Vineet Kothari - (1.) THE present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers: It is, therefore, prayed: i) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may be directed to release the remaining amount of actual expenditure incurred by him in the treatment taken at Yash Aman Hospital, Nagaur Road, Jodhpur along with interest @ 18% per annum from the date the same had become due till the date of payment.
(2.) THE petitioner, an employee of the High Court who retired from the services on 31.10.2005, unfortunately suffered from Cancer (RLGVS) and had to undergo surgery at private hospital, namely, Yash Aman Hospital, Nagaur Road, Jodhpur after local treatment by the Government Hospital, Dr. S.N. Medical College, Jodhpur. The medical expenses for the said medical treatment came to Rs. 1,12,551/ -. Upon the claim being made for the reimbursement, the respondent - -State however reimbursed only a sum of Rs. 22,000/ - against the said sum of Rs. 1,12,551/ - and therefore, for the balance amount, the present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner in this court on 9.11.2013. A reply to the writ petition has been fled by the respondent - -Pension Department and vide Annex. R/1, document produced by the State, the respondent - -State has admitted that vide order Annex. R2/1 dtd. 21.5.2009, the State has agreed to reimbursement of medical expenses, even if the pensioner takes treatment in a private or charitable hospital. This order was made effective from 16.9.2008. The petitioner in the present case took the treatment in the year 2012. Therefore, admittedly, the said Rule would govern the case of the present petitioner. However, the respondents in their reply have failed to give any reason for making reimbursement of the expenses only to the extent of Rs. 22,000/ - and even though Circulars Annex. R/2 and Annex. R/3 have been produced, the reasons and details of said part payment of Rs. 22000/ - only made have not been given and even though the actual expenses incurred as claimed by the petitioner, the details of which are given in Annex. 5 of the writ petition, have not been disputed by the respondent - Pension Department.
(3.) IN view of this, the writ petition filed by the petitioner deserves to be allowed and the petitioner found entitled to the reinstatement of the balance amount also.;