BALI, J. - (1.) ANIL Kumar Surolia, a judicial officer presently posted as Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track, Jhunjhunu through present writ filed by him under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks reimbursement with regard to the treatment that he had to go through in emergent circumstances.
(2.) THE cause of the petitioner has been opposed on the preliminary objections that the petitioner has approached this Court with inordinate delay and that no statutory or fundamental right of the petitioner has been infringed and therefore, writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not competent. On merits, the petitioner was denied the relief on the ground that it was not a case of undergoing emergent treatment and that the hospital from where the petitioner got treatment was not in the list of hospitals approved by the Government. The bare minimum facts that need a necessary mention reveal that the petitioner was referred on 13. 7. 2000 to the SMS Hospital, Jaipur when he suffered heart attack at Deedwana. He was admitted in I. C. U. and was discharged on 5. 8. 2000. The petitioner had to go to Ahmedabad to meet his brother Anupam Surolia in August 2000 where he suffered another heart attack and was taken to Rajasthan Hospital at Ahmedabad where due to non- availability of heart surgeon, he was taken to Krishna Heart Institute where his Angiography and Angioplasty was done. Krishna Heart Institute charged a sum of Rs. 78,000/- towards Angiography and Angioplasty and other medical expenses. The petitioner submitted his representation for reimbursement of his mediclaim which was referred to the Registrar General of this Court by the Distt. Judge on 28. 10. 2000. Registrar General vide letter dated 23. 11. 2000 referred the case of the petitioner to the Secretary to Govt. Law and Legal Affairs. Principal, SMS Medical College however refused to sanction reimbursement of mediclaim of the petitioner on 11. 12. 2000. Constrained, the petitioner moved yet another representation to the Principal, SMS Medical College on 1. 2. 2001. His case was referred to the Registrar General of this Court who once again referred the case of the petitioner to the Secretary to Govt. Law and Legal Affairs on 1. 2. 2001. Principal, SMS Medical College once again refused to grant sanction for reimbursement of mediclaim on the ground that Krishna Heart Institute was not an approved institute of the Government of Rajasthan. Dy. Secretary to Govt. Law Department also refused the mediclaim of the petitioner on the ground that he was not referred out of the State for treatment and Krishna Heart Institute was not approved hospital under the Rajasthan Civil Service (Medical Attendant) Rules. this order was passed on 9. 4. 2001. Before invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the desired relief, the petitioner issued a notice for demand of justice on 2. 7. 2003 which was obviously not responded to by the respondents. That the petitioner had visited his brother in the State of Gujarat on the dates mentioned by him, is not is dispute. He suffered heart attack and was indeed treated at Krishna Heart Institute has also not been denied. The fact that the petitioner had suffered heart attack and required immediate treatment is thus not disputed, even though it is mentioned that treatment that the petitioner ultimately got was also available in SMS Hospital at Jaipur or for that matter, other approved hospitals in the State of Rajasthan. In the factual background as detailed above, we are of the firm view that even if the required treatment was available in SMS Hospital at Jaipur or other approved hospitals in the State of Rajasthan, the petitioner was indeed entitled to medical reimbursement if he had got the treatment elsewhere necessitated on account of circumstances beyond his control. Self preservance is the first instinct in every human being. Person having suffered heart attack is not expected to await treatment at a far off distance as time is the essence in saving valuable life in such matters. There is every risk of a person breathing his last if he has to await treatment of heart attack. In the circumstances, even if such medical treatment as obtained by a government employee be available in the State itself, he shall be still entitled to medical reimbursement for the treatment obtained elsewhere if the same is necessitated on account of circumstances beyond his control. In emergent situation thus it is not incumbent for a patient to obtain medical treatment only in approved hospitals of the Government. We would have discussed the matter in further details as per provisions of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Medical Attendant) Rules but it is conceded during the course of arguments that if the petitioner was to obtain medical treatment at SMS Hospital at Jaipur or other government approved hospitals in the State of Rajasthan, he would have been paid the same amount for the treatment he ultimately got from Krishna Heart Institute. If that be a fact, and which as mentioned above, is conceded, we are of the view that the stand taken by the State Government is obdurate and wholly uncalled for. We could imagine if perhaps the petitioner had spent far more and was claiming the same while getting treatment in a non- approved hospital. Government in any case had to pay the same amount spent by the petitioner at Krishna Heart Institute even if the petitioner was to get treatment in SMS Hospital or other approved hospital in the State of Rajasthan. This Court cannot but depricate the attitude of the Government in rejecting justified claims in teeth of the recommendations made by this Court. Registrar General of this Court indeed supported the cause of the petitioner but the favourable recommendations made by this Court have been turned down on wholly untenable grounds.
(3.) BEFORE we may part with this order, we would like to mention that the government cannot insist upon an employee to get himself treated at recognised government institution. All that the government in these circumstances can do is to reimburse the concerned employee at the rates that may be applicable in the recognised government institutions. Reference in this connection may be made to the judgments of the Supreme Court in Surjit Singh vs. State of Punjab and Others (1) and State of Punjab and Others vs. Mohan Lal Jindal The preliminary objections raised by the State as have been noted above need to be straightaway rejected. Delay in this case has actually been caused by the State in refusing a justified claim despite repeated recommendations made by this Court. In so far as right of petitioner for reimbursement of mediclaim is concerned, it could not be disputed during the course of arguments that a government employee is entitled to the same. Simple because the right of a government employee for medical reimbursement may not be s fundamental right it cannot be said that the writ petition would not be competent. Once such a right is recognised, denial thereof would certainly entitle a citizen to invoke jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In view of the discussions made above, this writ petition is allowed and a direction is issued to the respondent State to make payment to the petitioner with regard to medical treatment obtained by him at Krishna Heart Institute, Ahemdabad. In as much as the petitioner has been claiming for the desired relief for last about five years, further direction is issued to the State to make the payment within fifteen days from the date of receipt of copy of this order which be supplied to the learned Advocate General under the signatures of the Court Master. . ;