Telangana High Court

WP/2976/2026 of Sri Y. Sree Raghu Kumar Vs The State of Telangana on 6 April 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA WRIT PETITION NO: 2976 OF 2026 Between Sri Y.Sree

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

134/.7 | IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA WRIT PETITION NO: 2976 OF 2026 Between Sri Y.Sree Raghu Kumar, S/o Late Rama Koteswara Rao, Aged- 69 Years, Occ- Court Officer (Rtd.,), Fl/o H. No. 4-3-125, Flot No. 22, Sri Sai Colony, Phase -ll, Hayath Nagar, Ranga Reddy District- 501505. ...PETITIONER AND '1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Prl. Secretary (Medical and Health), Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2. The Directorate of Medical Education, Government of Telangana, Koti, Hyderabad Rep. by its Director.

3. The Joint Registrar - cum - Drawing Officer, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ or Order more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent not initiated any action on Petitioners Medical Reimbursement Bill forwarded'by the 3rd Respondent / Joint Registrar - cum - Drawing fficer vide R.O.C. No. 267112025-Estt. 1(Medical) dated 23.04.2025 for Rs. 15,85,536/- as illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of Natural Justice guaranteed under Articles 14,21 and 309 of Constitution of lndia and observations of this Honble Court in W.P. No. 10902 of 2025 dated 30.04.2025 and subsequently direct the 2nd Respondent to release the amount of Rs. 15,85,536/- towards Petitioners Medical Bill forwarded by th,: 3rd RespondenUJoint Registrar of this Hon'ble Court. l.A. NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition uncler Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court mey be pleased to direct the 2nd Respondent to initiate action for scrutiny report fonruarded by the 3rd Respondent vide R.O.C.No.267112O25-Estt. 1(Medical) dated 23.04.2025 for release of medical reimbursement bill of Rs. 15,85,536/- pending disposal of the above writ petition. Gounsel for the Petitioner: SRI K.RAMACHANDRA Counsel for ther Respondent Nos.l & 2: SRI SANTHAPUR SAWANARAYNA RAO, counset for ther Respondent No.3: - GP FoR sERvlcES-l The Court mad,e the following: ORDER €

INTHEHIGHCOURTFoRTHESTATEOFTELANGANA AT HYDERABAD AND N G NN DATE: 06.04.2026 Between: Sri Y. Sree Raghu Kumar, S/o. Late Rama Koteshwara Rao Petitioner AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Prl. Secretary (Medical & Health)' Secretariat, Hyderabad and 2 others' Respondents ORDER: (per the tlon'ble SriJusticc I'Sum Koshlt) Heard Mr. K.Ramachandra, leamed counsel for the petitioner; and Mr.SanthapurSatyanaraynaRao,learnedGovernmentPleaderfor Services - I appearing on behalf of respondent Nos' I and1'

l'he instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the foltowing relief/s, vtz., " ... --...-ro is.rue wril or order more parricularly one in the natute ctJ' lvrit o.f Mandamus declaring the acrion o.f the 2'd Respontlcnl not initiated any action on Peririoner's Medical Reimhur.sement Bill .forwarded by lhe 3d Respondenr / Joint Regi.slrar - cum - Drowing o.fficer vide R.o-c. No. 2671/2025-Estt. t(Medical) tlated 23.04.2025 for Rs.15,85,536/- as illegal, arbitrarl, ancl violation of principles o.[ Natural Justice guaranleed under Arricles t4, 2t and 309 of Constitution oJ'lndia and observcttion.s o.f thc Hon'ble crntrt in wP- No- 10902 of 2025 dated 30.0r.2025 and subsequently direct rhe 2"o Respondent to release thc amount of Rs.t5,g5.536/- lowards Pe titioner'.t Medicol Bill Jbru,arded by the 3,,1 Respondent/Joint Registrar of this Hon'hre court and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court deems.fit and pruper in the interest ofjustice. "

The petitioner herein is a retired employee of this High court. Due to a medical emergency he was admitted in the Medicover Hospital, Hyderabad, and after undergoing the treatment he was discharged on 10.04.2025 upon paymenr of the full medical bill of Rs.15,g5,536/-. Subsequr:ntly, the petitioner forwarded the relevant documents to the High Court and from the High court the same were-fCIrwarded to the

Director of Medical Education on 24.04.2025. However, since then, the Director of Medical Education did not initiate any action on the same. This has led to the filing of the present writ petition.

