LAPYNHUN KHARKONGOR Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner by way of this instant writ application has prayed for reimbursement of the expenses incurred for her kidney treatment, the bills of which had been submitted by her (L) father who was an employee of PHE Department on whom she was dependent.

(2.) Mr. S.R. Lyngdoh, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the writ petitioner is without any source of income and is financially incapable to meet the medical expenses, and even for the expenses incurred for the treatment for the period w.e.f. 18/7/2019 to 14/8/2019, no reimbursement has been forthcoming, and in fact the same has been rejected by the State respondents.

(3.) The State respondents have filed an affidavit wherein it has been indicated therein that the ground for non-grant of medical reimbursement, was due to the ineligibility of the writ petitioner who would not come within the definition of Rule 3 (g) (iii) of the Meghalaya Medical Attendance Rule, 1981. Mr. H. Kharmih, learned Addl. Sr. GA therefore submits that the petitioner being not entitled to the reimbursement as claimed, the same cannot be granted.