CWP 1926/06 //1// In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench ** Civil Writ Petition No. 1926/2006 Phool Singh Versus State & (3) Ors Date of Order ::: 14/11/08 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi None, for petitioner Mr. JK Agrawal, Addl. Govt. Advocate, for respondents. Petitioner is working as Supervisor in Department of Agriculture (respondent No.3). On having acute cardiac problem, his family members took him to Santokba Durlabhji Hospital, Jaipur where he was admitted as indoor patient on 02/04/03. As alleged in petition, since his condition was critical and complaining recurring pain in his heart, in such compelling circumstances, he was subjected to emergency coronary angiography which showed 99% artery blockage, for which on medical advise, cardiac surgical operation for angioplasty was undertaken and was discharged from Santokba Durlabhji Hospital on 06/04/03 as is evident from discharge ticket (Ann.1) – bills whereof were furnished of Rs.1,31,503/- to respondents but were rejected vide letter dt.28/01/06 (Ann.2) on the premise that petitioner got surgically operated at a hospital being not recognised/approved by CWP 1926/06 //2// Government, medical bills are not reimbursable under Rajasthan Civil Services (Medical Attendance) Rules, 1970 (“Rules, 1970”). Hence this petition. Case of petitioner as alleged in petition is that there was an emergency and critical condition of petitioner and as per diagnosis report, he was subject to emergency coronary angiography which showed 99% artery blockage, requiring surgical operation at the earliest possible, in such circumstance, it was decided to get him admitted in Santokba Durlabhji Hospital Jaipur where he got surgically operated performing angioplasty for his cardiac problem as is evident from certificate (Ann.1) incurring expenses of Rs.1,31,503/- as per medical bills submitted to respondents; as such in light of Rule 12 of Rules, 1970, medical bills are required to be reimbursed in his favour. In support, Counsel placed reliance upon decision of this Court in State of Rajasthan Vs. Surendra K. Kalra (Special Appeal (Writ)-1276/06 decided on 17/01/08) (2008(2) WLC 430). Respondent's Counsel submits that petitioner got himself surgically operated at a hospital being not recognised/approved by Government, medical bills are not reimbursable CWP 1926/06 //3// under Rules, 1970. I have considered contentions of both the parties and with their assistance, examined material on record. As regards medical bills reimbursement, Apex Court in State of Karnataka Vs. R.Vivekananda Swamy (2008(3) SCC 328) and State of Rajasthan Vs. Smt. Savitri Upadhyay (Appeal (Civil) 2336/08 decided on 01/04/08) while examining similar controversy, observed ad infra: “18. In view of the aforementioned settled principles of law there cannot be any doubt that the Rules regarding reimbursement of medical claim of an employee when he obtains treatment from a hospital of his choice can be made limited. Such a rule furthermore having been framed under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India constitutes conditions of service in terms whereof on the one hand the employee would be granted the facility of medical aid free of cost from the recognized government hospitals and on the other hand, he at his opinion, may get himself treated from other recognised hospitals/ institutions subject of course to the conditions that the reimbursement by the State therefor would be limited.” Division Bench of this Court has examined scheme of Rules, 1970 in State of Rajasthan Vs. Surendra K. Kalra (supra) wherein CWP 1926/06 //4// it has been observed that in an emergent situation, the Government cannot insist upon servant to get himself treated at Govt. recognised institution/hospital. Division Bench of this Court (Per Hon. RM Lodha, J.) observed : “17. That the respondent (writ petitioner) is entitled to the reimbursement at the rates applicable in the Government recognised hospital is clearly established. However, we find that the Single Judge has directed the reimbursement to the respondent (writ petitioner) as per the bills submitted by him. This direction needs clarification. If the medical bills submitted by the writ petitioner exceeds the rates of the recognised/ approved Govt institutions/hospitals, needless to say that his claim shall be restricted to such rates. On the other hand, if medical bills submitted by the writ petitioner are less than the rates that are applicable to the treatment at the recognised/approved Government institutions/hospitals obviously the writ petitioner shall be reimbursed all the medical bills submitted by him.“ Thus, issue raised in instant case is no longer res integra. In instant case, once petitioner has been put to diagnosis of suffering from 99% artery blockage, for which immediate medical aid was required and was admitted in Santokba Durlabhji CWP 1926/06 //5// Hospital, Jaipur to get him surgically operated. In view of material on record, emergent condition of petitioner cannot be doubted and in such circumstances, State Government ought to have exercised powers U/r 12 of Rules, 1970 by allowing claim for reimbursement of medical bills at the rates approved for Government recognised hospitals. Consequently, writ petition succeeds and is hereby allowed. However, petitioner is held entitled for reimbursement of medical bills at the rates applicable in the Government recognised hospital (SMS Hospital, Jaipur) alongwith interest @9% per annum from the date of presentation of medical bill submitted till actual payment. In case his medical bills exceed rates of approved/recognised government hospitals /institutions, his claim shall be restricted to such rates and in case his medical bills are of less than the rates applicable to treatment of cardiac surgical operation at approved/recognised Govt. hospitals/institutions, it goes without saying that petitioner should be reimbursed of medical bills claimed. All exercise in compliance of this order, be completed within three months. No order as to costs. (Ajay Rastogi), J. K.Khatri/p.5/1926CW06Rm12-1411.doc