WP/16270/2024 of B.KARUNANANDAM Vs THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU on 22 September 2026

ORDER

This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to direct the Respondents 2 to 4 to reimburse the entire claim amount of Rs.1,68,933/- (Rupees One Lakh and Sixty Eight Thousand and Nine Hundred and Thirty Three Rupees Only) which was spent for Covid -19 treatment to the petitioner’s mother B.Krishnaveni (late), within stipulated time.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that his mother took treatment for Covid- 19 at SKS Hospital at Mogappair, Chennai between 20.04.2021 to 26.04.2021. Unfortunately, she died due to Covid and total expenditure meted out by her was Rs.1,68,933/-, It is the submission of the petitioner that his mother being a pensioner, she is entitled to have reimbursement. When the petitioner sent all the details the respondents rejected the same by cryptic order by stating that ‘non-critical nature and treatment taken in non-network hospital’. It is also submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that in the meanwhile the fourth respondent / Insurance Company

WP No. 16270 of 2024

have settled Rs.72,233/-. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is entitled to have full reimbursement. In this regard, they sent e-mail correspondence on 12.12.2023 for which the fourth respondent / Insurance Company had stated that they are not in a position to reconsider his request for further reimbursement. Further, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that his case was not considered in accordance with the judgment of this Court in S.Marimuthu v. Government of Tamil Nadu (W.P.(MD) No.13429 of 2013 etc., batch, dated 28.05.2018), hence, prayed to allow this writ petition.

3. The said contention was totally objected by the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 and would contend, though the petitioner’s claim was earlier rejected based on the provision then in existence, later Government reconsidered all the cases of the Covid and decided to give reimbursement. Based upon the documents submitted by the petitioner eligible amount of Rs.72,233/- was already been settled and therefore, no amount is due to be settled to the petitioner.

4. Inspite of the fact that the fourth respondent is served and name printed in the cause list, no one is appeared on their behalf before this Court.

5. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by

WP No. 16270 of 2024

either side and from the records perused.

6. From the perusal of the impugned order initially the respondents rejected the petitioner’s claim. However, later on settled a sum of Rs.72,233/-. It is the specific case of the petitioner that his case was not considered as per the decision of this Court in S.Marimuthu v. Government of Tamil Nadu (W.P. (MD) No.13429 of 2013 etc., batch, dated 28.05.2018). In such view of the peculiar defence raised by the petitioner and also upon the fact that only the notional amount has been settled to the petitioner and this Court would like to remit back the matter for reconsideration in line with the judgment of this Court in S.Marimuthu v. Government of Tamil Nadu (W.P.(MD) No.13429 of 2013 etc., batch, dated 28.05.2018).

7. In view of the same, this Writ Petition is dispose of as indicated above. No costs. 22-09-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No MTL

WP No. 16270 of 2024

To

1. The State Of Tamil Nadu Rep By Its Additional Chief Secretary, Finance Department, Fort St.George, Chennai- 09.

2. The Commissioner Of Treasuries And Accounts 3rd Floor, Prof. K.Anbazhagan Building, No.571, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai-35.

3. The District Treasury Officer District Treasury Officer, Madurai-20.

WP No. 16270 of 2024

C.KUMARAPPAN, J. MTL WP No. 16270 of 2024 22-09-2026