Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 07th February, 2025
SMT. BHAWANA SHARMA .....Petitioner
Through: Petitioner in person.
Through: Mr. Sunder Khatri, ASC for NDMC
Officer in person.
JUDGMENT
1. An additional affidavit has already been filed by respondent/NDMC.
2. Learned counsel for the respondent/NDMC submits that they have brought a medical card for the petitioner which is having validity of one year.
3. However, the order dated 24.01.2019 passed in CM(M) 808/2018 does not make any mention that such card would be having limited validity and, therefore, respondents are directed to ensure that they comply with the above said directions scrupulously and issue a fresh medical card to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from today.
4. For the purposes of completion of certain codal formalities viz. providing photograph and residential address and for signatures, the petitioner shall cooperate with the respondent/NDMC and would go to the office of the respondent/NDMC on 24.02.2025 at 11:00 A.M.
5. In case, the petitioner is unable to visit the office of NDMC on the CONT.CAS(C) 1608/2024 2 above said date, it is expected that she would get in touch with the officer of NDMC in advance and fix up another day with mutual consultation.
6. It is expected that if requisite formalities are completed, the medical card is handed over to the petitioner, then and there.
7. As regards the processing of her bill with respect to medical expenditure, the petitioner submits that she had, along with the bill, submitted an emergency certificate and, therefore, the bill was required to be processed in view thereof.
8. A copy of emergency certificate has been shown by her during course of hearing and has also been supplied to learned counsel for NDMC.
9. NDMC shall re-consider the above said bill, in light of the above said certificate supplied by her.
10. Let it be done within a period of four weeks from today.
11. In view of the above, nothing further survives in the present contempt petition.
12. The same is, accordingly, disposed of.
13. However, if the needful is not done by the respondent in the above said manner and if the petitioner feels that she is left with any further grievance in the matter, she would be at liberty to revive the present contempt petition by moving appropriate application.
JUDGE FEBRUARY 7, 2025