Shri Shyam Deo Singh vs State of Bihar

Mr. Mihir Kumar Jha, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties. No one appears for the State.

The relevant part of the prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:-

"1. �.to quash the Memo No. 2186/Nawada dated 10.8.2011, whereby and where under, some irrevalants questions, have been asked by the Civil Surgeon, Cum Chief Medical Officer, Nawada from the petitioner, after he approached him, for reimbursement of the amount, spent in his kidney transplantation. "

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that much water has flown after the impugned order was passed on 10.8.2011 by the Civil Surgeon cum Chief Medical Officer, Nawada, inasmuch as, the government itself by an order dated 25.2.2014 given approval for the treatment of the petitioner in PGIMER Chandigarh. In this regard, he has produced the copy of the letter dated 25.2.2014, which reads as follows:-

"i=kad 14@,e 2&69@10

fcgkj ljdkj

LokLF; foHkkx

izs"kd]

;''kLifr feJ]

ljdkj ds mi lfpoA

lsok esa]

egkys[kkdkj] fcgkj]

ohjpUn iVsy iFk] iVukA

iVuk] fnukad--------------

fo"k;%& Jh '';kenso flag] iwoZ fyfid] izkFkfed LokLF; dsUnz] okjlyhxat uoknk ds fnukad 06-03-2010 ls 23-03-2010 rd ih0th0vkbZ0 ,e0bZ0vkj0] p.Mhx<+ esa xqnkZ jksx dh djkbZ xbZ fpfdRlk dh dk;ksZijkUr Lohd`frA

egk''k;]

funs''kkuqlkj eq>s dguk gS fd Jh '';kenso flag] iwoZ fyfid] izkFkfed LokLF; dsUnz] okjlyhxat uoknk tks xqnkZ jksx ls ihfM+r gSa] dks ljdkj us ck/;dkkjh ,oa fo''ks"k ifjfLFkfr esa fnukad 06-03-2010 ls 23-03-2010 rd ih0th0vkbZ0 ,e0bZ0vkj] p.Mhx<+ vLirky esa djkbZ xbZ fpfdRlk dh dk;ksZijkUr Lohd`fr nh gSA

2- fpfdRlksijkUr lacaf/kr fpfdRlk laLFkku ds izeq[k inkf/kdkjh ds izfrgLrk{kfjr gksus ds ckn vuqekU; jkf''k dh izfriwfrZ dh tk;sxhA

3- fcuk iwokZuqefr djk;h xbZ fpfdRlk ds fy, ;k=k O;; ns; ugha gksxkA

4- blesa iz/kku lfpo] LokLF; foHkkx fcgkj] iVuk dk vuqeksnu izkIr gSA

fo''oklHkktu

g0@&

;''kLifr feJ

ljdkj ds mi lfpoA

Kkikad 229@14@Lok0 iVuk] fnukad 25-02-2014

From reading of the writ application as also the counter affidavit, it would appear that the Civil Surgeon of Nawada district had certain reservation with regard to passing the medical bill of the petitioner but, then, if the government''s decision dated 25.2.2014 has already been taken, this Court does not find any reason for anyone including the Civil Surgeon, Nawada to delay in making payment of the admissible amount, which has become payable to the petitioner in view of the latest letter dated 25.2.2014. It may be noted that even though the counter affidavit has been filed in this case on 7.3.2014, there is no mention of the said government decision dated 25.2.2014, though a copy of the same was shown to have been sent both to the Civil Surgeon, Nawada as also to the petitioner.

In view of the above, this Court would direct the respondents to ensure that whatever medical bill now is payable to the petitioner on the ground of the aforementioned government decision dated 25.2.2014, must be paid to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

With the aforementioned observations and direction, this application is disposed of.