IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No.5383 of 2006 Date of Decision: 1.2.2007. Charan Dass ....Petitioner. Versus State of Haryana and others. ...Respondents. CORAM : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashutosh Mohunta. Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.S.Madan. Present:- Mr.Rameshwar Sharma,Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Anmol Rattan Sidhu, Addl. AG Haryana with Mr.Deepak Jindal, AAG Haryana. **** ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.(ORAL) The petitioner has claimed medical reimbursement on account of suffering from Rheumatird Arthritis. The petitioner submitted medical bills of Rs.51,247.50 for reimbursement. He was treated for his disease from private hospitals, which are not recognised by the State of Haryana. Reply has been filed on behalf of respondents No.1 to 4 wherein it has been averred that a sum of Rs.14,312.50 has already been paid to the petitioner on 17.7.2006. It has further been averred that as per Government of Haryana Rules regarding medical treatment a government employee is entitled to the medical reimbursement if he has taken treatment either from a Government Hospital or a Government approved Private Hospital, whereas in the case of the petitioner he has got treatment neither C.W.P. No.5383 of 2006 -2- from the Government Hospital nor a Government approved Private Hospital and hence the petitioner is not entitled to the re-imbursement of the remaining amount of the medical bills submitted by him. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a Division Bench Judgment of this Court in S hakuntla Vs. State of Haryana , reported as 2004(1)RSJ 283 to contend that when the treatment has been taken from a Hospital not on the approved list of Haryana Government, even then the petitioner would be entitled to claim reimbursement. In the present case the petitioner was suffering from Rheumatird Arthritis and there was no emergency. Learned counsel has also stated that the petitioner had a stone in his kidney and was getting treatment for the same also. None of these diseases mentioned above were treated in an emergency situation. Therefore, the petitioner cannot be given the benefit of judgment in Shakuntla's case (supra). Apart from the above, we find that the petitioner was posted as a Lecturer in History in Govt. Senior Secondary School, Nanakpur Tehsil Kalka, District Panchkula. He has been getting his treatment from Panchkula and Chandigarh. There is no reason why the petitioner could not have got his treatment from a Govt. Hospital or a Govt. approved Private Hospital. In view of the above, we find no merit in the writ petition and C.W.P. No.5383 of 2006 -3- the same is dismissed. (ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA) JUDGE (R.S.MADAN) February 1,2007. JUDGE Reema