4. Recently there was another identical matter which came up for hearing before this High Court in W.P.No.46677 of 2022, which was decided on 04.01.2023. The Division Bench of this High Court while allowing the said writ petition made the following observations, viz., "3. The issue raised in this writ petition is no more res integro. Similar issue arose for consideration before this ('ottrt in WP.No.262l0 of 1995. In the said writ pctition al.so petitioner was an employee of High Court and when he submitlccl medical hills -for reimbursement, small amounl of reimbursemenl was granted from out of the total expenditure incurred by him Jbr treatmenl. The respondents hove taken a stand that even the employee o/ High Court was not entitled to full reimbursement of the expendilure incurred by him. Overruling the said obiection. the Division Bench held as under: "ln view of the above, il has to be declared that the reslrictions as in G.O.Ms.No.l81 or ony olher order o.f' the Government upon the reimbursement oJ'the medical expenses to the Government employees are not applicable to the employees oJ'the High Court unless they are made applicoble by the Chief Justice of the Court. The impugned Governmcnl Order rc.iecting the i claim o.f the petilioner in the aforementioned leiler of the second re.spondcnt herein thus rs wholly without jurisdictioni the some ,s accordingly quashed. Respondents are direcred to consider the -claim of the petitioner in .the light o.f the rules unelfected by the Government Orders imposing restrictions upon the reimbursement of the medical attendance/trealment cosls by various governmenl Orders, strictly in accordance with the Andhra pradesh Integrated Medical Attenc{ance Rules, 1972 as modified ftom time to time in consultation wilh the Chief .Iustice of the High Court. In view o-f the directions aforenrcntioned, no further discttssion of the issues roised by the petitioner herein is required."

1. similar issue u,as raised in w.P.No.s.l96l3 oJ'2005 and 22615 oJ' 2020. Following the decision in W.p.No.262l0 of lggs W.P.Nos.l96l3 of 2005 and 22645 of 2020 ore allowed.

5. According to the 3rd respondent, no Rules are formulated by the Hon'ble Chie.f ,Iustice of the High Court and no restriction is imposed on the employees working in the High Court. Therefore, the principle laid down by the Divi.sion Bench of this Court in W.P.No.262l0 of 1995 holds field and in terms thereof, petitioner is also entitled to full reimbursement of medical expenditure incurred hy him for his treatment.

6. Following the said decision, this writ Petition is also ailowcd snd the rcspondents I and 2 are directed to reimburse the halance amount after deducting Rs.1,00,000/- already paid to the petitioner within a period o.f three months from the date of receipt oJ'copy of this order".

5. Upon plain reading of the order of the Division Bench referred to above, we find that the present matter also being of.identical nature can be disposed of in similar terms.

6. Accordingly, the present writ petition also stands allowed. The respondents are directed to scrutinize the bills raised by the petitioner for reimbursement and whatever is the admissible amount, the same shall be released fonhwith without any further delay

7. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if any, shall stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. ,.-L.. .. ,/TRUE COPY,,

1. The Prl. Secretary (Medical and Health)' Telangana.

2. The D]rector, Directorate of Medical Education' SD/- L.VIJAYA LAXMI ANT SECTION OFFICER Hyderabad, State of of Telangana, Koti, To

3.

4.

5.

6. PSK. TKS <dl-- Hyderabad The Joint Registrar . Gum - Drawing officer, High Court for the State of on" ic to snt K.RAMACHANDRA, Advocate IoPUC] Two CCb to GP fbn SSSVICES-;, iigt' Corrt for the State of Telangana' at Hyderabad. [OUTI Two CD CoPies i" il':1r1J<*s+

a a HIGH COURT DATEDT 0610412026

ORDER

WP.No.2976 of 2026 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ()() $-rAflg 2 B [?t ?11?6 * * i I

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead