Disposed

The State of Rajasthan v. Smt. Usha Sharma Wife of Late Shri Suresh Chand Sharma

Rajasthan HC22 Aug 2024SAW/404/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this special appeal, the State sought recovery of medical reimbursement paid to the widow and children of a deceased employee who underwent emergent treatment. The High Court held that recovering the amount would be futile in light of the Apex Court's ruling in State of Rajasthan Vs. Mahesh Kumar Sharma, and refused to treat this disposal as a precedent.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is disposed without considering the recovery of the medical reimbursement amount from the respondents, asserting the entirety of the principle stated in State of Rajasthan Vs. Mahesh Kumar

The State of Rajasthan Vs Smt. Usha Sharma… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:35444-DB]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 404/2021

¶4

The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary To The Government, Home Department, Rajasthan Secretariat, Jaipur

¶5

The Director General Of Police (Acb), J-9, Jhalana Industrial Area, Jaipur.

¶6

The Superintendent Of Police, Anti-Corruption Bureau,jaipur

¶7

----Appellants

¶8

Versus

¶9

Smt. Usha Sharma Wife Of Late Shri Suresh Chand Sharma, Resident Of House No. 2282, Devidasji Ki Bagichi, Khazanewalon Ka Rasta, Jaipur.

¶10

Vibhash Sharma Son Of Late Shri Suresh Chand Sharma, Resident Of House No. 2282, Devidasji Ki Bagichi, Khazanewalon Ka Rasta, Jaipur.

¶11

Kapil Sharma Son Of Late Shri Suresh Chand Sharma, Resident Of House No. 2282, Devidasji Ki Bagichi, Khazanewalon Ka Rasta, Jaipur.

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Samee Khan on behalf of Mr. Bhuvnesh Sharma, AAG

¶14

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kapil Sharma on behalf of Mr. Sandeep Mathur

¶15

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

¶16

Order

¶17

22/08/2024

¶18

Appellants have preferred this appeal aggrieved by Judgment and Order dated 20.08.2019 passed by learned Single Judge whereby the writ petition filed by the respondents was allowed and the appellants were directed to make complete medical

¶19

[2024:RJ-JP:35444-DB]

¶20

[SAW-404/2021]

¶21

(2 of 3)

¶22

reimbursement to the respondents who are surviving wife and children of Late Shri Suresh Chand Sharma to the tune of Rs.9,12,457/-. The learned Single Judge made it clear that amount already paid shall be deducted from the final amount to be paid and that the respondents shall be entitled to receive the interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the writ petition to the time amount is paid.

¶23

It is contended by counsel for the appellants-State that the learned Single Judge has placed reliance on Shankar Lal Mathur (Dr.) Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3222/2001 whereas, this judgment has been overruled by the Apex Court in State of Rajasthan Vs. Mahesh Kumar Sharma: (2011) 4 SCC 257 . It is also contended that the entire amount has been paid to the respondents, but the same has been paid subject to the decision of this appeal in terms of the order dated 03.12.2021 passed by this Court. 3. Counsel for the respondents has opposed the present Special Appeal (Writ). It is contended that the judgment of the Apex Court in State of Rajasthan Vs. Mahesh Kumar Sharma (supra) was brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge. Respondents are widow and children of the deceased. It is also contended that the deceased was referred by the doctors at SMS Hospital, Jaipur to undergo treatment at Indraprasth AIIMS Hospital, New Delhi in emergent circumstances and thereafter, the deceased had undertaken his treatment at Indraprasth Apollo Hospital, New Delhi. It is further contended that even in State of Rajasthan Vs. Mahesh Kumar Sharma case (supra) , Hon’ble Supreme Court has

¶24

(3 of 3)

¶25

[2024:RJ-JP:35444-DB]

¶26

[SAW-404/2021]

¶27

made it clear that Government will not recover the amount which has been paid to the respondents.

¶28

We have considered the contentions.

¶29

It is true that the law laid down in Shankar Lal’s case (supra) has been overruled by the Apex Court in State of Rajasthan Vs. Mahesh Kumar Sharma (supra) . However, the said judgment was not placed before the learned Single Judge by the counsel for the State. The respondents are widow and children of the deceased, who had undergone emergent operation at Indraprasth AIIMS Hospital New Delhi after he was referred by the Doctors at SMS Hospital, Jaipur. Since, the expenses has been incurred by the family members of the deceased and the amount has been paid to the respondents, we are of the considered view that the amount should not be recovered from the respondents, who are widow and son of the deceased, in light of the law settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Rajasthan Vs. Mahesh Kumar Sharma (supra). The amount which has been paid by the Government was to the tune of Rs.3,22,000/-. The amount which has now been paid is Rs.9,00,000/-. The excess amount is less than Rs.6,00,000/-. It would be a futile exercise to recover the said amount from the family members of the deceased. However , it is made clear that disposal of this appeal will not be considered as a precedent.

¶30

Consequently, the present appeal stands disposed.

¶31

All pending applications also stands disposed.

¶32

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J

¶33

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

¶34

MAHIMA/36

The State of Rajasthan v. Smt. Usha Sharma Wife of Late Shri Suresh Chand Sharma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Rajasthan v. Smt. Usha Sharma Wife of Late Shri Suresh Chand Sharma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Manoj Agrawal Son of Shri Shyam Sundar Agrawal, Vs M/S J.K.D. Pearl India Developers Pvt.Ltd.

Madan Singh S/O Shri Devi Singh Rajput Vs Deputy Commissioner, Income Tax (Benami Transaction)

Dinesh Gautam Son of Shri Inderlal Sharma Vs the Board of Revenue for Rajasthan

Smt. Santosh Devi Sharma Wife of Shri Nirmal Kumar Sharma, Vs Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd.

Vyom Foodcraft Private Limited Vs Vyam Food Craft India Private Limited

Rakesh Yadav S/O Shri Lekhram Yadav Vs the Registrar (Examination), Rajasthan High Court