IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 15TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 26TH MAGHA 1931 WA.No. 481 of 2008() ------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN OP.12457/2002 Dated 04/09/2007 .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENTS ------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR, HEALTH SERVICES, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.BENNY GERVASIS RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------- SMT.B.RADHAMONY, RETIRED JOINT R.T.O., SURABHI, SOUTH KOCHUMURI, OCHIRA P.O., KOLLAM. BY ADV. MR.ELVIN PETER P.J. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/02/2010 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, J & S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J ------------------------------------- W.A No.481 OF 2008 -------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of February 2010 JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair,J The respondents in the O.P are the appellants and respondent herein was the writ petitioner. Brief facts of the case are as follows. 2. The respondent/writ petitioner while working as Joint Regional Transport Officer underwent a bypass surgery on 18/02/2000 at Sree Uthradom Thirunal Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram. She moved for an interest free loan for the said purpose as provided in G.O.(P) No.45/97/H&FWD dated 18/02/1997. The loan was sanctioned by as per Ext.P3 Government Order dated 05/04/2000. After discharge from the hospital, she raised a claim for reimbursement for Rs.1,11,352/- on 26/03/2000. The Director of Health Services admitted the claim only to the extent of Rs.55,404/-. The respondent filed Ext.P7 representation before the Government claiming reimbursement of the entire amount. The Government informed the respondent by Ext.P8 that she is eligible only to get the W.A No.481 OF 2008 Page numbers amount sanctioned by the Director. Feeling aggrieved by the orders of the of the appellants, Exts.P8, P6 and P5, the writ petition was filed. In the mean time, after adjusting Rs.55,404/- the balance loan amount, with 18% interest was recovered from her DCRG. The learned single Judge after hearing both sides allowed the writ petition by ordering the appellants to pay to the respondent an amount of Rs.55,000/- within three months. Feeling aggrieved by the said direction, this writ appeal is preferred by the appellants. 3. The learned Government Pleader submitted that G.O.(P) 45/97 dated 18/02/1997 is the G.O governing interest free loan for bypass surgery and other similar operations. The amount of interest free loan that can be advanced for bypass surgery is fixed as Rs.1,00,000/-. But she is entitled to get reimbursement as provided under Rule 8(3) of the Kerala Government Servants Medical Attendants Rules 1960. The said Rule says that the Government servants may undergo treatment in a private hospital but he can get reimbursement of the amount spent only to the extent he would have received such treatment free in a Government hospital. Whatever that be, the amount which should be reimbursed for such a surgery in a Government W.A No.481 OF 2008 Page numbers Hospital has been sanctioned by the Director of Health Services. Therefore the decision of the learned single judge directing to pay further amount is unsustainable, it is submitted. 4. Rule 8(3) of the aforementioned Rules reads as follows. “ Government servants who have no Government medical institutions within a radius of five miles of their station, may resort to such Private Institutions and the charges incurred by them would be reimbursed by Government to the extent they would have received such treatment free in a Government Institution or at the hands of an Authorised Medical Attendant”. It is no doubt true that the claim of the respondent for reimbursement can be made only in the light of the above Rule as she has undergone surgery not in a Government Hospital. But no Rule or Order has been brought to our notice which says that the amount payable for a bypass surgery in a Government Hospital is only around Rs.50,000/-. But as evident from G.O(P) 45/97 mentioned above, the Government itself has taken the approximate amount necessary for a bypass surgery in hospitals other than Government Hospital is Rs.1,00,000/-. The petitioner has expended only Rs.1,10,000/-. The appellants did not have a case that it is an inflated bill. The hospital concerned is a reputed W.A No.481 OF 2008 Page numbers hospital. In the absence of any Order or Rule specifying that the charges for bypass surgery in a Government Hospital is lower than that, we find nothing wrong in the decision of the learned single judge. No material has been placed before us to show that the amount payable under Rule 8(3) of the aforementioned Rule is something less than what was claimed by the respondent. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR JUDGE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE //True Copy// P.A TO JUDGE vdv