Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from a government servant's claim for reimbursement of medical expenses incurred in a private hospital for heart disease. The petitioner, a government servant, claimed reimbursement and the amount was ultimately disbursed on August 28, 1991, but there was delay in payment. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking interest on the delayed reimbursement. The High Court of Punjab & Haryana, in a Letters Patent Appeal, directed payment of the reimbursement amount but disallowed the claim for interest at 12% per annum. A review petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed. The petitioner then approached the Supreme Court by special leave petition. The petitioner contended that in several cases the Division Bench of the High Court had directed payment of interest, but in this case they had departed from that principle. The petitioner also argued that when a special leave petition was filed by the State against a similar order, the Supreme Court had dismissed it in limine, and therefore the petitioner was entitled to interest. The Supreme Court rejected these contentions. The Court observed that the petitioner had no right to claim reimbursement except for the benefit granted by the Government. The core question was whether the State should be liable to pay interest on account of delay in reimbursing the amount incurred towards medical expenses. The Court held that it is inexpedient and not proper to direct the State to pay interest for delay in payment of reimbursement amount. The Court reasoned that verification of amounts spent by the petitioner and similar persons is required, and the right only is to get reimbursement; it does not follow that for delay in payment of medical reimbursement, the petitioner should also be entitled to interest. The Court further held that the order of the Supreme Court dismissing an earlier special leave petition in limine does not furnish any ground for following the same, as such dismissal has no precedential value. Consequently, the Supreme Court dismissed the special leave petition, holding that no interest is payable on delayed reimbursement of medical expenses incurred by a government servant.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Medical Reimbursement - Right to Interest on Delayed Reimbursement - No specific Act cited - A government servant claimed interest at 12% on delayed reimbursement of medical expenses incurred in a private hospital for heart disease; reimbursement was paid after delay. The Supreme Court held that the right to reimbursement does not automatically include interest for delay, and it is inexpedient and not proper to direct the State to pay interest for delay in payment of reimbursement amount. Held that no interest is payable on delayed reimbursement of medical expenses to a government servant. (Para 1) B) Precedent - Effect of In Limine Dismissal of Special Leave Petition - Binding Nature - No specific Act cited - Petitioner argued that since the State's earlier special leave petition was dismissed in limine, the petitioner was entitled to interest; the Supreme Court rejected this, holding that dismissal of a special leave petition in limine does not furnish any ground for following the same and does not constitute a binding precedent. Held that an order dismissing a special leave petition in limine has no precedential value. (Para 1)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the State is liable to pay interest on delayed payment of medical reimbursement to a government servant, and whether dismissal of an earlier special leave petition by the State in limine entitles the petitioner to interest
Final Decision
Special leave petition dismissed. No interest payable on delayed reimbursement of medical expenses.
Law Points
- Right to reimbursement of medical expenses does not automatically include interest for delay
- dismissal of special leave petition in limine has no precedential value
