JUDGMENT Honble Mr. V.K. Bhatnagar Member (Adm.). 1. This original application has been filed by Smt. Leela Devi widow of Late Shri Roop Singh for full reimbursement of the cost of open heart surgery performed on her husband in Escort Hospital. Late Shri Roop Singh was serving as a Deputy Range forest Officer Sarahan in District Sirmaur. He became a heart patient in 1992. According to the pleadings, the treatment at various Hospitals including the Post Graduate Institution Chandigarh was of no help. Late Shri Roop Singh was referred Jo Escort Heart Institute Delhi by the Director of Health Services Himachal Pradesh vide Annexure-A/1 dated May 29, 1995. On the advise of Doctors at the Escort Institution, the applicant underwent open heart surgery and before that he was required to deposit a sum of Rs. 1,78,000/-. A request was made to the respondents to sanction an advance of Rs. 1,78,000/- but only a sum of Rs. 58,000/- was released as medical advance. Late Shri Roop singh paid the full amount to the hospital by arranging the remaining amount of Rs. 1,20,000/- from his. private sources. Late Shri Roop Singh remained in the hospital from May 9, 1996 to May 29, 1996 as per details attached with Annexure-A/5. The applicant has claimed that the total expenditure of Rs. 1,80,000/- was incurred on the surgery and they submitted a bill for reimbursement for a sum of Rs. 1,26,000/- to the respondents but the same was dis-allowed. Feeling aggrieved, the present original application has been filed with the request that the balance of amount of Rs. 1,26,000/- incurred on the surgery of the husband of the applicant may be ordered to be reimbursed to the applicant alongwith 18 percent interest. 2. The respondents have resisted the present original application. In their reply affidavit it has been admitted that a sum of Rs. 58,000/- was given to the husband of the applicant as medical advance for bye pass heart surgery in the Escort heart Institute New Delhi but have referred to the office memorandum dated August 25, 1994 issued by Under Secretary (Health) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh to all the Administrative Secretaries and Heads of Department fixing the charges for coronary bye pass heart surgery in Escort Heart Institute New Delhi, at Rs. 55,000/-. 55,000/-. On that ground it has been stated that the Government had already fixed the ceiling on medical charges on coronary bye pass surgery in Escort Heart Institute New Delhi and the balance amount as claimed for, was not admissible to the applicant. 3. The learned counsels for the parties have been heard and pleadings have been gone into. 4. During the arguments the learned counsel for the applicant referred to decision of this Tribunal in OA 484 of 1997 Surinder Bir Singh Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, decided on September 23, 1997. In that case also the applicant had undergone open heart bye pass surgery in the National Heart Institute New Delhi on which a total sum of Rs. 1,25,000/- was incurred. The respondents in that case did not agree to bear the entire cost of that surgery. He was paid only Rs. 65623/- and for the balance amount, the applicant had approached this Tribunal to issue suitable directions to the respondents. In that case reliance was placed on the following observations of the apex Court in case of State of Punjab and others versus Mohinder Singh Chawla and others. (1997) 2 S.C.C. 83: "It is now settled law that right to health is integral to the right to life. Government has a constitutional obligation to provide health facilities. If the Government servant has suffered an ailment which requires treatment at a specialized approved hospital and on reference where at the government servant had undergone such treatment therein, it is but the duty of the State to bear the expenditure incurred by the government servant. Expenditure, thus, incurred requires to be reimbursed by the state to the employee." 5. On that basis, directions were issued to pay Rs. 60517/-being the balance of the actual expenditure incurred by the applicant. Further an interest at the rate of 12 percent per annum was also allowed. 6. The facts of the present original application are quite similar and there is no ground to take a different view. However, the amount of Rs. 1,26,000/- prayed to be reimbursed has not been correctly worked out. The learned counsel of the applicant after re-checking, has given the following details: (i) Claim as per Annexure-A/5 1,64,000.00 (ii) Clain on account of angiography 14,000.00 (iii) Claim for medicines 2,250.00 Total = 1,80,250.45 Amount released as advance 58,000.00 Balance amount to be re-imbursed 1,22,250.45 7. 1,26,000/- prayed to be reimbursed has not been correctly worked out. The learned counsel of the applicant after re-checking, has given the following details: (i) Claim as per Annexure-A/5 1,64,000.00 (ii) Clain on account of angiography 14,000.00 (iii) Claim for medicines 2,250.00 Total = 1,80,250.45 Amount released as advance 58,000.00 Balance amount to be re-imbursed 1,22,250.45 7. In view of the above discussion the original application is accepted. The applicant will submit her full claim to the respondent within 15 days where after the respondents will re-imburse the same in terms of the observations made in the preceding paragraph within a period of two month from today, along with interest @ 12%.