1 SBCW NO.979/2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR. O R D E R Vagta Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 979/2008 Date of Order : : 24/02/2009 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR Mr.Kuldeep Mathur, for the petitioner. Mr. K.K.Bissa, Additional Govt. Counsel for the respondents. BY THE COURT: By the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to reimburse medical claim submitted by him for the treatment undergone by him at Krishna Heart & Super Specialty Institute, Ahmedabad wherein the petitioner has undergone bypass surgery of heart (Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Surgery). I have heard learned counsel for the parties. The facts and circumstances giving rise to the instant writ petition are that the petitioner is a pensioner having retired as a Primary Teacher and thus he is retired Govt. employee and 2 SBCW NO.979/2008 entitled for the medical reimbursement as per the Scheme for grant of Medical Concession to State Government Pensioner floated by the respondent State vide Govt. of Rajasthan Finance Department Notification No. F1 (6) FD (Rules)/ 2002 dated 19.12.2004 wherein a limit has been provided for medical reimbursement in respect of pensioners. Indisputably, according to the petitioner, he is a pensioner and has undergone the bypass surgery of heart. Rule 4E of the Scheme provides the treatment of heart ailment in recognised hospital outside the State (with or without the recommendation of the Medical Board). Rule 4E (b) of the Scheme provides that in case a pensioner undergoes by- pass surgery of heart (Cardio Thoracic Surgery) in any recognized hospital outside the State in emergent circumstances, without any recommendation of the Medical Board, he may be allowed 80% of Hospital expenses limited to Rs.48,000/- i.e. 80% of General Ward Charges of AIIMs, New Delhi provided that he submits a Certificate from a Cardiologist who hold a degree of D.M. in Cardiology or MCH in Cardio thoracic Surgery stating that pensioner's condition was such that immediate treatment was essential. According to the petitioner, the petitioner in the month of June while at Ahmedabad suddenly suffered chest pain 3 SBCW NO.979/2008 and he was immediately taken to Krishna Heart & Super Specialty Institute, Ahmedabad for treatment where he was admitted in an emergent situation and ultimately underwent bypass surgery and according to the learned counsel for the petitioner there was hardly any time for the petitioner either to have got recommended for such treatment or to have gone to the hospital recognized by the State. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on a decision of this Court in Kailash Lal Mathur Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors., SBCW No.1155/2007 decided on 18.4.2007 and a Division Bench decision in State of Rajasthan and Ors. Vs. Kailash Lal Mathur, D.B.Civil Special Appeal No. 671/07 which came to be dismissed by order dated 14.9.2007 affirming the order of this Court dated 18.4.2007. In Kailash Lal Mathur Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors., (supra) this Court held that the State Govt. has framed the Scheme for providing medical concession to the State Govt. pensioners, therefore, denial of reimbursement/ concession of the medical claim to the petitioner by the respondents only on the ground that the hospital where the petitioner's wife underwent the treatment has not been approved by the State Govt., is not justified and it cannot be an impediment for providing medical concession/ reimbursement to the pensioner in respect of his claim to the extent permissible under the Scheme. 4 SBCW NO.979/2008 The controversy involved in the instant case is also identical to that of Kailash Lal Mathur Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors., (supra) which has been affirmed by the Division Bench. A Division Bench of this Court in State of Rajasthan and Anr. Vs. Mithu Lal Gupta, D.B.Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.858/2007 decided on 24.3.2008 has also taken a similar view. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is allowed to the extent that the petitioner is entitled for reimbursement of the medical claim to the extent of Rs. 48,000/- as provided under the Scheme and the respondents shall pay a sum of Rs. 48,000/- to the petitioner within a period of two months from today. There shall be no order as to costs. (H.R. PANWAR), J. rp