Friday, August 16, 2013


(K.P. Sivasubramaniam, J.)
K.P. Sivasubramaniam,J.
Writ Petition No. 10392 of 1996 and WMP. No. 13753 of 199628-07-2003
E.V.Kumar …..Petitioner
The Union of India, rep. by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare(Department of Health), Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi and others….Respondents
Administrative Law – Statutory Rule and Administrative Instruction –Administrative instruction whether can override statutory rule – It is notpossible for Central Government to issue Office Memorandum overridingrule which is statutory in character – Statutory rule providing for fullreimbursement of medical expenses – Office Memorandum cannot putceiling on medical expenses – Medical Expenses incurred by formerAdditional District and Session Judge of Karaikal, Pondicherry for coronaryby-pass surgery in Private Hospital authorised by appropriate Governmentwas ordered to be reimbursed in full setting aside order granting partialreimbursement.
(Para 8)
Central Services (Medical Attendance) Rules, Rule 6

- Free Medicaltreatment to Government Servant – Rule enables Government Servant toget treatment in hospital other than Government Hospital if suchGovernment Hospital is not available at or near place of his illness and anyamount paid by Government servant to such Private Hospital is liable to bereimbursed – Former Additional District and Sessions Judge of Karaikal,Pondicherry claimed reimbursement of medical expenses for coronary by-pass surgery underwent in Private Hospital authorised by appropriateGovernment – As against claim of Rs. 1,44,019 Government sanctionedRs.99,500 holding that it was reasonable amount – Statutory rule providingfor full reimbursement of medical expenses – Full reimbursement wasclaimed – It was held that Office Memorandum cannot put ceiling onmedical expenses overriding rule which is statutory in character – MedicalExpenses ordered to be reimbursed in full with interest at 12% per annum.
(Paras 8,10,11,12,13 & 14)
S.Jagannath v. Union of India and others, 1997 (2) SCC 87….(Para10); Ramayee, V. v. TheCommissioner of Pudukottai Municipality, 1992 WLR 330 ….(Para 12); Hema Devi and anotherv. State of Bihar and others, 2002 (6) Sup. 417 ….(Para 13) Mr. R. Gandhi, Senior Counsel for R.G.Narendhiran for Petitioner.Mr. T.Murugesan, Government Pleader (Pondicherry) for Respondents.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.