AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
T.H.B. Chalapathi, J.—This writ petition has been filed claiming reimbursement of the medical claim for the treatment of the petitioner''s husband.
The petitioner is an employee of Government of Haryana working as Translator in the Law and Legislative Department. Her husband is a practising lawyer of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. According to the petitioner, her husband developed chest pain in the month of December, 1993 and he underwent medical check up at Bhargawa Nursing Home, Sector-8, Chandigarh. He also took the T.M.O. Test at Bhargawa Nursing Home as there was strike in the Post Graduate Institute, Chandigarh at that time. As recommended the petitioner''s husband had undergone Theliam Test and (Angiography) at Escorts Heart and Research Institute, New Delhi as the facilities for these tests were not available at Chandigarh. According to the petitioner, she incurred an expenditure of Rs. 19,750/- towards medical charges for the Theliam and Angiography tests. She submitted the medical claim for reimbursement of the medical expenses of Rs. 19,750/-. The same was returned with an endorsement that the bill submitted for reimbursement is not covered under the Haryana Government instructions. The petitioner, therefore, filed this writ petition claiming reimbursement of the said amount in her name for the medical treatment of her husband.
The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the ''family'' includes the husband and, therefore, the petitioner is entitled to reimbursement of the medical expenses incurred for the treatment of her husband.
On 25th February, 1969, the Government of Haryana issued instructions in Memo. No. 1062-U.S.F.P.-Cell-69 which is to the following effect:-
"xx According to the Government instructions issued vide erstwhile Punjab Government letter No. 3601-4 HBI-65/14112, dated 6th May, 1965 a wife/son can only be'' member of the ''Family'' defined in the said letter, if she/he is residing with the Government servant concerned and is wholly dependent upon the Government servant, but in the case of a wife/son who is employed in a private institution or is earning her/his livelihood through some other sources, she/he cannot be covered under the term "wholly Dependent". As such Government servants are not entitled to claim reimbursement of medical expenses in respect of their wives/sons who are earning members.
Keeping the above in view, the State Government have decided that in future no reimbursement of medical expenses in such cases should be allowed to Government employees".
The above Government letter was again modified vide letter No. 4197-USFP-Cell-70/24708, dated 11th September, 1970. Paragraph 2 of the said letter reads as follows:-
" I may also add that the condition of dependency or wholly dependent both in the case of husband or the wife of the State Government employee has been dispensed with under the Punjab Medical Attendance Rules, 1940, and the instructions issued vide Haryana Govt. letter No. 1069-USFP-Cell-69, dated 25th February, 1969 may be treated to have been modified to this extent. Thus the State Government employee can claim, reimbursement of medical expenses irrespective of her source of income."
It is thus clear that the Government has itself dispensed with the clause of dependency of the spouses of the Government employees. Thus even though the husband of a Government employee is gainfully employed and not dependent on the wife, can claim reimbursement. It has not been brought to our notice that there has been any further clarification or amendment of the rules making dependency as one of the conditions for claiming reimbursement of the medical expenses. In view of this, we are of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to get reimbursement of the medical expenses incurred by her on the medical treatment of her husband. Though her husband cannot be said to be wholly dependent or partially on her, as her husband is a practising Advocate and having his own income but in view of the Government instructions, the petitioner is entitled to get the reimbursement of the medical expenses incurred by her for the treatment of her husband from the State. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is liable to be allowed.
In view of our foregoing discussion, the writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to reimburse the petitioner the expenses of Rs. 19,750/-which she incurred for medical treatment of her husband.
However; we make it clear that it will be open to the State Government to re-examine the matter for future cases and take, appropriate decision in regard to reimbursement of the medical expenses incurred for treatment of the spouses and the children of the Government employees even though they are not dependent either wholly or partially on the Government employee.