MD AHAD RAZA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The two writ petitions raise a common question of medical reimbursement by the State of Bihar. The petitioner of C.W.J.C. No. 3778 of 2006 is a serving employee, and the petitioner of C.W.J.C. No. 3781 of 2006 is the widow of a deceased employee. The respondents have placed on record their counter affidavits and have opposed the writ petitions. In view of variation of facts in the two writ petitions, I will dispose of the two one after the other by the present judgment.

(2.) I shall first take up C.W.J.C. No. 3778 of 2006. The facts are not in dispute. The petitioner was at the relevant point of time posted as Statistical Compiler, Department of Animal Husbandry, Begusarai. He suffered a massive heart attack in the first half of 2002, and was rushed to the Cardio-thoracic & Neuro Sciences Centre of All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'AIIMS'), on an emergency basis to save his life. Angiography was done on him in AIIMS on 7.6.2002. A photo copy of the document showing angiography and the money receipt showing payment of Rs. 4,000/- is marked Annexure-1 to the writ petition. The petitioner had undergone coronary Artery bypass grafting 28.8.2002, and is supported by the documentary evidence dated 3.10.2002 (Annexure-2), including payment of the charges of Rs. 75,000/-. Photo copy of the voucher showing payment of a further sum of Rs. 24,531.40P. to AIIMS is marked Annexure-3. The petitioner submitted his claim for reimbursement before the appropriate authorities which was forwarded to the State Government along with letter No. 557/ Begusarai, dated 18.7.2003 (Annexure-4), with the note that "

(3.) I have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of learned Counsel for the parties. It is manifest that the petitioner had suffered a massive heart attack in the first half of 2002, and had to be rushed to AIIMS. The petitioner has made averments to that effect in paragraphs 5 and 11 of the writ petition which has not at all been answered in the counter affidavit. Consequently the emergency involved in the matter stands admitted by non-traverse. The very fact that angiography has taken place on 7.6.2002, and on the heels of which Cardiac Surgery was done on 28.8.2002, is by itself more than adequate evidence of the emergency involved in the matter. This was fully supported by the recommendation of respondent No. 8, vide letter dated 18.7.2003 (Annexure-4), and quoted in paragraph No. 2 hereinabove.