2011 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

The case of the petitioner is that his son suffers from permanent disability on account of an accident that he met at the age of 17 years but his medical expenses are not being financed by WAPDA. He referred to Rule 17 of the Pakistan WAPDA Employees Medical Attendance Rules, 1979 as amended upto 1-6-2001 read with definition of hospital as provided in Rule 2(c). Both these Rules are reproduced as follows:

"

17. Permanently and totally incapacitated/crippled children of serving, retired and diseased WAPDA Employees, who are not able to earn their living, will be allowed medical treatment irrespective of their age. The Treatment will be limited to whatever is available in WAPDA Hospitals/Dispensaries where the patient is registered. However, the patient may be referred to nearest WAPDA Hospital for hospitalization, if needed. The disability will be certified by WAPDA Central Medical Board. "2(c). "Hospital" means all WAPDA In-door/out-door Hospitals and Dispensaries". Learned counsel for WAPDA on the other hand has contended that Rule 16 is applicable to the case which provides that Widows and dependent children upto the age of 25 years and unmarried/unemployed daughters of all deceased employees will be provided medical facilities only in WAPDA Hospital and dispensaries where they exist. Treatment at residence, re-imbursement of expenditure on purchase of medicines/ specialist consultation is not covered. Dr. Humayoon Ghayour Authorized Officer of respondent No.4 present along with counsel for WAPDA, states that son of the petitioner Syed Atif Ali Zaidi suffers from permanent disability and is permanently bed ridden. We have carefully examined the rules. In our opinion, the Rule 17 applies as this Rule provides that permanent and totally incapacitated/ crippled children of serving, retired and diseased WAPDA Employees who are not able to earn their living, will be allowed medical treatment irrespective or their age. However, this rule provides that such concession of treatment can be availed only in WAPDA Hospitals/ Dispensaries where the patient is registered. This clearly means that entitlement of treatment is given only in WAPDA Hospitals. However, when the definition of Hospital is read in Rule 2(c) which defines hospital, it includes all WAPDA In-door and Out-door Hospitals and Dispensaries. This means that Hospitals that are not only being run by the WAPDA itself but also such Hospitals which are on the panel of the WAPDA i.e. those hospitals with which WAPDA has an agreement for giving treatment to its employees or their family members. In the present case, the counsel for the WAPDA states that such contract exists with Wali Bhai Rajputana Hospital Hyderabad and Red Crescent Hospital Unit No.6 Latifababad, Hyderabad. Hence reading this definition of Hospital in Rule 2 with Rule 17, the son of the petitioner, apart from the Hospitals which are being run by the WAPDA itself shall also be entitled for treatment in the above mentioned two Hospitals i.e. Wali Bhai Rajputana Hospital Hyderabad and Red Crescent Hospital Unit No.6 Latifababad, Hyderabad irrespective of his age. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms along with listed application. H.B.T./M-112/K Order accordingly.