Mysuru district admin apprehensive about rise in COVID cases post Dasara festivities
Mysuru: There could be a spurt in coronavirus cases due to tourists from outside who came to the city to witness the Dasara festivities, Mysuru deputy commissioner Rohini Sindhuri said on Monday.
"We have been discussing it (spurt in cases). We will get the effect of Dasara after a fortnight," Sindhuri told reporters in Mysuru replying to queries on the Dasara event.
She added that in December there will be a Panchalinga festival, which too will have an effect on the spread of coronavirus.
The officer said once Mysuru had brought down the cases to zero but there will be a spurt in COVID-19 infections again.
She insisted that the trend of decline in cases needed to be maintained in the interest of people.
According to the health department, Mysuru has cumulatively reported 47,831 cases and 959 fatalities.
The district was in the limelight for the Nanjangud COVID cluster when a large number of employees of a pharmaceutical company were found to be coronavirus infected in April.
The persistence of the district administration had brought down the cases to zero, but the cases later increased to an alarming level of about 1,000 cases a day.
However, it has been brought down to 147 cases a day presently, the department said.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Legal heirs can claim reimbursement if govt employee dies during treatment: Allahabad HC
Lucknow (PTI): The Lucknow bench of Allahabad High Court on Saturday said that if a government employee or pensioner dies during treatment or becomes incapable of making a claim, his legal heirs can also claim reimbursement of medical expenses.
The bench of Justice Alok Mathur and Justice Amitabh Kumar Rai passed the verdict on the petition of Chandra Choor Singh.
The petitioner's father was a retired deputy registrar. He was treated at private hospitals in Lucknow, where he passed away during treatment. The petitioner applied for reimbursement of medical expenses, but the department rejected the claim, stating that only the "beneficiary" can make a claim under the rules.
ALSO READ: KSRTC MD Akram Pasha receives SKOCH National Award for transparent recruitment initiative
The state government argued that under the Uttar Pradesh Government Servants (Medical Attendance) Rules, 2011, a claim can only be made by a beneficiary, and the petitioner did not fall within this category. It also cited the limit of Rs 5,000 set out in the succession certificate submitted by the petitioner.
The court rejected this argument of the state government, stating that the provisions of Rule 16 of the Rules, 2011, were arbitrary and violated Article 14 of the Constitution. The court held that if a beneficiary dies or becomes incapable of making a claim, his or her legal heirs cannot be deprived of this right.
Applying the principle of "reading down", the Court directed that Rule 16 be interpreted to include legal heirs, especially when there is no other eligible beneficiary.
The court also clarified that if there is no dispute about being an heir, it is not appropriate to reject the claim merely on technical grounds.
Ultimately, the court directed the concerned authority to reconsider the petitioner's claim and take a decision within two months, and if the claim is found to be correct, payment should be ensured within one month.
