SAMAR BHUSAN CHAKRABORTY Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is a retired Assistant Teacher of the Government of Tripura. His grievance is that the respondents have not paid him his medical bills as per his entitlement. Brief facts are as under:

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that upon detection of the fact that the petitioner was suffering from cancer, he was advised to rush to TATA Memorial Hospital at Mumbai for immediate treatment. The petitioner did not have sufficient time to obtain referral certificate from the Medical Board. He pointed out that on subsequent occasions whenever the petitioner needed to take follow up treatment at Mumbai, he had approached the Medical Board and was duly certified for reference. Several such referral orders are placed on record. He submitted that the objection raised by the respondents is highly technical and not accepted by various Courts including the Supreme Court in number of cases.

(3.) On the other hand, learned Government counsel opposed the petition contending that obtaining a reference by the Medical Board before taking treatment outside the State is one of the requirements for claiming medical reimbursement. In the present case, the petitioner failed to obtain such reference. The department has, therefore, correctly rejected his medical bills.