CWP No.16004 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.16004 of 2011 Date of decision : 01-12-2011 Ganesha Ram .... Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER Present: Mr. V.B. Aggarwal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Sunil Nehra, Sr. DAG, Haryana, for the respondent-State. MAHESH GROVER, J. (Oral) In this petition, the petitioner prays for reimbursement of medical bill amounting to Rs.5871/- on account of his eye treatment taken from PGI which was declined to him by the respondents on the ground that medicines were not purchased from the cooperative stores dealing with sale of medicines and further they were inconsistent with the policy (Annexure R1/6) which contemplate that if any amount claimed exceeds Rs.300/- in a month, all the bills have to be got signed by PMO/Civil Surgeon/DGHS, Medical Superintendent in Medical College, Rohtak & Director, Ayurveda Haryana irrespective of the salaries of the Government employees. This Court had issued notice on the representation having been made by the petitioner regarding his bills. The reply of the respondents is on the aforesaid lines based on the CWP No.16004 of 2011 -2- policy (Annexure R1/6). Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to Annexure R1/3, which has been filed along with reply where the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Haryana under which the petitioner served, has referred the matter authenticating the bills submitted by the petitioner for compliance and payment. He has stated as follows:- "It is in reference and the captioned subject, the Medical Reimbursement Bill amounting to Rs.5871/- is forwarded again for sanction. It is also clarified that applicant bill has been verified by the Medical Superintendent of PGI and medicines were purchased from PGI Complex. If Government has any doubt than to deduct the 2% or 3% amount from the bill and remaining amount be consider for sanction sympathetically. Encl: Medical Bill in original" On due consideration of the matter, I am of the opinion that the respondents have unfairly denied the reimbursement to the petitioner as once a superior who is officer of some standing has verified that the bills submitted by the petitioner were authenticated and has been verified by the Medical Superintendent, PGI and medicines were purchased from PGI Complex, necessary reimbursement should have been made. It is to be seen that the ostensible purpose behind issuance of instructions under Annexure R1/6 is to obviate any chances of fraudulent bills being raised. But once there is material to show that a superior officer has verified the bills, authenticating them and the medical Superintendent of PGI has also further authenticated them, then I am of the opinion that such reports' authentication should have been to the satisfaction of the respondents. In view of the aforesaid, the respondents are directed to reimburse CWP No.16004 of 2011 -3- the petitioner for the bills that have been submitted. Whatever amount have already been paid shall obviously be adjusted in the remaining amount to be paid along with 6% per annum interest from the date of submissions of claims by petitioner till realization. The needful be done as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three months. (MAHESH GROVER) 01-12-2011 JUDGE manju