IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Letters Patent Appeal No.712 of 2010(O&M) Date of decision: 28.6.2010 Union of India and others …..Appellants versus Sampuran Singh ……Respondent CORAM: Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jasbir Singh Hon’ble Mr.Justice Augustine George Masih Present: Mr.Mahesh Dheer, Advocate for the appellants Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) Respondent underwent heart bypass surgery from Fortis Hospital, Mohali and remained admitted there from 7.3.2006 to 31.3.2006. In the process, he had spent an amount of Rs.2,80,252.80. When his claim for reimbursement of the amount so spent was declined, he filed CWP No.18327 of 2008, which was allowed by this Court vide order dated 10.11.2009. Hence, this appeal. Before the learned Single Judge, it was defence of the appellants that case of the Central Government pensioners is not covered under CCS(MA) Rules 1944. However, that contention was negatived by the learned Single Judge by placing reliance upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Darshan Singh Rai v. Union of India and others, 2008 (2) SCT 242, wherein it was observed as under:- “9. A perusal of the above text makes it clear that fixed medical allowance @ Rs.100/- p.m is given to the Central Government pensioners residing in areas not covered by CGHS for meeting day-to-day medical Letters Patent Appeal No.712 of 2010(O&M) expenses which do not require hospitalization. Therefore, as the petitioner was getting fixed medical allowance of Rs.100/- per month for meeting day-to-day medical expenses that do not require hospitalization, he is entitled to reimbursement of medical expenses for his heart ailment for which he remained hospitalized in Escorts Hospital, New Delhi, and had to undergo by-pass surgery. 10. For the aforesaid reasons, this writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to reimburse the medical expenses incurred by the petitioner during his treatment in Escorts Hospital, New Delhi, equal to the rates of A.I.I.M.S, New Delhi.” It is not disputed before us that the judgment in the case of Darshan Singh Rai (supra), has become final. In view of facts mentioned above, no case is made out for interference. No ground is made out to condone 130 days delay in filing the appeal also. Dismissed. (Jasbir Singh) Judge 28.06.2010 (Augustine George Masih) gk Judge 2