State Of Haryana vs R.S.D.Bansal on 14 January, 2009

LPA No. 242 of 2004 in                                                   1
CWP No. 11450 of 1988

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH
                                     --

                               LPA No. 242 of 2004 in
                               CWP No. 11450 of 1988
                               Date of decision: 14.01.2009

State of Haryana                                          ........Petitioner

            Versus

R.S.D.Bansal                                             .......Respondent

Coram:      Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashutosh Mohunta
            Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur
                             -.-

Present:    Mr. R.S.Kundu, Addl. A.G. Haryana
            for the petitioner

            Mr. Sandeep Punchii, Advocate
            for the respondent
                   -.-

Ashutosh Mohunta, J. (Oral)

The petitioner has impugned the judgment dated 15.10.2003

passed by the learned Single Judge in civil Writ Petition No. 11450 of

1998, vide which, instructions dated 06.07.1985 (Annexure P-9), issued by

the State of Haryana, have been ordered to be quashed.

Facts of the case, in brief, are that respondent No. 1

(R.S.D.Bansal) retired as Treasury Officer from the Treasury Office, Sirsa.

His son, namely, Sanjay Bansal, who was studying in M.A. in the subject of

Public Administration in Punjab University, Chandigarh, was staying in the

University Hostel. On January 14,1997, the son of the petitioner met with

an accident in the University Campus and suffered multiple injuries on

head and fractured his left forearm. His son was admitted to P.G.I.,
LPA No. 242 of 2004 in 2
CWP No. 11450 of 1988

Chandigarh and remained under treatment from 14.01.1997 to 04.02.1997.

The petitioner claimed reimbursement of the medical bill amounting to

Rs.37,285.30 on account of the injuries suffered by his son. However, his

aforesaid claim was rejected, vide Annexures P-3, P-6 and P-8 on the

ground that his son had attained the age of majority at the time of accident

and was no more a minor.

Being dissatisfied, respondent No. 1 filed Civil Writ Petition

No. 11450 of 1988, as also challenged the instructions dated 06.07.1985

(Annexure P-9). The learned Single Judge has allowed the aforesaid writ

petition vide the impugned judgment, and has quashed the instructions

dated 06.07.1985 (Annexure P-9) by holding that an appropriate affidavit

be called for from the petitioner (respondent No. 1 herein), stating therein

that his son is not gainfully employed anywhere.

Mr. R.S.Kundu, Additional Advocate Genera, Haryana, has

now referred to the latest instructions dated 18.10.2007, according to

which, even the minor children after becoming major and are unemployed,

are entitled to the reimbursement of the medical bill, subject to the

condition that their parents submits an affidavit to the concerned Drawing

and Disbursing Officer,stating therein that their wards/dependents are not

gainfully employed any where. The aforesaid instructions dated

18.10.2007 are reproduced hereunder:-

“Sub: Free medical facility to the retired employees/
spouses of employees and minor/major children
of the employees of the Haryana State

Sir,
I am directed to invite your attention to State
LPA No. 242 of 2004 in 3
CWP No. 11450 of 1988

Government order No. 2/(162) 84-1 HB III dated 06.07.1985.
that according to these orders medical facility to the retired
employees of the state/spouse of the employees, mother
father, minor and minor grand children of the employees was
granted. In this concern after consideration, it has been
decided by the Government, that above facility will be
available to the minor children/minor grand children even
after the became major and are unemployed, with the
condition that retired employees/officers submit an affidavit
with their claim with the satisfaction of concerned Drawing
and Disbursing officer.

In this mater sanction of Finance Department has been
taken vide their letter No. 2580/5/F.D. II/2007 dated
24.09.2007.”

We have perused the judgment of the learned Single Judge

carefully and are of the considered opinion that the children, who have

attained the age of majority, but are still dependent on their parents and are

not gainfully employed any where, are entitled to get medical

reimbursement for the medical treatment which they have undertaken.

However, the quashing of the instructions dated 06.07.1985 (Annexure P-

9) will not serve the purpose, as the employees of the State of Haryana

would not be able to claim medical reimbursement for their children on the

basis of the aforesaid instructions, which stands quashed.

In this view of the matter, we modify the impugned judgment

dated 15.10.2003 passed by the learned Single Judge to the extent that the

instructions dated 06.07.1985 (Annexure P-9) are valid and be read in

conjunction with the latest instructions dated 18.10.2007, and accordingly,

the children who have become major, but are still dependent on their
LPA No. 242 of 2004 in 4
CWP No. 11450 of 1988

parents and are not gainfully employed any where, would be entitled to get

medical reimbursement for the medical treatment.

It is made clear that respondent No. 1-R.S.D Bansal, is fully

entitled to reimbursement of the medical expenses incurred for the

treatment of his son, namely, Sanjay Bansal.

There shall be no order as to costs.

Disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

[Ashutosh Mohunta]
Judge

[Nirmaljit Kaur]
Judge
January 14, 2009
mohan