B.S. TANDON Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a retired employee of the department of Medical and Health, State of Rajasthan and has laid the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for claiming under mentioned relief's: -

(2.) THE petitioner has further averred in the writ petition that the requisite angioplasty was an imminent need for saving his life and he made another attempt by annexing the medical bills with his letter dt. 12.11.2007 which was addressed to the second respondent. However, according to the petitioner, the said attempt also proved to be futile inasmuch as his claim for medical reimbursement was once again declined by a letter dt. 29.02.2007. The petitioner has termed the communication dt. 29.02.2007 (Ann. 5) as arbitrary, unreasonable and unjust and has prayed for quashing the adverse communications to him.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that providing free medical facilities to the pensioners is an obligation of the welfare State and welfare State is not expected to show apathy towards the life of an individual. The learned counsel has urged that protecting the life of a citizen as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is the legal obligation of a welfare State and therefore, denial of medical reimbursement is wholly unjust, unfair and against the basic tenets of law. In support of his contentions, the learned counsel has placed heavy reliance on the following authoritative legal precedents, Raj Laxman Taneja vs. State of Raj., : RLW 2005 (2) Raj. 1271, Tulcha Ram vs. State of Raj. & Ors.,, 2005 (2) WLC (Raj.) 250 and Ganesh Raj vs. State of Rajasthan, : 2005 (2) WLC (Raj.) 259.