PADMABEN NATVARLAL DESAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant original petitioner has filed this appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent challenging the order dated 29.11.2006 passed by the Learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.24709 of 2006 whereby the Learned Single Judge has disposed of the petition directing the respondents to consider the representation made by the petitioner dated 25.07.2006 and to pass appropriate reasoned order within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the copy of the said order and to communicate the same to the petitioner. The Learned Single Judge has also observed in the order that the Court was not entertaining the said petition because of details such as statutory rules or GR on which claim of medical reimbursement is based, were not supplied by learned advocate and that the petitioner has not established his legal right to claim full amount of medical reimbursement. The Learned Single Judge has further observed that demanding details from the State Government that on what basis the amount of claim is reduced is a converse conduct of the petitioner through his advocate and hence, the Court was not entertaining the petition only on that ground.

(2.) This Court has admitted the petition on 11.04.2007. In Civil Application for stay, this Court, after hearing learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, passed a detailed order on 11.04.2007. The Court has considered the fact that the appellant was 90 years old and as against the expenses incurred by the applicant to the tune of Rs.91,730/- on account of his medical treatment, only Rs.11,746/- were sanctioned by the opponents and that too after the appeal was admitted by this Court. The Court has also taken note of the fact that the impugned order of the Learned Single Judge as well as the sanctioned order issued by the opponents are contrary to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as this Court. The Court has considered the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of The Comptroller & Auditor General of India, Gian Prakash, New Delhi and another V/s. K. S. Jagannathan and another, AIR 1987 S.C. 537 as well as the judgment of this Court in the case of Bharatkumar H. Pathak V/s. State of Gujarat, (2003) 2 G.H.J. 994. The Court has also considered the submissions made by Mr. Apurva Dave, learned Assistant Government Pleader on behalf of the opponents to the effect that as per the rules, the amount was sanctioned and hence, no interference is called for in the judgment and order of the Learned Single Judge. The Court thereafter took the view that the amount sanctioned by the opponents is too low and contrary to the reported judgments. The Court, therefore, granted interim relief in terms of paragraph 5 (A) of the Civil Application whereby judgment and order passed by the Learned Single Judge dated 29.11.2006 was stayed. As far as prayer made in paragraph (B) was concerned, the Court observed that interest of justice would better be served, looking to the age of the appellant, if on account payment of 50% of the claim amount is ordered to be made to the appellant, during the pendency of the appeal. The Court, therefore, while disposing of the said Civil Application, directed the respondent authorities to make on account payment of 50% of Rs.91,750/-, rounded of Rs.45,000/- towards the medical reimbursement of the appellant forthwith which was made subject to the outcome of the main Letters Patent Appeal.

(3.) During pendency of the present appeal, appellant Mr. Natvarlal Dahyabhai Desai expired on 12.05.2007. Hence, his wife, namely, Padmaben Natbvarlal Desai has filed Civil Application No.7918 of 2007 to be joined as legal representative of the deceased appellant. This Court, vide order dated 19.06.2007, allowed the said Civil Application and the applicant was permitted to be joined as legal representative of the deceased appellant.