Jayvadan Maganlal Acharya vs Bharuch Nagarpalika
2022 Latest Caselaw 4357 Guj

     C/SCA/20381/2018                                      JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2022



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
        R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.                     20381 of 2018

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI   :    Sd/-
=======================================================

1     Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be                                  NO
      allowed to see the judgment ?

2     To be referred to the Reporter or not ?                                   NO

3     Whether their Lordships wish to see the
      fair copy of the judgment ?                                               NO

4     Whether this case involves a substantial
      question of law as to the interpretation
      of the Constitution of India or any                                       NO
      order made thereunder ?

=======================================================
               JAYVADAN MAGANLAL ACHARYA
                         Versus
                  BHARUCH NAGARPALIKA
=======================================================
Appearance:
MR KASHYAP R JOSHI(2133) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR MEHUL SHARAD SHAH(773) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=======================================================

    CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI

                                  Date : 25/04/2022

                                    ORAL JUDGMENT

1. Rule. Learned advocate, Mr. Mehul Sharad Shah

waives service of notice of rule for respondent.

2. This petition is filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India, in which, the petitioner

has prayed that the respondent authority be

directed to approve and disburse the amount of

C/SCA/20381/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2022

medical reimbursement of the petitioner to the

tune of Rs.1,30,954/-.

3. Heard learned advocate, Mr. Kashyap Joshi for the

petitioner and learned advocate, Mr. Mehul Sharad

Shah for the respondent.

4. Learned advocate, Mr. Joshi appearing for the

petitioner referred to the averments made in the

memo of petition and, thereafter, submitted that

the petitioner was permanent employee of the

respondent - Nagarpalika and has served for almost

40 years and, thereafter, retired from the service

on attaining the age of superannuation on

31.12.2014. It is submitted that the petitioner is

getting pension from the respondent - Nagarpalika

and in respect of the service benefits qua medical

and relevant benefits, the respondent -

Nagarpalika has adopted policy of the State

Government as per Circular dated 24.08.2015.

Learned advocate further submits that the the

petitioner is retired employee of the Nagarpalika

and is eligible for the medical reimbursement for

certain life danger diseases, if certified by the

Civil Surgeon of Civil Hospital and if the

treatment is taken from the recognized hospital

C/SCA/20381/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2022

approved by the State Government.

5. Learned advocate further submitted that due to

chest pain and heart disease, the petitioner was

admitted in Mahavir Hospital, Surat from

16.05.2018 to 18.05.2018, where he was operated

for coronary angiography followed by angioplasty

and, thereafter, the petitioner was discharged

from the hospital. Learned advocate submitted that

after his discharge from the hospital, the

petitioner submitted an application in the

prescribed format to the respondent - Nagarpalika

on 22.06.2018 and applied for medical

reimbursement. It is contended that the petitioner

is entitled to claim medical expenses of

Rs.1,30,954/- relying upon the Resolution dated

24.08.2015. It is submitted that the respondent

no.1 did not grant the said medical reimbursement

and, therefore, the petitioner has filed the

present petition.

6. On the other hand, learned advocate, Mr. Shah

appearing for the respondent - Nagarpalika has

referred to the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf

of the respondent and submitted that the

petitioner applied for the medical reimbursement

C/SCA/20381/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2022

of Rs.1,30,954/- and such expenses were verified

by the Civil Surgeon, Bharuch and counter

signature was made by him by approving an amount

of Rs.76,025/-. Learned advocate has referred to

Page No.13 of the compilation and, thereafter,

contended that the application submitted by the

petitioner was placed before the Sanitary

Committee, Bharuch and, thereafter, the papers

were placed for appropriate decision before the

General Body Meeting. It is submitted that since

the petitioner has filed this petition before this

Court, the decision of the Sanitary Committee was

not placed before the General Body Meeting and,

therefore, there was no inaction on the part of

the Chief Officer of the respondent - Nagarpalika

and now the decision taken by the Sanitary

Committee will be placed before the General Body

Meeting of the respondent - Nagarpalika after

following due procedure and subject to the

sanction being granted by the General Body

Meeting, an amount of Rs.76,025/- can be

reimbursed to the petitioner, however, the

petitioner is not entitled to get Rs.1,30,954/- as

claimed by him as Civil Surgeon, Bharuch i.e. the

C/SCA/20381/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2022

independent authority has examined the case of the

petitioner and approved Rs.76,025/- as per the

Rules and Regulations. Learned advocate further

submits that the amount of Rs.76,025/- will be

paid to the petitioner as early as possible

preferably within a period of twelve weeks.

7. Having heard learned advocates appearing for the

parties and having gone through the material

placed on record, it transpired that the

petitioner was permanent employee of the

respondent - Nagarpalika and he has served for 40

years and on attaining the age of superannuation,

the petitioner retired from the service on

31.12.2014 and after his retirement, he was

admitted in Mahavir Hospital, Surat for the period

between 16.05.2018 to 18.05.2018 and he was

operated for for coronary angiography followed by

angioplasty. Relying upon the Circular dated

24.08.2014 issued by the State Government, which

is adopted by the respondent - Nagarpalika, the

petitioner submitted an application on 22.06.2018

in the prescribed format and thereby the

petitioner has claimed medical reimbursement to

the tune of Rs.1,30,954/-. It is the case of the

C/SCA/20381/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2022

petitioner that though such application was

submitted with required documents, the respondent

- Nagarpalika has not taken any decision, however

from the affidavit filed on behalf of the

respondent - Nagarpalika, it is clear that in

fact, the decision was taken in the meeting of

Sanitary Committee, which was

held on 07.07.2018 that the petitioner is entitled

to receive an amount of Rs.76,025/- towards the

medical expenses on the basis of the endorsement

made by the concerned Civil Surgeon, Bharuch. The

concerned Civil Surgeon, Bharuch, who is an

independent authority, has specifically made

endorsement that the petitioner is entitled to get

total amount of Rs.76,025/-, copy of said

endorsement is placed on record at Page No.13 of

the compilation. Thus relying upon the said

endorsement made by the Civil Surgeon, the

concerned Committee has approved an amount of

Rs.76,025/-, thereafter now the matter was

required to be placed before the General Body

Meeting, however before that, the petitioner has

filed the present petition. Learned advocate, Mr.

Shah appearing for the respondent, under the

C/SCA/20381/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2022

instructions, submitted that now the said decision

taken in the meeting of Sanitary Committee will be

placed before the General Body Meeting and the

General Body Meeting will take appropriate

decision on the basis of the decision taken by the

Sanitary Committee and after following procedure,

amount of Rs.76,025/- will be paid to the

petitioner. From the record, it further transpires

that when the Civil Surgeon has made endorsement

and approved that the petitioner is entitled for

Rs.76,025/-, this Court is of the view that no

direction can be issued to the respondent -

Nagarpalika to pay Rs.1,30,954/- as claimed by the

petitioner.

8. In view of the aforesaid discussions, the

respondent - Nagarpalika is hereby directed to pay

Rs.76,025/- within a period of twelve weeks from

the date of receipt of this order after following

procedure to the petitioner. The present petition

stands allowed to the aforesaid extent. Rule is

made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct

service is permitted. Direct service is permitted.

Sd/-

(VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J.) Gautam