CWP(T) No.7085 of 2008 6.10.2010 Present:- Ms. Monika Shukla, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. with Mr. Rajesh Mandhotra, Dy. A.G.for respondents No. 1 and 2. Ms. Bhavna Dutta, counsel for respondent No.3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the matter in question is squarely covered by the decision rendered by the Division Bench of this court in CWP No. 6232 of 2008, titled T.B. Dutta versus State of H.P. and ors. and CWP(T) No. 4468 of 2008 titled M.L.Aggarwal versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, copies of which are taken on record. 2. The petitioner is claiming reimbursement of medical claim admissible in accordance with the rules. On 20.12.2007, office memorandum was issued, which reads as follows:- “The matter regarding extension of medical reimbursement facilities to those employees/pensioners who have been absorbed in the Corporations/Boards and Autonomous Bodies after seeking voluntary retirement from the Govt. departments before attaining the age of superannuation has been engaging the attention of the Government for some time. The issue has been re-considered in consultation with the Finance Department. Now in supercession of this department’s Office Memorandum of even number dated 24- 11-1994 the Government has decided to extend medical reimbursement facilities to those pensioners, who have been absorbed in the Corporation/Boards and Autonomous Bodies after seeking voluntary retirement from the Govt. departments, before attaining the age of superannuation where such facilities are not being provided by the concerned Board/Corporation/Autonomous body. These orders shall come into force with immediate effect. This issues with prior concurrence of Finance Department obtained vide their U.O.No.50602644-Fin(C)A(3)/- 4/2005, dated 5-12-2007.” - 2 - Petitioner’s entitlement for medical reimbursement cannot be disputed. 3. This court in T.B. Dutta (supra) issued the following directions:- “ In view of the judgment of this court in State of H.P. vs. Dharamvir Sain and others dated 24.4.2010 in CWP No. 1204 of 2001 which has become final, wherein it has been held that in the case of the employees transferred from the State Government service to Corporation, the medical reimbursement has to be done by the State, this writ petition is also disposed of directing the State, to continue to discharge its obligation with regard to the medical reimbursements bills submitted by the petitioner.” 4. The matter in issue being squarely covered by the aforesaid decision, similar directions are also issued in the instant case. The writ petition is being disposed of with a direction that the State shall continue to discharge its obligation with regard to the medical reimbursement bills submitted by the petitioner. October 6, 2010 ( Sanjay Karol) (GR) Judge.