IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 5169 of 1999 Between: Sri. K. Ravinder Reddy, S/o. Late Sesha Reddy, R/o. 12-13-390, Street No. - 1 Taarnaka, Secuderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND Andhra Pradesh Dairy Devp- Co- op , Federation Limited, Rep. b y the Managing Director Lalapet, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner:NONE APPEARED Counsel for the Respondent: MR.M.DILIP RAO The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent to reimburse medical expenses incurred by the petitioner. At the hearing, there is no representation for the petitioner. Heard Sri M.Dilip Rao, learned counsel for the respondent, and perused the record. The petitioner was the General Manager of the respondent. In this writ petition, he questioned proceedings dated 28-08-1998, by which the respondent rejected the petitioner’s request for reimbursement of the sum of Rs.45,000/- towards medical expenses relating to angioplasty surgery. In support of his plea that he is entitled to reimbursement, he relied on G.O.Ms.No.175 dated 29-05-1997. According to the petitioner, this G.O enables the petitioner to undergo surgery in Medicity Hospital, which is one of the private hospitals notified by the Government for medical reimbursement. G.O.Ms.No.175 dated 29-05-1997 was issued to facilitate the employees to receive treatment in the notified private hospitals in emergency cases without obtaining referral certificates from the Nizam’s Institute of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad or Sri Venkateswara Institute of Medical Sciences, Tirupathi. It is mentioned therein that representations were made by the Andhra Pradesh Non-Gazetted Officers’ Association and other service associations that orders in G.O.Ms.No.258 dated 15-06-1996, which prescribe that the employees are entitled to receive treatment in Super Specialty Hospitals only after obtaining referral certificates from Nizam’s Institute of Medical Sciences or Sri Venkateswara Institute of Medical Sciences, Tirupathi are not beneficial to the employees as in case of emergency they are not left with any time to seek such referrals. While accepting the said representations, the Government in the said G.O provided that when the case is serious, which requires immediate treatment and no sufficient time was available for getting referral letters from the above mentioned two institutions, the employees, both the serving and retired and their dependents are permitted to secure treatment in the private hospitals recognized by the Government in G.O.Ms.Nos.38 and 258, dated 23-01-1996 and 15-06-1996 respectively. A perusal of the correspondence between the petitioner and the respondent filed by the petitioner himself shows that on 23-09-1996, the petitioner sought for permission from the respondent to undergo treatment for his heart ailment at Kamineni Hospital or Medicity Hospital. In letter dated 11-10-1996, the petitioner was advised by the respondent to furnish referral letter from the Nizam’s Institute of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad in terms of G.O.Ms.No.175 dated 28-05- 1997. However, without furnishing any such referral letter, the petitioner informed the respondent through his letter dated 10-03-1997 that he was admitted in the Medicity Hospital on 26-02-1997 and underwent angioplasty. This correspondence is referred to in the impugned proceedings. In my considered view, the petitioner had enough time at least from 23-09-1996, when he wrote his first letter till he underwent angioplasty on 26-02-1997 to obtain referral letter from the Nizam’s Institute of Medical Sciences and produce the same before the respondent. The petitioner has not given any explanation, whatsoever, for not producing the referral letter from the Nizam’s Institute of Medical Sciences. He neither satisfied the pivotal condition in G.O.Ms.No.175 namely; the seriousness of the case requiring immediate treatment nor produced referral letter. The petitioner is, therefore, not entitled to seek medical reimbursement for the treatment obtained by him from a private hospital. For the above mentioned reasons, the writ petition is dismissed. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 21st November, 2008 vrn