(1) Gulam Rasool Vs. State of Rajasthan & Others IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR : O R D E R : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6626/2006. (Gulam Rasool Vs. State of Rajasthan & Others) DATE OF ORDER : August 20, 2008 P R E S E N T Hon'ble Mr. Justice Gopal Krishan Vyas _______________________________ Mr. Harish Purohit for petitioner. Mr. N.K. Mehta for the respondent(s). BY THE COURT : In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for direction to the respondents to reimburse the amount of Rs.2,36,191.34 with interest @ 12% from the date the petitioner raised the claim till the date of actual reimbursement of the amount. The petitioner being government employee went on leave and while filing application on 14.01.2005 to attend the marriage of his relative at Delhi. The petitioner was granted leave and also permitted to leave the headquarters which is evident from (2) Gulam Rasool Vs. State of Rajasthan & Others Annex.-2 filed by the petitioner with the writ petition. The case of the petitioner is that in Delhi he suddenly received pain in his chest and his relatives took him for treatment to the MAX Devki Devi Heart & Vascular Institute where the doctors, after examination, suggested him to undergo angio-plasti so as to avoid imminent danger to his life. On the advice of the doctors, the petitioner underwent angio-plasti in the said medical institute. As per the petitioner, the petitioner suffered from 100 per cent blockage in his RC, therefore, in the emergent situation, he took medical treatment in Delhi at the aforesaid medical institute while he was on leave. According to the petitioner, in the aforesaid treatment, a huge amount was incurred by him in the sum of Rs.2,32,575/- which is evident from the final bill of the institute and, for the reimbursement of the said bills, the petitioner submitted claim to the respondent No.2 and prayed for reimbursement of the said amount. However, the petitioner's claim has not been finalized. The case of the petitioner is that being a government employee working in the Public Health Engineering Department on the post of Office Assistant substantively he is entitled for medical reimbursement as per the Rajasthan Medical Attendance Rules, 1970. Inspite of giving legal notice and requests made (3) Gulam Rasool Vs. State of Rajasthan & Others by him, the respondents did not reimburse the aforesaid amount incurred by the petitioner in the treatment. Therefore, it is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that being government servant the petitioner is entitled for reimbursement in accordance with the provisions of the Rules of 1970 and the respondents cannot refuse the same. It is contended that in so many cases this Court has decided the same controversy and held that in emergent situation the objection with regard to reference by the Medical Board is to be ignored. Admittedly, in this case, vide para 4 and 5 of the reply, it is admitted by the respondents that the petitioner went on leave with permission to leave headquarters, therefore, in my opinion, the claim of the petitioner cannot be denied merely for the sake of technicality for not having got the reference made by the appropriate Medical Board for treatment outside the State. The case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the earlier judgments of this Court. In this view of the matter, this writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to reimburse the medical bill claim of the petitioner for the expenses incurred for treatment in Delhi in accordance with the Rules of 1970, within two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, failing (4) Gulam Rasool Vs. State of Rajasthan & Others which, the petitioner shall be entitled to 6% interest on the aforesaid amount of claim. There shall however be no order as to costs. (Gopal Krishan Vyas) J. Ojha, a.