Remanded

G.K. Dhamayanthe, v. the Joint Director

Madras HC19 Sept 2011WP(MD)/10607/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A retired teacher sought mandamus for medical reimbursement of Rs.53,308/- under the Municipals and Corporations Pensioners Health Fund Scheme. The Court, noting the administrative effort and recent clarification requests, ordered respondents to obtain necessary clarifications from the Joint Director and decide the claim within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to obtain clarifications and pass appropriate orders on the petitioner's representation within four weeks; Writ Petition disposed of.

G.K. Dhamayanthe, Vs the Joint Director — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2011)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 19.09.2011

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR

¶6

W.P.(MD).No.10607 of 2011

¶7

G.K.Dhamayanthe : Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The Joint Director,

¶10

Medical and Rural Welfare Services and

¶11

Family Welfare, Usilampatti, Madurai Now at Usilampatti,

¶12

Madurai.

¶13

2.The Director of Pension, II Floor, III Block,

¶14

DMS Office Complex,

¶15

Teynampet, Chennai-600 018.

¶16

3.The Commissioner of Corporation,

¶17

Madurai Corporation,

¶18

Arignar Anna Maaligai, Madurai.

¶19

4.The Assistant Commissioner of Corporation (Account), Madurai Corporation,

¶20

Arignar Anna Maaligai,

¶21

Madurai.

¶22

: Respondents

¶23

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to pay the medical reimbursement amount of Rs.53,308/- to the petitioner, by considering the application preferred by the petitioner dated 16.05.2011 under Municipals and Corporations Pensioners Health Fund, within the stipulated time.

¶24

For Petitioner : Mr.Ramanatha Sethupathy For Mr.R.Alagumani

¶25

For Respondents 1&2 : Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen

¶26

Additional Government Pleader

¶27

For Respondents 3&4 : Mr.M.Ravi Shankar

¶28

ORDER

¶29

A seventy six years old woman retired as a Teacher on https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 30.06.1989 and claimed to have renewed her services upto 13.05.1994, has approached this Court for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to pay medical reimbursement amount of Rs.53,308/-, by

¶30

¶31

considering her application dated 16.05.2011 under the Municipals and Corporations Pensioners Health Fund Scheme.

¶32

According to the petitioner, she was admitted as an inpatient in Aarogya Ayurvedic Centre on 23.02.2011 and taken treatment upto 29.03.2011 for 35 days and incurred Rs.53,308/- as medical expenses. It is the further contention that she has been regularly paying Rs.100/- as subscription to Madurai Corporation under the said Scheme. Therefore, she made a representation dated 16.05.2011 to respondents 3 and 4 for reimbursement of the medical expenditure incurred. However, the Assistant Commissioner of Corporation (Accounts), Madurai Corporation, Madurai has sought for a clarification from the Joint Director, Medical and Rural Welfare Services and Family Welfare, Madurai. Another representation dated 05.08.2011 was also submitted to respondents 3 and 4. As the claim of the petitioner has not been considered so far, she has approached this Court for the reliefs stated supra .

¶33

Considering the relief sought for and the age of the petitioner, this Court has directed Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen, learned Additional Government Pleader to take notice on behalf of respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.M.Ravi Shankar, learned counsel to take notice on behalf of respondents 3 and 4.

¶34

Inviting the attention of this Court to the letter No.B10/13531/2011, dated ..08.2011 of the Assistant Commissioner of Corporation (Accounts), Madurai Corporation, Madurai addressed to the Joint Director of Medical and Rural Welfare Services and Family Welfare, Madurai, learned counsel for the Corporation submitted that as and when the clarification is issued by the first respondent, appropriate decision would be taken on the representation dated 16.05.2011 of the petitioner. He prayed that sufficient time may be granted. His submission is placed on record.

¶35

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record.

¶36

Pleadings and material on record disclose that the petitioner retired from service on 30.06.1989 and that she has claimed to have renewed services upto 13.05.1994. According to her, she has been regularly paying Rs.100/- as subscription to Madurai Corporation under the Municipals and Corporations Pensioners Health Fund Scheme. Acting on the representation dated 16.05.2011, the Assistant Commissioner of Corporation (Accounts), Madurai Corporation, Madurai, in his proceedings in B10/13531/2011, dated .. 08.2011, has addressed a letter to the Joint Director, Medical and Rural Welfare Services and Family Welfare, Madurai, the first respondent herein. Along with the letter, the fourth respondent has also enclosed the details of the medical expenditure incurred by the petitioner. The letter has been sent only recently i.e., in the month https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ of August, 2011. Though the petitioner has rushed to this Court immediately, as if there is a failure on the part of the respondents to consider her representation dated 16.05.2011, in terms of

¶37

¶38

Municipals and Corporations Pensioners Health Fund Scheme, and prayed for a Writ of Mandamus, it cannot be said that respondents 3 and 4 have not acted promptly or diligently. The letter of the Assistant Commissioner of Corporation (Accounts), Madurai Corporation, Madurai itself shows that certain clarifications have been sought for.

¶39

In view of the above, respondents 3 and 4 are directed to get appropriate orders from the Joint Director, Medial and Rural Welfare Services and Family Welfare, Madurai, the first respondent herein, as expeditiously as possible and in that regard, take steps. Considering the age of the petitioner, the first respondent is directed to issue necessary clarifications and reply to the letter dated ...08.2011, stated supra , expeditiously, not later than four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As soon as the clarification is received, respondents 3 and 4 are directed to pass appropriate orders on the representation dated 16.05.2011, in accordance with the conditions for grant of reimbursement under Municipals and Corporations Pensioners Health Fund Scheme.

¶40

With the above directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶41

Sd/-

¶42

Assistant Registrar(AS)

¶43

/True Copy/

¶44

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶45

¶46

1.The Joint Director,

¶47

Medical and Rural Welfare Services and

¶48

Family Welfare, Usilampatti, Madurai Now at Usilampatti, Madurai.

¶49

2.The Director of Pension,

¶50

II Floor, III Block, DMS Office Complex, Teynampet, Chennai-600 018.

¶51

3.The Commissioner of Corporation,

¶52

Madurai Corporation,

¶53

Arignar Anna Maaligai, Madurai.

¶54

4.The Assistant Commissioner of Corporation (Account), Madurai Corporation, Arignar Anna Maaligai, Madurai.

¶55

+1cc to Mr.R.Alagumani, Advocate, Sr.No. 32281

¶56

+1cc to the Special Govt.Pleader, Sr.No. 32374

¶57

sml

¶58

ssk/28.09.2011 /7c -3p/-

¶59

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶60

Order made in W.P.(MD).No.10607 of 2011 Dated:- 19.09.2011

G.K. Dhamayanthe, v. the Joint Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.K. Dhamayanthe, v. the Joint Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jeevan Polytechnic College Vs the Appeal Committee

Mrs.M. Indira Vs the Director of Public

Deesan Amose Vs the District Collector

S. Mekala Vs the Registrar

M. Muthuvel Vs the District Collector

S.G. Mathiyalagan, Vs the Joint Commissioner