SHIWADHAR RAY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Solicitor General representing the Union of India.

(2.) Perused the order dated 21st December, 2016 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna in O.A. No. 350 of 2016. The order by and large is in favour of the present petitioner since a direction has been given to the respondent-authorities to settle the medical claims. However, apprehension of the petitioner is that the insistence of the respondents and their demand to produce 'Emergency Certificate' is something, which is coming in the way of compliance and settlement of the medical claims of the petitioner.

(3.) The condition being such, since it is said that it was a case of retina detachment, by any medical standards and opinion of expert, the emergent nature of such term is inherent to the medical condition being suffered by an employee.