Jai Prakash Tiwari v. The Secretary

on medical treatment. The case of the petitioner for medical reimbursement was recommended by the Chief Election Officer, Bhopal, Deputy Collector, Seoni as well as Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare. However, vide letter dated 18.9.2017, annexure P/8, Addl. Commissioner, Tribal, Bhopal declined the claim of the petitioner on the ground that there is no provision for medical reimbursement to the Lecture/Adhyapak cadre. On 8.1.2018 the petitioner was informed by the Joint Director (Finance) that there is no provision for medical expenditure to the Lecturer/contractual cadre employee of the State Govt. However, on 23.2.2018 the respondent no.2 issued a letter to the Principal Secretary, School Education to treat the case of the petitioner as 'exceptional' and release the medical claim of the petitioner. It is submitted that despite recommendation of the Chief Election Officer, medical claim has not been released to the petitioner till date, hence this petition.

3. Per contra, counsel for the respondents opposed the prayer made by the petitioner and submitted that as per letter dated 8.1.2018, annexure P/13, of the Joint Director (Finance), Public Instructions, there is no provision for reimbursement of medical claim of Adhyapak/Contractual cadre and as such the petitioner being Lecturer/Adhyapak is not entitled for such claims and prayed for dismissal of the petition.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5. The M.P. Civil Services (Medical Attendance) Rules, 1958, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1958') are enacted by the State Legislature with a view to regulate the medical attendance and treatment of Govt. servants. Rule 4 of the Rules of 1958 provides as under :-

2

Rule 4. (1) A government servant shall be entitled to treatment in a hospital free of charge if any amount is paid by a Government servant on account of such treatment, accommodation in hospital, diet or or any other account it shall be reimbursed to him in the manner and to the extent provided in these rules.

6. Thus, as per rule 4(1), a Govt. servant is entitled to treatment in a hospital free of charge. In case any amount is paid by a Govt. servant on account of such treatment, accommodation in hospital, diet or on any other account it shall be reimbursed to him in the manner and to the extent provided in these rules. Similarly, as per rule 7(1), a Govt. servant is entitled to reimbursement of expenditure incurred by him on account of medical attendance, treatment, accommodation, diet to the extent mentioned in the said rule.

7. Reliance has been placed on a Division Bench judgment of this Court (Gwalior Bench) dated 25.2.2025 in the case of State of M.P. and others Vs. Smt.Padma Sharma, passed in W.A.No.2246/2024, wherein relying upon the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of State of M.P. Vs. M.P.Ojha and another, reported in AIR 1998 SC 659 and order dated 11.2.2010 passed in W.P.No.6228/2006, the order of reimbursement of medical claim of the petitioner therein was allowed and the respondents were directed to pay medical bills amounting to Rs.54,761/- along with interest.

8. In the present case, the petitioner being a Lecturer, was assigned with the charge of election duty by the District Election Officer. While performing election duty on 23.11.2013, he suffered acute abdomen with perforation peritonitis due to which he became unconscious and immediately referred to District Hospital Seoni and thereafter to Nagpur. He remained

3

(DEEPAK KHOT)

JUDGE

under treatment continuously w.e.f. 27.11.2013 to 21.1.2014 at Ganga Care Hospital, Nagpur. The case of medical reimbursement of the petitioner was recommended by the authorities including the Chief Election Commission. Thus, on the basis of recommendations of the State Election Commission, it cannot be said that the petitioner was not doing any Govt. duty. As the petitioner was assigned with the charge of election by the District Election Commission, therefore, he can be said to be performing Govt. duty and can be treated as Govt. servant for getting the cover of medical bills under the Rules of 1958.

9. In view of the foregoing analysis and taking into consideration aforesaid enunciation of law, in the considered opinion of this Court, as the petitioner being Lecturer, was obligated with the charge of election duty by the District Election Commission, he can be said to be performing Govt. duty for the said purpose and during the course of employment, he suffered stomach ailment, for which he is entitled to medical reimbursement for the bills submitted by him for his treatment during the said illness by treating his case to be an exceptional case.

10. In the result, the petition succeeds and is allowed and the respondents are directed to make payment of the amount spent by the petitioner on medical treatment as recommended by the authorities within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

4

HS

5