Research › Browse › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

1998 DIGILAW 910 (PAT)

Vandana Kumari v. State of Bihar

1998-12-24

AFTAB ALAM

body1998
ORDER : Although this case is listed today for ORDER :s on I.A, after hearing counsel for the parties I find that the main writ petition itself may be disposed of at this stage. 2. The petitioner is the daughter of one Mahesh Prasad Mishra who is in Government service. It is an admitted position that she is suffering from some life threatening disease for which she is undergoing treatment at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Delhi as per the recommendation of the Medical Board constituted by the State Government. The treatment involves considerable expense and it is beyond the means of her father to bear the expenses. In the past, therefore, she approached this Court for a direction to the State Government to sanction her the necessary expenses in terms of rule 26 of the Bihar Medical Attendance Rules, 1992. Rule 26 is special provision empowering the Government to grant concessions relating to medical attendance or treatment, not authorised by the Rules. 3. When the petitioner came to this court for the first time in CWJC No. 7357/1993, she was directed by ORDER :dated 27.1.1994 to. approach the Secretary, Department of Health & Family Planning who was asked to look into her grievance and pass an appropriate ORDER :in accordance with law. On that occasion the Government sanctioned the amount for the purchase of medicine, as prescribed by the doctors for one year. 4. The treatment had to continue beyond one year and this time the Government refused to sanction the necessary expenses. The petitioner then came to this Court in CWJC No. 1315/1996 assailing the Government's refusal to sanction the necessary amount for further purchase of the medicine. That writ petition was disposed of by ORDER :, dated 26.2.1996. By that ORDER :, this court set aside the Government's ORDER :as being passed on irrelevant considerations and remitted the petitioner's case for a fresh consideration. Thereafter, on 2.8.1996 the Government gave its sanction to meet the expenses of the petitioner's medicines for a further period of two years. 5. The two years period is over but the petitioner requires further treatment. This is evident from a certificate dated February, 5, 1998 (Annexure II) issued by Dr. P.S.N. Menon, Addl. Professor, Division of Pediatric Endocrinology. Thereafter, on 2.8.1996 the Government gave its sanction to meet the expenses of the petitioner's medicines for a further period of two years. 5. The two years period is over but the petitioner requires further treatment. This is evident from a certificate dated February, 5, 1998 (Annexure II) issued by Dr. P.S.N. Menon, Addl. Professor, Division of Pediatric Endocrinology. In this certificate after making a review of the petitioner's prognosis the doctor has observed as follows : "The review suggests that the child is recovering well and she urgently requires continuous treatment till October 1999 for complete recovery from the disease." 6. It is under these circumstances that the petitioner is once again before this court seeking a direction to the Government to sanction the expenses of her treatment upto October, 1999. 7. Mr. Vikash Jain, G.P. VI invited my attention to a passage from the ORDER :dated 26.2.1996 by which the 2nd writ petition filed by the petitioner was disposed of. That ORDER :records an undertaking given by the petitioner's counsel that the petitioner would not make any further prayer for medical allowance in future. Mr.Jain was quite justified in drawing my attention to the statement made by the petitioner's counsel earlier before this court but in the facts and circumstances of the case I am not inclined to hold any undertaking earlier given by the petitioner's counsel against her. In a matter of life and death and where the petitioner's treatment, at the expense of the State, is showing good prognosis and the specialist is satisfied that continuous treatment till October, 1999 would result in her complete recovery, I feel revolted at the idea that the undertaking given by her earlier should be used against her and she be thrown in the jaws of death. I think that in case the petitioner survived, of which there is now every hope, it would be a matter of pride for the State Government that its help saved the life of the child of one of its employees. Further, in case medical help is stopped to the child at this stage, the expenses earlier incurred by the State are also likely to go waste. 8. Having thus heard counsel for the parties and having perused the writ petition, this writ petition is disposed of in the same terms as the petitioner's earlier case being CWJC No. 7357/1993. Further, in case medical help is stopped to the child at this stage, the expenses earlier incurred by the State are also likely to go waste. 8. Having thus heard counsel for the parties and having perused the writ petition, this writ petition is disposed of in the same terms as the petitioner's earlier case being CWJC No. 7357/1993. The petitioner is directed to approach the Secretary, Department of Health & Family Planning who would look into all the material facts and circumstances, and specially the certificate dated February 6, 1998 issued by Dr. P.S.N. Menon and would consider the desirability to grant sanction for further purchase of her medicines till October, 1999. I feel certain that the Secretary would consider the petitioner's request sympathetically and without taking into consideration any earlier undertaking given on her behalf. A final ORDER :should be issued without any undue delay and preferably within ten days from the date of filing of the representation. 9. This writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions.