Allowed

T.V. Devarajan v. the Director General of

Madras HC15 Jul 2015WP(MD)/10193/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought inclusion in the new insurance scheme and reimbursement of medical expenses for cardiac surgery under the Tamil Nadu Government Servant Medical Welfare Scheme. The Court noted that contribution had been recovered by the government and accordingly directed respondents to extend benefits immediately.

What did the court decide?

Direction to extend medical benefits to the petitioner immediately and reimburse medical expenses.

T.V. Devarajan Vs the Director General of — Medical Negligence | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 15.07.2015

¶3

C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN

¶4

Writ Petition (MD) No.10193 of 2015

T.V.Devarajan

... Petitioner

1.The Director General of Police, Mylapore, Chennai, Chennai. 2.The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, Madurai. 3.The Pay and Accounts Officer, Madurai City, Madurai. 4.The Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd.,

¶9

Divisional Office 5^th Floor,

¶10

PLA, Rathna Tower,

¶11

212, Annasalai, Chennai.

¶12

5.The Chairman, Vadamalayan Hospital (P) Ltd.,

¶13

16, Jawaharlal Road, Chockikulam, Madurai-2 ... Respondents

¶14

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent No.1 to instruct the respondent No.2 to take necessary action to include the name of the petitioner in the newly introduced Insurance Scheme with the united India Insurance Ltd., and to reimburse the Medical Expenses of amount of Rs.2,53,981/- to the petitioner, under the Tamil Nadu Government Servant Medical Welfare Scheme for the petitioner's treatment for “off pump coronary artery by pass grafting”

¶15

For Petitioner ...Mr.A.Gandiappan For Respondents ...Mr.S.Kumar Additional Government Pleader for R.1 to R.3

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

This Writ Petition has been filed, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent No.1 to instruct the respondent No.2 to take necessary action to include the name of the petitioner in the newly https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ introduced Insurance Scheme with the united India Insurance Ltd., and to reimburse the Medical Expenses of amount of Rs.2,53,981/- to the

¶18

¶19

petitioner, under the Tamil Nadu Government Servant Medical Welfare Scheme for the petitioner's treatment for “off pump coronary artery by pass grafting”

¶20

2.Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3.

¶21

3.When the matter is taken up for hearing, it is represented by the learned Additional Government Pleader that the Government has now recovered the contribution for availing the medical benefit/medical claim under the new Health Insurance Scheme from the petitioner.

¶22

4.The submission made by the learned Additional Government Pleader is recorded.

¶23

5.In view of the above, the respondents are directed to extend the medical benefits to the petitioner immediately.

¶24

6.With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶25

Sd/-

¶26

Assistant Registrar(Per.Admn.) /TRUE COPY/ Sub Assistant Registrar

¶27

¶28

1.The Director General of Police, Mylapore, Chennai, Chennai.

¶29

2.The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, Madurai.

¶30

3.The Pay and Accounts Officer, Madurai City, Madurai.

¶31

4.The Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Divisional Office 5^th Floor,

¶32

PLA, Rathna Tower,

¶33

212, Annasalai, Chennai.

¶34

+1cc to Mr.A.GANDIAPPAN Advocate, in SR.NO.38915 +1cc to Mr.SPL.GOVERNMENT PLEADER,in SR.NO.39367 ssl

¶35

gcs/29/07/2015/2p/7c

¶36

Writ Petition (MD) No.10193 of 2015

¶37

15.07.2015

¶38

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

T.V. Devarajan v. the Director General of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.V. Devarajan v. the Director General of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jeyaraj, Vs the Commissioner

A.Ninaiva, Vs the Secretary to Govt.

D.Kumar Vs the District Collector

P. Gunasekaran, Vs the Deputy General Manager

M/s. Polaris Consulting Vs The Joint Commissioner of

M/s. D.V.R. Freight Forwarders Vs The Commissioner of Customs