Letters Patent Appeal No.725 OF 2007 ------ Against the order dated 20.7.2007 passed in C.W.J.C. No.13331 of 2004 by the learned Single Judge. -------- 1.The State Bank of India. 2. The State Bank of India through its General Manager, State Bank of India, Zonal Office, Muzaffarpur. 3. The Deputy General Manager, State Bank of India, Zonal Office, Muzaffarpur. 4. The Chief Manager (D & P.B. Section), State Bank of India, Zonal Office, Muzaffarpur. All the aforesaid being the Officers of the State Bank of India in their official capacity are being represented through Kamla Kant Tiwari, s/o late Ras Bihari Tiwari, Chief Manager (Office Administration) S.B.I. Zonal Office, Club Road, P.S. & P.O. Mithanpura, Muzaffarpur, District Muzaffarpur under Regulation 77 read with Regulation 76 of the State Bank of India General Regulation, 1955. ------ Appellants/Respondents. Versus Pawan Kumar Mishra,S/O late Kusheshwar Mishra, resident of Mo.Mishra Tola,P.S.;Darbhanga,Town & District-Darbhanga ----- Petitioner/Respondent. ------- For the Appellants: Mr. Chittaranjan Sinha, Sr. Advocate. Mr. S.D.Sanjay & Mr. Akash Chaturvedi. For the Respondent : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Mishra. ------- P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR KUMAR KATRIAR THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL S.K. Katriar, J. The State Bank of India has preferred this appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of High Court of Judicature at Patna, and is aggrieved by the order dated 20.7.2007, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 13331 of 2004 (Pawan Kumar Mishra Vs.The State Bank of India &.ors), whereby the Bank has been directed to make full reimbursement of the medical bills presented by the respondent herein. We shall go by the 2 description of the parties occurring in the present proceedings. 2. A brief statement of facts essential for the disposal of the present appeal may be indicated. The respondent is an employee of the appellants Bank. He was at the relevant point of time posted as Deputy Manager D & PB section, Zonal Office of the State Bank of India, at Muzaffarpur. He was admitted in Apollo Hospital, where he is undergoing treatment for obstruction in common bile duct. He was admitted in the Hospital on 24.3.2003, and was discharged on 17.5.2003, after successful treatment. He presented bill of Rs. 2,27,132.00/- for reimbursement which included charges for medical treatment as well as room rent. In view of Rule 24(2) of the State Bank of India Officers (Terms and Conditions of Services) Rules (hereinafter referred to as the Rules), full reimbursement was made to the respondent for the medical treatment. However, claim of reimbursement for the room/bed was truncated and paid as per the graded chart prepared by the Bank, leading to the present C.W.J.C. No.13331 of 2004. The same has been allowed by the learned Single Judge on the ground that such classification with respect to payment of room rent/bed charges is impermissible in view of the provisions of 3 Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. He has relied on the judgment dated 20.6.2001, passed by another learned Single Judge of this Court in C.W.J.C. No.256 of 2000, whereby Rule 26(6) of the Rules has been struck down as violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Consequently, learned Single Judge in the present case has directed for full reimbursement of the medical bill. 3. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. We are relieved of an exhaustive discussion in the present case for the reason that the said judgment in C.W. J.C. No.256 of 2000, was the subject matter of L.P.A. No. 668 of 2001. By our judgment of 19.5.2010, we have disagreed with view taken by the learned writ Court and have upheld the validity of rule 26(6) of the Rules. We have held that such reasonable classification is based on a rational classification which has a reasonable differentia with the object sought to be achieved. It is based on objective considerations of the standing of the employees in the Bank, uniformity governing all it seeks to cover. We have, therefore, allowed L.P.A. No.668 of 2001. In view of the reasons assigned in our judgment dated 19.5.2010, passed in L.P.A. No.668 of 2001, we allow the present 4 appeal also. We hold that the Bank is justified in declining to make payment of the bill for the full payment, and is right in making payment of the room/bed charges as per the graded chart. 4. In the result, we allow this appeal, and respectfully express our disagreement with the judgment dated 20.7.2007 of the learned writ Court, passed in C.W.J.C. No. 13331 of 2004. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. (S.K. Katriar, J.) Kishore K. Mandal, J.I agree. (Kishore K. Mandal, J.) High Court Patna, Dated 19th May, 2010. Vinay/N.A.F.R.