1. ' MUMTAZ ALI KAZI (CHAIRMAN).-This appeal arises from an order of the Government rejecting the claim of the appellant for reimbursement of medical charges for his treatment abroad.
2. ' The appellant was serving as Chief Design Officer in Irrigation and Power Department. In August, 1978, the appellant fell ill and the medical board constituted by the Secretary to the Government of Sind, Health Department, gave the report that the appellant should proceed abroad for treatment as the same was not available in Pakistan and in case the appellant remained in Pakistan be might be disabled for further service. The appellant accordingly applied to the Government for leave for the purpose of treatment abroad on the basis of the certificate issued by the medical board recommending such treatment. The appellant proceeded to U. K. On 20th September, 1978 and after necessary treatment returned to Pakistan and resumed his duties on 18th November, 1978. He then submitted his bill of medical expenses countersigned by the Embassy of Pakistan, London, for reimbursement of medical charges. He was, however, informed that his request for reimbursements of medical charges could not be acceded to as under the Medical Attendance Rules prior concurrence of the Government should have been obtained.
3. ' The Government Servants (Medical Attendance) Rules were published by the West Pakistan Government on 20th July, 1959. They were made applicable throughout West Pakistan including Sind. Since fresh Rules have not so far been framed on the subject the West Pakistan Government Rules continue to apply to Sind Government Servants also. It is true that under these Rules the Government servants have not been granted the privilege of medical treatment in Foreign countries but under Rule 14 the Government has been authorised to relax the provision of these Rules in cases of special hardships. The Government of Sind in the Finance Department accordingly promulgated or published Circular No, F D (SR-I1) 11-9-77, dated 4th December, 1977, on the subject of reimbursement of medical expenses incurred on civil servants' medical treatment abroad. The conditions laid down for such relaxation were :-
(a) Where question of life is involved and treatment is not available in Pakistan ; and
(b) where the disease may permanently disable the Government servant. The medical board of the Provincial Government had to certify that the treatment for the illness was not available Pakistan.
4. ' When all these conditions were fulfilled the Government Officer On return had to submit his bills and vouchers to the Finance Department. The Government had then to adopt a common policy of allowing Rs, 35,000 or 50% of the expenses which ever was less.
5. ' Thus under the above circular, the case of the appellant fulfilled all the necessary requirements for reimbursement of the medical charges. The facts have not been disputed and they have been admitted in the written statement filed by the Government ' The only question therefore left to be decided is whether the claim of the appellant _should be rejected merely on the ground that prior sanction of the Finance Department for incurring the expenditure was not obtained. The cases requiring medical treatment abroad are usually of urgent nature and in an emergency when the question of life of the patient is involved. It is not possible for the patient to apply for sanction and wait for the concurrence of the Finance Department before proceeding abroad. It is usual for the department in such cases to ask for clarifications and refer the case back with number of quarries before sanctioning the expenditure ; and this procedure if adopted may nullify the very object of granting the relief. In any case the question is of "reimbursement" which is subsequent to the incurring of expenditure for medical treatment and not of "prior sanction". A patient would not know even the approximate amount required to be spent before going abroad. The question of prior sanction would, therefore, be meaningless. In any case there could be no bar to the examination of the case of the appellant for deciding the question of reimbursement of medical charges. Sanction can also be granted postfacto looking to the emergency. There is nothing in the circular above referred to, requiring prior concurrence of the Government, specially when all the conditions laid down in the circular are fulfilled. The rejection of the claim of the appellant summarily without examining the claim on merits was, therefore, unjustified. We are accordingly of the view that on the facts of this case, and the policy laid down by the Government, the case of the appellant , for reimbursement is one that ought to be allowed.
6. The appellant accordingly succeeds and the appeal is allowed with no orders as to costs.