K V K MOORTHY Vs. FACT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is aggrieved since the full eligible benefits under Ext.P1 medical reimbursement scheme have not been disbursed to the petitioner. According to the first respondent, the petitioner is not entitled to any benefit in respect of the treatment of his wife for two reasons : (1) the petitioner had not disclosed the fact that the wife of the petitioner was employed in the Telecom department. (2) In any case no additional contribution was paid at the relevant time. It is seen that the petitioner had approached this court earlier leading to Ext.P3 judgment in OP.No.15937/1995 wherein this court directed consideration of the representation of the petitioner sympathetically.

(2.) ACCORDING to the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent, though the petitioner is not legally entitled to get any benefit, in view of the observations contained in Ext.P3 judgment, the case was considered sympathetically and the petitioner was paid Rs.50000/- of the eligible reimbursement as a special case. But it is seen that the additional contribution was deducted from the said Rs.50,000/. ACCORDING to the petitioner, having deducted the full additional contribution, there is no justification in denying the reimbursement. It is fairly stated in the impugned order as well as the counter affidavit that in certain cases despite non payment of additional contribution, the full reimbursement was given. But it is stated that such cases were treated as special cases, taking note of the amount involved in the claims. It is also submitted that once it was noted that such payments are not permissible under the scheme, the same have been discontinued. Ext.P8 in Ext.P3 judgment is the reply given to the petitioner, turning down the claim for reimbursement. That communication is dated 14.9.1995. If even after the said communication payments have been made in cases where there were no additional contribution, it cannot be said that such cases were treated as special cases. Therefore, it is made clear that in case any reimbursement had been made even without additional contribution after 14.9.1995, the petitioner also shall be reimbursed the full eligible benefits. The first respondent will examine the matter as above with notice to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders, on the petitioner approaching the first respondent by way of an appropriate representation, within another four months. The original petition is disposed of as above.