- (1.) By way of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has implored to quash and set aside the order dated 10th February, 2011, whereby the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, allowed the Original Application filed by the applicant-respondent no.2 Shambhu Prakash Sharma and directed the non-applicant-petitioner to calculate the admissible amount of reimbursement and reimburse the same to the applicant-respondent no.2, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the order.
(2.) The facts, leading to the instant writ petition, succinctly run as under:- That the applicant-respondent no.2 Shambhu Prakash Sharma was initially appointed as Up-Vaidya in the Ayurveda Department of Government of Rajasthan on 18th July, 1956. On the establishment of National Institute of Ayurveda (hereinafter referred in short as 'Institute'), the services of the applicant-respondent no.2 were permanently transferred and he was absorbed as UDC with the above Institute w.e.f. 1st January, 1979. After attaining the age of superannuation, he retired from the services on 31st March, 1994, from the post of Office Assistant. It is also revealed that the wife of applicant-respondent no.2 Smt. Shakuntala Devi Sharma fell ill and underwent an open heart surgery in Tongiya Heart & General Hospital, Jaipur, in an emergent situation and remained hospitalized w.e.f. 11th December, 2007 to 31st December, 2007. The applicant-respondent no.2, as a pensioner, submitted a medical bill amounting to Rs. 2,24,487/- for reimbursement to the Institute on 19th March, 2008 along with the application in a prescribed format with the details of expenditure and the medical bills. The applicant-respondent no.2 was not given any response by the Institute. Thereafter, he made his personal appearance to the concerned Authority and beseeched to reimburse medical bills of Rs. 2,24,487/-, but he was orally informed that the pensioners of the Institute were not entitled for any medical care or reimbursement. The applicant-respondent no.2 quoted an example of one late Shri L.N. Sharma, Ex-Director of the Institute, who was reimbursed the medical bills incurred by him after his retirement by the petitioner-Institute, but the applicant-respondent no.2 was not given any heed to it. Aggrieved with the conduct of the concerned Authority of the Institute, he preferred a writ petition in the High Court, which was transferred to the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, for adjudication. Dissatisfied with the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, the petitioner-Institute has invoked the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution by way of filing the instant writ petition.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner canvassed that agreement, having taken place between the Government of Rajasthan, Central Government and the National Institute of Ayurveda, was not applicable to the case of the applicant-respondent no.2, as he was absorbed in the services of Institute on 1st January, 1979. Apart this, there was no provision in the said agreement regarding medical facilities after retirement. Learned counsel further canvassed that the services of the employees of the Institute were governed by the Service Rules and the Bye-laws and where the services and bye-laws were silent, the rules of Government of India were applicable mutatis mutandis. Therefore, neither terms of agreement were applicable to the applicant-respondent no.2 nor the existing rules permitted the medical bills to be reimbursed to the pensioner respondent no.2. The Central Administrative Tribunal, relying upon the judgment of Gujarat High Court has allowed the applicant-respondent no.2's application and directed the petitioner Institute to reimburse the admissible amount of medical bills, within the stipulated period, whereas the rules and bye-laws do not allow the same. Learned counsel further canvassed so far as the payment made to late Shri L.N. Sharma, Ex-Director of the Institute is concerned, it was in exceptional circumstances, as a special case and while allowing the reimbursement to late Shri L.N. Sharma, it was made clear by the governing body specifically in the minutes that it would not be a precedent in future. The Central Administrative Tribunal, did not attend these peculiar facts and exceptional circumstances and sans assigning any cogent reason, arbitrarily allowed the respondent no.2's application and further allowed the reimbursement of the medical bills to the applicant-respondent no.2, contrary to the rules. Hence, the impugned order, being bad in law, deserves to be set aside.;