Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

B.L. NAGAR versus STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


B.L. Nagar v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - A No. 61158 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 18939 (9 November 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

HON.R.P. MISRA, J.

HON. SHISHIR KUMAR, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Ashish Srivastava and Sri R.N. Pandey, learned standing counsel for the respondents.

This writ petition has been filed for issuing a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to make the payment of amount of the medical claim, which has already been approved by the competent authority. The petitioner was having some problem in kidney and on 17.4.2003 the kidney of the petitioner was transplanted and the wife of the petitioner donated the same. The petitioner being a Senior Finance and Accounts Officer working in the Higher Education had submitted a medical claim before the competent authority. The competent authority vide its order dated 5.8.2004, Annexure-1 to the writ petition, has sanctioned an amount to the tune of Rs.1,42,577/-. The petitioner submits that in spite of the aforesaid order up till date, the amount sanctioned in favour of the petitioner has not yet been paid to him. To this effect the petitioner has approached the authorities several times personally or by way of representations but the respondents have not paid any heed and due to the aforesaid arbitrary action of the respondents, the petitioner is suffering a great loss and financial hardship.

In view of the aforesaid fact we are of view that the action of the respondents is not appreciable. A person who is an employee has got right to be paid the medical bills according to the service rules. It is not a case where the medical reimbursement has not been sanctioned by the competent authority. The same has been sanctioned by order-dated 5.8.2004. More than two years hae passed but the same has not been paid to the petitioner.

In view of the aforesaid fact, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no.1 to make the payment of the sanctioned amount by order dated 5.8.2004 to the tune of Rs.1,42,577/- within a period of three weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

With these observations the writ petition is dismissed.

A certified copy of this order may be issued to the learned standing counsel Sri R.N. Pandey within 24 hours for communication and compliance of this order.

9.11.2006

V.Sri/-

W.P. No. 61158 of 2006


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.