In Jammu Kashmir, by virtue of the State Government order dated 19.02.2006, retired Judges are entitled to the same benefits as are available to the sitting Judges of Jammu Kashmir High Court.
73 of 2008 for review of the order dated 15.01.2007, but by order dated 22.04.2008 the High Court rejected the prayer for review and directed the State Government to companyply with the order dated 15.01.2007 of the High Court within two months.
Aggrieved, the appellant filed this appeal against the order dated 15.01.2007 passed in suo motu writ petition No.6285 of 2005 and the order dated 22.04.2008 rejecting Civil Application No.73 of 2008.
In Kuldip Singh v. Union of India JT 2002 2 SC 506, the medical facilities for retired Judges of the Supreme Court were in issue.
9020 9021 OF 2012 Arising out of SLP C Nos.15739 15740 of 2008 Secretary, Ministry of Health Welfare Government of Maharashtra Appellant Versus C. Malte Ors.
The Government of Maharashtra the appellant herein then filed Civil Application No.
Justice S.C. Malte and four other retired Judges who after retirement were residing in Aurangabad, Maharashtra, addressed a letter to the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court mentioning therein the difficulties of the retired Judges in getting the medical facilities under the CGHS Scheme including the fact that the facilities thereunder were provided at only three cities in Maharashtra, namely, Mumbai, Nagpur and Pune.
This Rule 5, however, did number apply to retired Judges.
In Uttar Pradesh, the medical facilities to the retired Judges of the Allahabad High Court are the same as those available to the sitting Judges of the High Court.
J. K. Patnaik New Delhi, December 13, 2012.
This letter was treated as suo motu Writ Petition No.6285 of 2005 and an order was passed by the High Court on 17.07.2006 directing the Government of Maharashtra to frame rules for medical treatment and reimbursement of retired Judges of the Bombay High Court.
The Principal Secretary and RLA, Law and Judicial Department was present in Court, however, the Secretary, Finance Department was number.
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS.
The matter was finally heard at the After Notice stage.
Initially the suggestion was opposed on behalf of the State.
In Andhra Pradesh, the Government of Andhra Pradesh has extended the medical benefits to the retired Judges of the High Court at par with sitting Judges of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh.
Aggrieved from the orders dated 15th January, 2007 and 22nd April, 2008, the State of Maharashtra has preferred the present appeal by way of special leave before this Court.
In Madhya Pradesh, the Chief Justice of the High Court sanctions the reimbursement of the medical bills of the retired Judges of the High Court pursuant to the orders passed by the State Government.
This representation came to be treated as a suo motu Writ Petition on the appellate side of the Bombay High Court.
The facts very briefly are that Section 23D of the High Court Judges Salaries and Conditions of Service Act, 1954 for short the Act provides for medical facilities for retired Judges.
A retired officer of the Central Civil Services, Class I and his family are entitled to medical facilities under the Central Government Health Scheme for short the CHGS Scheme .
In this representation, they also referred to various judgments under which the full reimbursement was provided under different rules as well as disparities that were prevalent in this respect, in different States of the companyntry.
Respondents J U D G M E N T Swatanter Kumar J. Leave granted.
Section 23D of the Act which is titled Medical facilities for retired Judges is extracted hereinbelow 23D 1 Every retired Judge, shall, with effect from the date on which the High Court Judges Conditions of Service Amendment Act, 1976, receives the assent of the President be entitled for himself and his family, to the same facilities as respects medical treatment and on the same companyditions as a retired officer of the Central Civil Services, Class I and his family, are entitled under any rules and orders of the Central Government for the time being in force.
Vide its order dated 17th July, 2006, the High Court directed the State Government to frame Rules within three months and companytinued the operation of the interim order dated 13th October, 2005.
Sub section 1 of Section 23D provides that every retired Judge shall be entitled for himself and his family to the same facilities as respects medical treatment and on the same companyditions as a retired officer of the Central Civil Services, Class I and his family, are entitled under any rules and orders of the Central Government for the time being in force.
In Gujarat, the Gujarat Ministers Medical Attendance and Treatment Rules 1964 have been extended to retired Judges of the High Court and the powers of the State Government under these Rules with respect to reimbursement have been delegated to the Chief Justice of the Gujarat High Court for sanctioning and reimbursing the expenditure for both sitting and retired Judges and their family members.
This application was dismissed by a detailed order of the High Court dated 22nd July, 2008.
Amendment suggested to the above Rule was that the words shall be entitled whenever the Central Government Health Scheme CGHS is number available be substituted by the words shall be entitled whenever the Central Government Health Scheme CGHS is number availed of.
K. PATNAIK, J. Leave granted.
After their tenure, their efforts to resolve these issues obviously did number result in bringing about any fruitful result.
I have read the judgment of my learned brother Justice Swatanter Kumar but with due respect to his learning I am unable to persuade myself to agree with his companyclusion that the appeals have numbermerit and with the directions in his judgment.
The bills will be cleared by the State Government to begin with and thereafter the Central Government will reimburse the amount paid by the State Government.
Some of the former Judges of the Bombay High Court, particularly those who are settled at Aurangabad, moved a representation to the Chief Justice of that High Court explaining the difficulties faced by them in getting medical facilities and difficulties in respect of reimbursement of the expenses on medicines.
In my view, the appeals should be allowed and the impugned orders of the High Court should be set aside for reasons which I shall indicate after setting out the facts.
After the pronouncement of the above judgment and lapse of a companysiderable period of time, on 8th October, 2007 the State Government filed an application stating that the companynsel and the officer giving companysent for change, by substitution of the words availed of in place of available, did number realise the repercussions of the amendment and had number obtained the companycurrence of the Finance Department.
These former Judges also included Judges who were appointed to the Bombay High Court but were subsequently transferred under the transfer policy to other High Courts.
The Government of Maharashtra drafted the Maharashtra Retired High Court Judges Facilities for Medical Treatment Rules, 2006, pursuant to the order dated 17.07.2006 of the Bombay High Court and placed the Draft Rules of 2006 before the High Court.
