G.S. PUNIAH Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER was serving the Respondent -State. He developed heart problem in the year 1983. He was hospitalized in I.G.M.C; Shimla with effect from 19.12.1983 to 23.12.1983. He was again hospitalized in I.G.M.C; Shimla with effect from 6.4.1984 to 7.4.1984. He was granted permission to seek treatment outside the State vide memorandum dated 25.6.1984 (Annexure A -3). He was permitted to undergo treatment/ examination at A.I.I.M.S, New Delhi for Angina Pectoris (name of disease) as per recommendation. He had undergone heart bye pass surgery at A.I.I.M.S; New Delhi in the year 1991. His bills were reimbursed by the State of Himachal Pradesh. He accompanied by his wife left India on 6.12.2003 on a special visit to meet his kith and kin and other family friends in Canada and U.S.A. While staying with his daughter at Abbotsford (B.C.) Canada on 24.1.2004, Petitioner felt some discomfort in his stomach all of a sudden and in a few moments thereafter vomited almost 25% of blood from his body. He suffered heart attack and was taken in emergency Ambulance to the nearby Government Hospital, MSA, Abbotsfort (B.C.), Canada. He was revived in the hospital and thereafter he remained inpatient in I.C.U. of this hospital till 28.1.2004. He was referred to the Royal Columbian Hospital, New Westminster (B.C.) for cardiac catheterization. He informed the authorities about his illness on 11.2.2004 and 7.9.2004. He came back to India and made representation to reimburse him a sum of Rs. 3,06,605.52 paise vide Annexure A -7 dated 14.10.2004. The claim of the Petitioner was rejected on 16.3.2005 vide Annexure A -9. He filed O.A. No. 1291 of 2005, which was directed to be treated as representation to the Principal Secretary (Personnel). He decided the same on 24.9.2005 whereby the claim of the Petitioner was rejected.

(2.) MR . Dilip Sharma has strenuously argued that the case of his client was squarely covered under the Central Services (Medical Attendance) Rules, 1944. He then argued that the Petitioner was hospitalized due to sudden illness and remained in Government Hospital, MSA, Abbotsford (B.C.) and thereafter he was referred to the Royal Columbian Hospital, New Westminster, (B.C.). He then argued that rejection of case of the Petitioner, vide Annexures A -9 and A -12 is arbitrary and unreasonable.

(3.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and have perused the pleadings carefully.