CENTRAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER Vs. N SATHEESAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ext.P4 verdict dated 11th April 2017 rendered by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench in O.A 740/2015 is under challenge at the instance of the respondents in the Original Application.

(2.) The brief facts involved in this Application are as follows: The applicant joined service in the year 1972 in the Employees Provident Fund Office ('EPFO' for short ) and retired as Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner on 31.10.2011. As per an order dated 6.11.2006, the benefit under Civil Service (Medical Attendants) Rules, 1944, ('CS (MA) Rules' for short) was extended to the retired employees of the Provident Fund Office with effect from 24.10.2006. As such the employees and their family members are eligible for medical reimbursement. The wife of the applicant had undergone treatment on various spells incurring considerable amount but the full amount spent by him was not reimbursed. The details of the actual amount incurred for treatment and the amount reimbursed are furnished in the Tabular form as follows: <TAB> <FRM>JUDGEMENT_180_LAWS(KER)1_2018_1.html</FRM> </TAB>

(3.) As the entire amount claimed was not sanctioned by the authority, he submitted a representation as Annexure- A2 with Annexure A1, as a similar claim was allowed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore but, it was rejected stating that the claim raised by him was deviating from CS (MA) Rules. He never raised any claim deviating from the Rules. Hence, the O.A. was filed with the following reliefs: