HARBIR KAUR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IS the claim of the petitioner for medical reimbursement valid and justified in the facts and circumstances of this case, is the core question which emerges for consideration in the instant writ petition.

(2.) THE petitioner's husband late Shri Jagpal Singh, was the member of the Rajasthan Higher Judicial Service (in short Higher Judicial Service ). When he was holding the post of President District Consumer Redressal Forum, Dausa in the year 2000 he suspected to be a severe heart patient. He was examined by the Expert Cardiology of SMS Hospital, who advised him to undergo heart surgery. His case was referred to a Medical Board for examining the feasibility and place of heart surgery, which submitted its report on May 26, 2000. It was inter alia stated in the report that Jagpal Singh is suffering from Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (for short CABG) and his three vessels require grafting, therefore he needed CABG operation. It was further recommended that although this facility was available in the State of Rajasthan, yet he was referred to All India Institute of Medical Science, New Delhi or Escorts Hospital, New Delhi as he wanted to be operated in New Delhi. THE approximate cost of operation in the SMS Hospital was shown to be Rs. 50,000/- and expenses of an attendant as per rule. A communication dated May 26, 2000 was received by Jagpal Singh from Principal, SMS Medical College and Controller of the Attached Hospitals, Jaipur wherein it was stated that he could go to Escorts Heart Institute New Delhi (for short Escorts ). Jagpal Singh thereafter was admitted in the Escorts for Coronary Angiography on May 20, 2000 and was discharged on May 21, 2000. Since immediate surgery was necessary required Jagpal Singh was again admitted on May 29, 2000 to the Escorts where CABG operation was performed. Jagpal Singh was discharged on June 12, 2000. In the Escorts following amount was paid by Jagpal Singh towards surgery: Rs. 14,000/- vide Receipt No. 2538 dated 20. 5. 2000 Rs. 1,90,000 vide Receipt No. 2955 dated 29. 5. 2000 Rs. 7200 vide Receipt No. 3626 dated 12. 6. 2000. Shri Jagpal Singh during his life time made several representations to the respondents seeking medical reimbursement but no heed was paid. After the demise of Shri Jagpal Singh, the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition with the following prayer: (i) for medical reimbursement of Rs. 2,11,200/- and (ii) to declare Rule 7 of the Rajasthan Civil Services Medical Attendant Rules 1970 (for short 1970 Rules) as unconstitutional.

(3.) IT is well settled that right to health is an integral to right to life. Their Lordships of the Supreme Court in (1), indicated as under:- (Para 10) "it is otherwise important to bear in mind that self preservation of one's life is the necessary concomitant of the right to life enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India, fundamental in nature, sacred, precious and inviolable. The importance and validity of the duty and right to self preservation has a species in the right of self defence in criminal law. Centuries ago thinkers of this Great Land conceived of such right and recognised it. Attention can usefully be drawn to vs. 17, 18, 20 and 22 in Chapter 16 of the Garuda Purana (A Dialogue suggested between the Divine and Garuda, the bird) in the words of the Divine: 17. Vinaa Dehena Kasyaapi canpurushaartho na vidyate tasmaaddeham dhanam rakshetpunyakarmaani saadhayet Without the body how can one obtain the objects of human life? Therefore protecting the body which is the wealth, one should perform the deeds of merit. 18. Rakshayetsarvadaatmaanamaatmaa saravasya bhaajanam Rakshane yatnamaatishthejje vanbhaadraani pashyati One should protect his body which is responsible for everything. He who protects himself by all efforts, will see many auspicious occasions in life. 20. Shariraraksanopaayaah kriyante sarvadaa budhaih Necchanti cha punastyaagamapi kushthaadiroginah The wise always undertake the protective measures for the body. Even the persons suffering from leprosy and other diseases do not wish to get rid of the body. 22. Aatmaiva yadi naatmaanamahitebhyo nivaarayet Konsyo hitakarastasmaadaam\tmaanam taarayishyati If one does not prevent what is unplesent to himself, who else will do it? Therefore one should do what is good to himself. "