Case :- WRIT - C No. - 31600 of 2019 Petitioner :- Deepti Singh Respondent :- Bank Of Baroda And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Alok Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- Anadi Krishna Narayana
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
1. Heard Sri Alok Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri Arun Prakash, learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2 and perused the record.
2. The petitioner has sought a mandamus commanding respondent-3 a private company i.e. M/s Star Health and Allied Insurance Company Ltd. to approve cashless treatment/payment of medical expenses in respect of medical claim of petitioner.
3. The grievance of petitioner is against a private party i.e. respondent 3 hence the writ petition is not maintainable.
4. Despite repeated query, learned counsel for petitioner could not show any statutory obligation upon respondent 3, which may be enforced by means of this writ petition. This writ petition therefore is neither maintainable against private party nor such mandamus can be issued.
5. It is well settled that a writ of mandamus would lie only if petitioner is enforcing a legal right, and respondents are under a statutory obligation to do or not to do something.
6. In Oriental Bank of Commerce Vs. Sunder Lal Jain and another (2008) 2 SCC 280 the Apex Court after referring to its earlier judgments in Bihar Eastern Gangetic Fisherman Cooperative Society Ltd. Vs. Sipahi Singh (1977) 4 SCC 145; Lekhraj Kant Saran Vs. State of Bihar 1993(1) SCC 485 observed as under:
"There is abundant authority in favour of the proposition that a writ of mandamus can be granted only in a case where there is a statutory duty imposed upon the officer concerned and there is a failure on the part of that officer to discharge the statutory obligation."
7. In view of above, relief prayed for in this writ petition cannot be granted.
8. Dismissed accordingly.
Order Date :- 27.9.2019 KA