IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. C.W.P.(T) No. : 7746 of 2008. Reserved on: 15.12.2009. Decided on: 01.01.2010. _________________________________________________________ Shri Harbhajan Singh. …Petitioner. -Versus- State of Himachal Pradesh through the Secretary (Industries) to the Govt. of Himachal Pradesh. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1Yes. __________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : Mrs. Ranjana Parmar, Advocate. For the respondent. : Mr. R.K. Sharma, Senior Additional Advocate General with Mr. Rajinder Dogra and Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Additional Advocate Generals. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge: Material facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that the petitioner was appointed as Dyeing Master in Government Weaving Centre, Mandi in the month of December, 1957. He has served Industry Department till 1970. He was granted pension vide PPO No. 3980/H.P. since, 1970. He was absorbed in Himachal Pradesh State Small Industries & 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. Export Corporation Limited. He superannuated in the year, 1993. He gave his option to claim medical claim/reimbursement from Industry department on 21st July, 1983 (Annexure A-7). He submitted two medical bills for reimbursement. The same were sanctioned on 20th October, 1993 and 28th March, 1994. He was informed on 23rd April, 1996 by the Additional Director Industry (Administration) that as per office order of Government of Himachal Pradesh issued on 8.11.1994, the department cannot pay medical reimbursement claim. The fact of the matter is that petitioner’s medical bills were not reimbursed. He has also taken up the matter with the Secretary (Health). The Secretary (Health) has informed the Secretary (Industries) on 05.08.1997 that in view of letter dated 08.11.1994, petitioner was entitled to get reimbursement from the Corporation. Mrs. Ranjana Parmar, learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that action of the respondent not to reimburse the medical bills is contrary to law. She then contended that the petitioner has fundamental right to health. under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. She further contended that letter dated 08.11.1994 is prospective in nature and could not be applied retrospectively to her client. Mr. R.K. Sharma, learned Senior Additional Advocate General has argued that petitioner is entitled to get reimbursement from the Corporation on the basis of letter dated 08.11.1994 (Annexure R-1). I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the pleadings carefully. Petitioner has served the Industry Department till 30th November, 1970. He has been sanctioned pension in the year, 1970. He was absorbed in Himachal Pradesh State Small Industries & Export Corporation Limited and has superannuated in the year, 1993. He has also given option to get reimbursement of medical bills from Industry Department, as noticed above. In fact, petitioner’s medical bills were cleared on 20th October, 1993 and 28th march, 1994 respectively and he was informed for the first time on 23rd April, 1996 by the Industry Department that he was not entitled to get reimbursement from this Department on the basis of letter dated 8th November, 1994. His medical bills have neither been cleared by the Industry Department nor by the Himachal Pradesh State Small Industries & Export Corporation Limited. Petitioner has fundamental right to life which includes health as well. He has served in the Government Department and the services rendered by him could not be obliterated by denying the benefit of medical reimbursement. He has already been granted pension by the State Government. The instructions have been issued on 8th November, 1994, whereby the persons who have sought absorption in Government undertakings, were to get the reimbursement from Government undertakings Public Sector in the Corporations/Boards/Bodies/Universities and other semi- Government Departments. This office memorandum has come into force on 8th November, 1994. This will apply prospectively. The right of the petitioner to get his reimbursement from Government Department has already crystallized after seeking his option and the same cannot be destroyed by making office memorandum dated 8th November, 1994 retrospectively. It is mentioned in the office memorandum dated 8th November, 1994 that the persons who are absorbed in the Corporations/Boards etc. will get medical facility from these bodies. However, the petitioner has been denied this facility also by his new employer, i.e., Himachal Pradesh State Small Industries & Export Corporation Limited on 23.4.1996. Petitioner has been left in lurch. He has attained the age of 70 years and till date, he has not been released the medical reimbursement amount. Accordingly, in view of the observations made hereinabove, petitioner is held entitled to get medical reimbursement from respondent, i.e. Industry Department. Consequently, the petition is allowed. Respondent is directed to reimburse all the medical claims to the petitioner which he has furnished within a period of four weeks from today. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge January 01, 2010. bhupender