SATISH KUMAR BAJAJ Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant has preferred this original application against the impugned office order dated April 11, 2000 whereby his claim for medical reimbursement for Rs. 1,78,200/ - has been rejected.

(2.) Shorn of unnecessary details facts giving rise to the original application are that the applicant a retiree from Education Department of Himachal Pradesh had gone to Delhi to attend a family function in March, 1998. Suddenly he fell ill due to heart problem and as a emergency case he was admitted in the Escort and Research Institute Okhla Road New Delhi. His wife immediately informed the Director of education, respondent No. 2 regarding the ailment of the applicant. After diagnosis open Heart Surgery was done on March 27, 1998 in Escort Heart Institute where he remained admitted after April 2, 1998. Ex -post permission to get the treatment outside the State was also granted by the Director of Health Services vide letter dated August 3, 1999. All the codal formalities were completed. Even then the respondents have not released the payment of medical reimbursement. Instead vide impugned order he has been informed that he is not entitled for medical reimbursement.

(3.) The maintainability of the original application claiming reimbursement is assailed on the ground that the department of Health and Family Welfare vide its letter dated February 12, 1997 has de -recognised the Escort Heart Institute. The employees/pensioners of Himachal Pradesh Government who have taken treatment from Escort are not entitled to reimbursement, even after permission to take treatment has been given on or after February 12, 1997. Rest of the claim has been resisted mainly on the ground that on account of de -recognistion of Escort, the applicant is not entitled to reimbursement of the medical claim.