High court Lambasts Delhi govt

NEW DELHI: For 16 years, a Delhi man had been fighting a case against the Delhi Government over an amount of Rs 51,824. The state Government was insisting that Mahendra Kumar Verma, who was a reader in the Tis Hazari Court and was, therefore, covered under the Central Services (Medical Attendance) Rules, 1944, must pay from his pocket the contested amount which was spent on the treatment of his then 15-year old son in 2003, as it was above his approved sanctioned limit.

Now the Delhi High Court has come down heavily against the state Government and declared that the petitioner cannot be faulted or penalised to pay the excess amount that was charged from him from the Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute.

Single-judge Justice Chandra Dhari Singh said that Central Services (Medical Attendance) Rules, 1944 are not merely the rules relating to medical attendance, but a beneficiary piece of legislation to facilitate good and sound health for all the Government employees and their families.

The petitioner’s son was diagnosed with brain tumour in 2003 for which he had to go through surgeries and chemo and radiation therapy at Sir Ganga Ram Hospital as well as Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre.

The Rules provide that all the expenses incurred upon by a Government servant towards the medical treatment of himself or his dependents have to be free of charge and any amount paid by him on account of such medical attention or treatment shall be reimbursed fully to him.

Verma was not only not fully reimbursed for the treatment but on August 6, 2004 a letter was issued to him from Drawing & Disbursing Officer, Officers of District and Sessions Judge asking him to deposit a sum of ₹51,854 against the medical advance granted to him from time to time.

Contesting this claim, Verma had filed a petition in 2006. After considering the submissions, Justice Singh said that he was unable to figure out even a single provision of law which had been taken in support by the respondents to justify the deductions made in the claim of the petitioner.