Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 2168 (PNJ)

Sushil Kumar Sharma v. Union Of India

2007-12-13

HEMANT GUPTA, MOHINDER PAL

body2007
Judgment Hemant Gupta, J. 1. The petitioner, an employee of respondent No. 3, a Cooperative Society, has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court to direct the respondents to grant medical reimbursement of the claim of the petitioner for treatment of his wife for breast cancer and striking down the Staff Service Rules dated 12.4.1999 vide which the claim of the petitioner for medical reimbursement has been declined. 2. The wife of the petitioner remained hospitalized from 8.6.2005 to 15.6.2005 as indoor patient for undergoing operation. The petitioners wife was undergone 8 Cycles of Chemotherapy to cure the disease subsequently. The petitioner incurred a sum of Rs. 1,06,462/- as the expenses for the period pertaining to 15.12.2004 to 18.5.2005 when the wife of the petitioner had taken treatment from the PGI at Chandigarh. 3. The claim of the petitioner for medical reimbursement was considered and a sum of Rs. 50,000/- was allowed in terms of the Staff Services Rules of the Cooperative Society. The petitioner challenged the restrictions of Rs. 50,000/- in the Staff Services Rules and sought medical reimbursement of the entire expenses. 4. In reply, it has been pointed out that initially in the year 1983 Rule was proposed to provide for reimbursement of the entire medical claim, but such clause was not approved by the Registrar, Cooperative Societies. It is further pointed out that at the time of treatment taken by the wife of the petitioner, the Rules framed on 25.7.2003 were applicable, wherein there was a cap of Rs. 50,000/- for medical reimbursement and in terms of such Rules, the medical reimbursement has been allowed to the petitioner. 5. The medical reimbursement is permissible in terms of the Rules applicable to the an employee. Without going into the question whether proposal for medical reimbursement of entire expenses was approved, we find that at the time when the petitioners wife undertook treatment, the Rules framed in the year 2003 were applicable which has the limited reimbursement upto Rs. 50,000/- only. Since the Rules applicable at the time of treatment of the wife of the petitioner had a limit of reimbursement upto Rs. 50,000/-, therefore, the petitioner cannot claim medical reimbursement of the entire expenses. In view of the above, we do not find any ground to interfere in the present writ petition in exercise of the writ jurisdiction of this Court. The present writ petition is dismissed. 50,000/-, therefore, the petitioner cannot claim medical reimbursement of the entire expenses. In view of the above, we do not find any ground to interfere in the present writ petition in exercise of the writ jurisdiction of this Court. The present writ petition is dismissed. Petition dismissed.