Disposed

Amarnath Tiwari v. S.e.c.l. and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC6 Apr 2016WPS/759/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a writ petition seeking quashing of an order and direction for medical facility and reimbursement of expenses under Rule 12(iii) of the Medical Attendance Rules. The court disposed of the petition, noting partial payment of bills, and granted liberty to move for the balance amount.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed; liberty granted to petitioner to move representation for balance amount if admissible.

Amarnath Tiwari Vs S.e.c.l. and Ors. — Chhattisgarh HC (2016) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

WPS No. 759 of 2013

¶5

Amarnath Tiwari S/o Late Shri S.P. Tiwari Aged About 50 Years Working As Assistant Foreman, Longwal Project, Kumda Sub-Area Bishrampur Area, Police Station Bishrampur, Distt. Surajpur C.G.

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Through The Managing Director, Headquarter, Bilaspur, Police Station Sarkanda, District Bilaspur C.G.

¶9

The General Manager South Eastern Coalfields Limited Bishrampur Police Station Bishrampur Distt. Surajpur C.G.

¶10

Chief Medical Officer South Eastern Coalfields Limited Central Hospital Bishrampur Police Station Bishrampur Distt. Surajpur C.G.

¶11

Area Personnel Manager South Eastern Coalfields Limited Bishrampur Area, Police Station Bishrampur Distt. Surajpur C.G.

¶12

---- Respondents

¶13

For Petitioner : Shri Shahid Ahmed Ansari, Advocate For Respondents : Ms. Vijay Laxmi Saraf, Advocate on behalf of Shri Shailendra Shukla, Advocate

¶14

Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra

¶15

Order On Board

¶16

06/04/2016

¶17

The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for quashing the order dated 25-2-13 (Annexure P-1) and for direction to the respondents to provide medical facility/treatment to his Daughter as per Rule 12 (iii) of the Medical Attendance Rules (for short 'the Rules') as also for releasing the amount of medical expenses incurred by the petitioner for treatment of his Daughter.

¶18

In course of hearing learned counsel for the petitioner confirmed that a sum of Rs.4,32,000/- approximately has been paid to him out of the total bill of

¶19

¶20

Rs.5,31,000/- approximately.

¶21

In view of the above, the major part of the payment has already been made to the petitioner. The petitioner has not submitted break-up of the medical bills and the head on which the said bills have not been cleared.

¶22

In view of the vague pleadings, the petition for the remaining amount does not survive.

¶23

For the present, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move representation before the competent authority of the respondent for the balance amount, if admissible under the Rules.

¶24

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶25

Sd/-

¶26

Judge Prashant Kumar Mishra

¶27

ashu

Amarnath Tiwari v. S.e.c.l. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amarnath Tiwari v. S.e.c.l. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr.M.L.Agrawal Vs State and Others

Mohanlal Dilliwar and Ors. Vs State and Ors.

T.R.Sahu and Ors. Vs State and Ors.

Vidyadhar Mishra Vs State and Ors.

Balco Officers Association Vs Union of India and Ors.

Santidin Ekka Vs the State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.