APPEAL NO: 987/2005


Nawal Singh Sancheti

r/o Kapasan,Teh. Kapasan,

Distt. Chitorgarh.

Complainant- appellant


Vs.


1. State of Rajasthan through Distt. Collector, Chittorgarh.

2. Director of Pension and Pension Welfare, Govt. of Raj., Jaipur.

3. Financial Advisor, Medical & Health Services, Govt. of Raj. Jaipur.

4. Treasury Officer, Chittorgarh.

Opposite parties-respondents


Date of Judgment 5.3.09


Before:


Mr.Justice Sunil Kumar Garg-President

Mrs.Vimla Sethia-Member


Mr.Manoj Kumar Sharma counsel for the appellant

Mr.M.L.Vyas counsel for the respondents


This appeal has been filed by the complainant appellant against order dated 17.5.05 passed by the District Forum, Chittorgarh in complaint no. 304/2004 by which the complaint of the complainant appellant was dismissed.


2. It arises in the following circumstances-

2



That the complainant appellant had filed a complaint against the respondents before the District Forum, Chittorgarh on 19.10.04 inter alia stating that after his retirement as per terms and conditions of the service, free medical aid was being provided by the respondents and for that a trust was created by the Govt. of Rajasthan for the welfare of the retired employees. It was further stated in the complaint that the complainant appellant was a patient of heart and his case was referred by the Medical Board for taking the treatment in AIIMS at Delhi and approximate expenditure to the tune of Rs.50,000/- was sanctioned by the medical board on 5.2.02. It was further stated that thereafter on 8.4.02 the complainant appellant was got admitted in the AIIMS where bypass surgery was done on him on 10.4.02 and a sum of Rs.55,000/- were spent for which bill issued by the AIIMS had been produced which shows that the complainant had taken the treatment in that institute for the period 9.4.02 to 17.4.02. It was further stated in the complaint that thereafter claim was preferred by the complainant appellant before the office of the respondents but his case was rejected simply on the ground that the pensionary diary was not renewed. Thereafter the present complaint was filed.


A reply was filed by the respondents before the District Forum,Chittorgarh on 21.12.04 and the case of the respondents was that the amount which was sanctioned by the medical board was to be utilised by the end of 31.3.02 and since the diary for the next financial year was not


3


renewed, therefore, the complainant appellant was not entitled to any amount and it was prayed that complaint be dismissed.


After hearing the parties, the District Forum, Chittorgarh through impugned order dated 17.5.05 had dismissed the complaint inter alia holding that as per circular of the Govt. of Rajasthan, no claim for financial assistance was to be entertained unless medical diary stands renewed for the period the treatment was taken by the pensioner and since the diary of the complainant (pensioner ) was not renewed, therefore, claim was not payable.


Aggrieved from the said order dated 17.5.02 passed by the District Forum,Chittorgarh, this appeal has been filed by the complainant appellant.


3. In this appeal the main contention of the learned counsel for the complainant appellant is that the findings recorded by the District Forum by which complaint was dismissed are erroneous one as the amount of Rs.50,000/- which was sanctioned by the Medical Board on 5.2.02 was for the treatment to be taken at AIIMS, New Delhi and there was no restriction that the bypass surgery be got conducted prior to 31.3.02 and thus the findings of the District Forum rejecting the claim of the complainant appellant could not be sustained as they suffer from basic infirmity, illegality and perversity and this appeal deserves to be allowed.


4. On the other hand the learned counsel appearing for the


4


respondents has supported the impugned order passed by the District Forum.


5. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as for the respondents and gone through the entire materials available on record.


6. In our considered opinion, the findings recorded by the District Forum could not be sustained at all as no rider could be imposed on the pensioner that this amount be utilised before 31.3.02 especially when the complainant appellant was a patient of heart and as per case of the complainant appellant he had received heart attack on 2.4.02 and thereafter he rushed to Delhi where he was admitted in AIIMS on 8.4.02 and bypass surgery was done on 10.4.02 and thus the complainant appellant is entitled to get Rs.50,000/- though he had spent more amount.


7. For the reasons stated above, the findings of the District Forum dismissing the complaint of the complainant appellant could not be sustained as they suffer from basic infirmity, illegality and perversity. Hence, this appeal deserves to be allowed and the impugned order is liable to be quashed and set aside and the appellant complainant is entitled to get a sum of Rs.50,000/- alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint.



Accordingly, this appeal filed by the appellant complainant is allowed and the impugned order dated 17.5.05 passed by the District Forum,Chittorgarh is quashed and set aside and the complaint of the complainant appellant stands allowed

5


in the manner that the respondents are directed to pay to the complainant appellant a sum of Rs. 50,000/- alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint till the payment is made and respondents are further directed to pay a sum of Rs.3000/- as amount of costs to the complainant appellant.



Member President