High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/8453/2018disposed off

S. Babu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2019-01-03Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8453 of 2018 S. Babu S/o Late S. Sanku Shankran, Aged About 67 Years Retired Deputy Drug Controller Raipur, R/o MIG-387, Padmanabhpur, District Durg Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Public Health Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Director, Directorate Of Health Services And Family Welfare, State Of Chhattisgarh, Indrawati Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ----Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Uttam Pandey, Advocate For State :

Mr. Saleem Kazi, Dy. A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 03/01/2019

1. The relief sought for by the petitioner in the present writ petition is for a direction to the respondents to release the medical expenditure, which the petitioner has made towards the treatment of petitioner himself as well as his wife.

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that so far as the treatment of the petitioner is concerned, a bill to the extent of Rs.81,465/- is yet to be reimbursed and so far as the treatment of his wife is concerned. The petitioner has spent an amount of Rs.3,30,945/- and the bills as per the rules have been raised for reimbursement, but till date neither the reimbursement has been made to the petitioner, nor have the respondents decided the representation, which they have repeatedly made.

3. Given the limited issue that has been raised in the present writ

petition and the fact that the claim of the petitioner has till date not been rejected, let the respondent No.2 take a decision in respect of the claim of the petitioner. In case, if the petitioner is entitled for reimbursement of the said amount as per the rules, the same should be released at the earliest preferably within a period of 60 days from today. In case, if the petitioner as per the rules is not entitled for, then a speaking order as to why he is not entitled for, should be intimated to the petitioner.

4. With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed off.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved