High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Bharat Kumar Sahai v. Union Of India Thru' Secretary Ministry Of Railway And Other - WRIT - A No. 22819 of 2007  RD-AH 10116 (25 May 2007)
Reserved on 14.05.2007
Delivered on 25.05.2007
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 22819 of 2007
Bharat Kumar Sahai
Union of India and others
Hon'ble Anjani Kumar, J.
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.
Heard Sri S.C. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.
The writ petition is directed against the order dated 8.2.2007 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad (in short 'Tribunal') rejecting the petitioner's Original Application No. 879 of 2005.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that his claim for medical reimbursement is for Rs. 1,14,357/- but he was paid only Rs. 60,000/- towards cost of pace maker and Rs. 8,972/- towards cost of medicine and investigations etc. and rest of the amount has been denied illegally for which he filed the aforesaid original application which has been rejected by the Tribunal erroneously.
From the record it does appear that the petitioner got settlement of medical reimbursement for payment of Rs. 68,000/- and odd by giving an undertaking. This is evident from para 7 of his representation dated 10.9.2003 which is reproduced as under:-
"7. On expiry of 8 months of the submission of the reimbursement application, CMS/DLW Hospital told that it would be possible to reimburse Rs. 60,000/- towards pace-maker. This amount could be released if an undertaking is given by me not to claim the balance amount. I was in need of money, the undertaking was given."
The same thing has been reiterated by him in para 5 of his representation dated 10.6.2005 which is reproduced as under:-
"5. On laps of 8 months the undersigned was paid Rs. 68,972/- after giving an undertaking."
Once the petitioner has given undertaking to accept lesser amount, it is not open to him subsequently to retract and claim the balance amount for which he has already waived his right. We, therefore, do not find any error in the order of the Tribunal impugned in this writ petition. The writ petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.