2.00P.M. in the
chamber of DHS for giving opinion regarding relaxation of
procedures for medical reimbursement of full expenditure and
under mentioned Specialist was present:
1. Dr. P.S. Khatana, Sr. Spl. Surgery, Dr. BSA Hospital, Delhi.
The Case was examined technically and not recommended for
full reimbursement are as under:-
1. Mr. Ravinder Kaur, As per available records, the
DHJS of D&SJ office for patient was admitted in Global
Self. Hospital & Endosurgery
Institute, Delhi not recognized
under DGEHS with diagnosis
of Acute Cholecystitis with
cholelithiasis. The condition of
patient required urgent
treatment but it is not life
threatening condition as per the
clause 3(ii) a to I of DGEHS
OM dated 2.2.10 and does not
fit for criteria for full
reimbursement.
(Dr. P.S. KHATANA)
SR. SPL. SURGERY
(DR. P.K. MALIK) (DR. N.V. KAMAT)
SPO(DGEHS) DHS"
6. A reference to this order shows that the Committee has only taken into
account the aspect of the ailment being not urgent and not life threatening. In
para 3(II)(a) of the Circular dated 02.02.2010, there is no such condition of
employee's ailment being life threatening.
7. Accordingly, the impugned order being not in terms of the Circular
dated 02.02.2010, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent
No. 1 to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law in terms of Circular
dated 02.02.2010. The necessary order be passed within a period of two
months from today.
8. The writ petition is disposed of with the above said observations.
VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J
MARCH 14, 2013/j
