Disposed

K.Srinivasan, v. the Director, National Institu

Madras HC10 Jan 2019WP/37660/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petitioner challenged rejection of medical reimbursement claim for his mother's treatment. Court directed the respondents to consider a fresh representation on merits within 12 weeks and disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to submit fresh representation to the 3rd respondent with all facts and documents within 4 weeks for consideration within 12 weeks on merits.

K.Srinivasan, Vs the Director, National Institu — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED:10.01.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAN

¶5

W.P.No.37660 of 2003

¶6

K.Srinivasan ... Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

The Director, National Institute of Port Management, East Coast Road, Uthandi, Chennai - 600 119. 2. National Institute of Port Management Governing Body, Rep by its Chairman, Secretary to Government of India, (Ports and Shipping), Ministry of Shipping, No.1, Sansad Marg, Parliament Street, New Delhi 110 001.

¶9

The Indian Maritime University, Rep by its Registrar, East Coast Road, Uthandi, Chennai - 600 119. ... Respondents (R3 impleaded vide order dated 20.12.2018 made in W.M.P. 38633/2018)

¶10

Prayer : Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 1st respondent pertaining to his office Memorandum in

¶11

Ref.NIPM/ADM/01/STAFF/030/2003 dated 12.12.2003, quash the same and directing the respondents to allow the petitioner's appeal dated 19.02.2001.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr. B.K.Srinivasan

¶13

for Mr.K.N.Thambi

¶14

For Respondents : Mr.Anand Gopalan

¶15

for Mr.T.S.Gopalan for R1 Mr.K.R.Tamizhmani for R2

¶16

None appeared for R3

¶17

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

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

The order of rejection dated 12.12.2003 in respect of the claim of the writ petitioner for medical reimbursement is under challenge in the present writ petition.

¶20

The grievances of the writ petitioner is that, he has opted for the mediclaim policy with the respondent organization and on account of the treatment taken by his mother, he submit the medical bills to the Authorities Competent. The New India Insurance Company who was an insurer during the relevant point of time rejected the claim of the writ petitioner by invoking the exclusion clause. However, with reference to the rules of National Institute of Port Management, the case of the writ petitioner for reimbursement of mediclaim was considered in a governing body meeting and a part amount had been settled.

¶21

The learned counsel for the writ petitioner states that in respect of the similarly placed persons, the full medical amount had been settled and the case of the writ petitioner alone was discriminated. Under these circumstances, without going in to the merits of the matter, the writ petitioner is directed to submit a fresh representation to the 3rd respondent setting out all the facts and circumstances along with the documents within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of any such representation from the writ petitioner along with the details, the 3rd respondent is directed to consider the same and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of 12 weeks thereafter.

¶22

With these directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. No Costs.

¶23

s/d-

¶24

Assistant Registrar(CS VIII)

¶25

True Copy

¶26

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶27

Pkn To

¶28

1.The Director,

¶29

National Institute of Port Management, East Coast Road,

¶30

Uthandi, Chennai - 600 119.

¶31

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

¶32

The Chairman, National Institute of Port Management Governing Body, Secretary to Government of India, (Ports and Shipping), Ministry of Shipping, No.1, Sansad Marg, Parliament Street, New Delhi 110 001.

¶33

The Registrar, The Indian Maritime University, East Coast Road, Uthandi, Chennai - 600 119. +1 CC to Mr.K.N.Thambi, Advocate sr 3176. +1 CC to M/s.T.S. Gopalan st 3010. W.P.No.37660 of 2003 RSV(CO) SP(07/02/2019)

¶34

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

K.Srinivasan, v. the Director, National Institu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Srinivasan, v. the Director, National Institu

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

S. Durairaj, Vs the Collector

A.Babu Vs the Tamil Nadu Electricity

Sundaram Enterprises Vs the Deputy Commercial Tax

M/S.Kumar Mahendra Exim Vs the Deputy Comemrcial Tax

Harshad Doshi Vs the Authorised Officer

Ramasamy, Vs the Deputy Registrar of