Binda Devi vs Ranchi Regional Development Authority

Dr. S.N. Pathak, J.—Heard the parties.

Mr. Sunil Kumar Sinha, learned counsel appears on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Prashant Kumar Singh, learned counsel appears on behalf of respondent nos.13 and Mr. Rajesh Kumar makes his appearance on behalf of the RIMS.

The short facts of the case is that the petitioner's husband died in harness on 08.12.2013, who was working on Class IV post in the office of Ranchi Regional Development Authority, Ranchi. Petitioner's husband was seriously ill during service period and was admitted for treatment in Nagarmal Seva Sadan, Ranchi where his health condition deteriorated and on the medical advise of Nagarmal Seva Sadan, Ranchi, husband of the petitioner was taken to Christian Medical College, Vellore on 05.08.2013 where he had undergone Interline Surgery and remained there upto 10.09.2013 and was discharged on 11.09.2013 with an advise for further checkup within six months. After discharging from CMC, Vellore, his condition was stable and suddenly he became serious therefore he was again taken to Christian Medical College and Hospital, Vellore (Tamil Nadu) on 04.12.2013 and admitted on 06.12.2013 and he died on 08.12.2013. After the death of her husband she submitted the medical bills for reimbursement to the Vice-Chairman R.R.D.A on 10.02.2014.

Mr. Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the death of her husband, petitioner made representation to the respondents-RRDA for appointment of her son namely Santosh Kumar on Class-III post on compassionate ground on 29.01.2014 stating therein that her husband was only bread earner in her family, who died leaving behind her and his widow mother and two daughters and as such appointment should be given to her son by way of compensation. Mr. Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that she also made representation for reimbursement of medical bills incurred due to admission of her husband in Vellore and the expenses incurred by way of treatment in the said hospital. Mr. Sinha fairly submits that son of the petitioner has already been appointed on compassionate ground and at this stage her claim is regarding reimbursement of medical bills. In course of argument, learned counsel Mr. Sunil Kumar Sinha placed reliance on reported judgment of this Court in the case of Smt. Saroj Sinha v. State of Jharkhand and Ors; 2016 (3) JBCJ 479 (HC).

Learned counsel for the respondent-RRDA contended that the petitioner has already been appointed on compassionate ground and regarding reimbursement of medical bill, if the petitioner makes a fresh representation, the respondent will consider the payment of all the medical bills and reasoned order will be passed regarding payment of bills.

Learned counsel for the petitioner in reply to the contention of the respondent-RRDA submits that the medical bills have already been recommended by the competent authority and sent for approval but till date no order has been passed regarding the payment of medical bills.

Be that as it may, going through the rival submissions of the parties, I am of the considered view that as the husband of the petitioner died and the widow has knocked the door of this Court with a prayer of reimbursement of medical bills incurred due to admission of her husband in Vellore and the expenses incurred by way of treatment in the said hospital, respondents are directed to look into the matter and if after proper verification, the bills are found to be genuine, the entire amount incurred by way of expenses in treatment be paid immediately forthwith preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition is allowed.