IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 16970 of 2006 Date of Decision:22.1.2008 Ram Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. S.R.Hooda, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Harish Rahtee, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for the respondents. -.- JASBIR SINGH, J.(ORAL) Petitioner is a Government servant. As per rules, he is entitled to reimbursement of medical expenses incurred on himself and his family members. It is his case that on 26.5.2004 he got his wife admitted, in an emergent situation, in Batra Nursing Home & Heart Care Centre, Sonepat. After conducting necessary tests, it was found necessary to perform angioplasty upon his wife. The petitioner opted for a package, being offered by the above said institution. In fact angioplasty with stenting was done and petitioner's wife was discharged from hospital on 28.5.2004. Cost of the package, for three days, was Rs. 95,000/- including room rent and medicines. Thereafter the petitioner submitted his claim for reimbursement of the medical expenses. When it was not cleared, petitioner filed this writ petition. In response to the notice issued by this Court, reply has been filed by the respondents wherein it has been stated that it appears that the petitioner's wife had not gone for any angioplasty/stenting etc. rather it was C.W.P. No. 16970 of 2006 -2- a routine medical check up as she was discharged from the hospital within three days. Further that as she got treatment from a private hospital, the petitioner was not entitled to get the requisite benefit claimed by him. It was further said that the hospital was not in the approved list of the State of Haryana and further that the case of the petitioner's wife was not recommended by any civil hospital for emergency treatment as stated by the petitioner. It was stated that claim of the petitioner was not acceptable. After hearing counsel for the parties, we feel that stand taken by the respondent-State is totally unjustified. It is apparent from document Annexure P-1 that the petitioner's wife was admitted in the above said private hospital in an emergency condition. Certificate (Annexure P-1) reads thus:- “This is to certify that Mrs. Rajbala suffered from CAD, Ac Coronary Syndrome, CAG 99% LCS Stenosis & was admitted in this hospital on 26.5.2004 is an emergency situation. Her admission and treatment in this hospital was absolutely essential otherwise her disease could have been fatal.” Regarding treatment of the petitioner's wife following certificate (Annexure P-2) was given by the hospital referred to above:- “Diagnosis CAD AC Coronary Syndrome, CAG 90% LCX Stenosis PTCA/Stent to LCX performed. HISTORY 46 years female non hypertensive, non diabetic normolipidaemic non smoker sufered from recurred H/o pain chest radiating to both arm ass c ghabrahat & sweating for 4 days. Treated at Gohana with no response. O/E 110/70, C.W.P. No. 16970 of 2006 -3- 80/MM chest clear S1 S2 normally heard. ECG showed non specific ST T changes. After proper discussion c attendents. CAG performed by Dr. J.C. Mohan D.M. (Cardiology). It showed 99% mid LCX stenosis PTCA/Stent to LCX was performed. Post procedure stay was uneventful.” It is coming out from document Annexure P-3 that treatment was taken under a package. The detail of the expenses are given in certificate/receipt (Annexure P-3). Annexure P-4 is a copy of the receipt of payment of money. A further certificate has been issued stating that the petitioner's wife was treated in the hospital on account of emergency and she remained indoor patient from 26.5.2004 to 28.5.2004. It is apparent from the record that the case of the petitioner was referred for reimbursement of expenses by Principal of the School where he was working. The petitioner has also filed an affidavit (Annexure P-8) stating that he got his wife admitted on account of emergency, in the private nursing home, otherwise she would have died. In view of the facts mentioned above, we feel that merely because petitioner's wife has got treatment from a private nursing home, in an emergency situation, reimbursement of the medical expenses cannot be denied to him. This fact finds support from the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in Shakuntla versus State of Haryana, 2004(1) RSJ- 283. Same is the ratio of another judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in Chander Bhan versus State of Haryana and others 2004 (4) RSJ-66 wherein it was held that merely because a government employee has taken treatment from non approved hospital, in an emergency, benefit of reimbursement of the medical expenses cannot be denied to that official. From the documents on record, we are convinced C.W.P. No. 16970 of 2006 -4- that there was an emergency which compelled the petitioner to get his wife admitted in a private nursing home. As per admission made by the State Counsel, approved medical facility, to treat the ailment of the petitioner's wife, was not available in Sonepat. It was available at Rohtak or at Delhi in approved institutions. We feel that in view of nature of ailment of the petitioner's wife it was not possible for him to get her case recommended from a civil hospital and then get her treated at Rohtak or Delhi in some approved institution. In the facts mentioned above, we allow this writ petition and direct authorities concerned to clear medical expenses bill of the petitioner and reimburse the amount as per instructions within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (Jasbir Singh) Judge 22.1.2008 (Jaswant Singh) joshi/mk Judge