AJAY RASTOGI, J. - (1.) AT joint request, matter is finally heard at admission stage. While working as Gram Sevak/Ex Officio Secretary in Panchayat Samiti, Piprali (Sikar), petitioner suffered with a sever a headache in May, 2006 and initially consulted a local doctor at Sikar and after some preliminary diagnosis, doctor at Sikar advised him to consult an expert doctor at Jaipur. Ultimately, on 27.6.2006, petitioner consulted Dr. M.S. Punia, Associate Professor, Neurosurgery (Unit -1) SMS Hospital, who advised for MRI Brain -on its medical test, petitioner was advised to undergo surgical operation forthwith as he was suffering from brain tumour. As alleged, since there was long queue at SMS Hospital for such surgical operation of patients and in view of emergent situation being brain tumour, petitioner was able to take decision and being dependent upon family members at that point of time, they decided to get him surgically operated through Dr. S.R. Dharkar in S.K. Soni Hospital Jaipur where he was admitted as indoor patient and got operated for brain tumour on 10.7.2006 and after post operation care, was discharged on 20.7.2006 as is evident from discharge summary certificate (Schedule -B) of S.K. Soni Hospital and for his medical treatment, he spent about Rs. 1.30 lacs medical hills whereof were furnished with respondent No. 2 who forwarded the same vide letter dated 29.1.2007 to respondent No. 1 but was finally rejected vide order dated 20.6.2007 (Annexure 4) holding that since he go! surgically operated at a hospital not duly recognised by Government, his hills are not reimbursable under Rajasthan Civil Services (Medical Attendance) Rules, 1970 ('Rules, 1970').
(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioner submits that there was an emergency after undergoing his MR. brain test as he was diagnosed suffering front brain tumour, for which Dr. S.R. Dharkar is an eminent Specialist for such surgical operation attached to S.K. Soni Hospital, and there was long queue in SMS Hospital, his family members decided to gel him admitted in S.K. Soni Hospital Jaipur where he got surgically operated of the brain tumour as is evident from discharge summary (Schedule -B) incurring expenses as per medical bills submitted to respondents; as such in light of Rule 12 of Rules, 1970, his medical bills are required to be reimbursed in his favour and letter of rejection in the facts of the case deserves to be set aside. In their reply respondents raised preliminary objection that for claim of medical reimbursement, remedy is available to the petitioner under Rajasthan Civil Services (Services Matters Appellate Tribunals) Act, 1976 ('Act, 1976'). As regards merits, respondents inter alia averred that for such treatments available in State Government hospitals, one is entitled to gel medical bills reimbursed but for such treatments not available in Government Hospitals of the State, one can proceed for treatments outside State, after taking prior permission from competent authority under Rule 7 of Rules, 1970 and as regards treatment undertaken by petitioner from S.K. Soni Hospital (private), Jaipur, Respondents averred that since such treatment at private Hospital, is not covered under Scheme of Rules 1970, his medical bills are not reimbursable as per Rule 2(viii) of Rules, 1970 and thus his claim has rightly been rejected vide order impugned.
(3.) I have considered contentions of both the parties and with their assistance, examined material on record. So far as preliminary objection that reimbursement of medical bills rejected vide order impugned can be raised by way of appeal be tore the Tribunal is concerned, since reply on merits about claim of petitioner for reimbursement of medical bills has been filed by respondents and matter has also been heard in detail, hence without expressing any opinion on the issue of availability of remedy of appeal on the premise of being covered under 'service matters' as referred to in Section 2(f) of the Act, 1976, is left open for consideration in other appropriate proceedings however, this Court considers it proper to decide the claim of petitioner for reimbursement of medical bills on merits.;