State of Rajasthan And Ors vs Sampat Devi Bhardwaj And Ors

This intra-court appeal is directed against the order dated 16.11.2018 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court, whereby writ petition preferred by the first respondent/writ-petitioner, Smt. Sampat Devi Bhardwaj, claiming reimbursement of medical expenses incurred by her for treatment, has been allowed and it is ordered that the writ-petitioner shall be entitled to reimbursement of the medical expenses, which at the relevant time were prevailing in the All India Institute of Medical Sciences or Government Hospital, whichever is on higher side. It is further directed that medical reimbursement in terms of the order passed shall be remitted to the employee within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order, failing which the employee shall be entitled to get interest @ 9% per annum.

The appeal is reported to be barred by limitation for 308 days. It is accompanied by an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The explanation set out in the application for inordinate delay in filing the appeal is not plausible and acceptable, therefore, the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act deserves to be dismissed and consequently, the appeal deserves to be dismissed as barred by limitation. However, in the interest of justice, we have examined the matter on merits.

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the writ-petitioner had submitted the medical claim after lapse of about three years and, therefore, by virtue of Clause 26 of the Rajasthan State Pensioners' Medical Concession Scheme, 2009, which provides that claim shall be presented within two years from the date of completion of treatment, the respondent is not entitled for reimbursement.

It is noticed that the respondent/writ-petitioner retired from the post of Librarian of secondary school in the Department of Education after rendering 32 years of service on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.09.2003 and thus, at the relevant time, she was more than 65 years of age and now, she is 81 years of age. It was categorically pleaded on behalf of respondent/writpetitioner that her case for replacement of the left knee was ripe and she was suffering from inbearable pain and, therefore, knee replacement was required urgently, but surgery could not be undertaken in the Government Hospital, Jodhpur as on 22.12.2011, the employees of Government Hospital, Jodhpur had proceeded on the strike.

The factum of respondent undergoing the surgery and incurring expenditure is not in dispute. Merely because, the claim was not submitted within three years, it would not be appropriate to deny the medical reimbursement to an old aged retired Government employee.

In this view of matter, we are not inclined to interfere with the discretion exercised by the learned Single Judge under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

No case for interference by us in the intra-court appeal jurisdiction is made out.

Consequently, the appeal is dismissed.