Petitioner became a member of ‘Retired Employees Liberalized Health Scheme’ floated by the respondent for the retired employees. As per Scheme, petitioner was entitled to medical facilities as well as reimbursement of medical expenditure being member of the Scheme and ex-employee of the Railways. He was issued Medical Card No.AO19985. Petitioner was rushed to SMS Hospital, Jaipur due to severe chest pain from where he was referred to Apollo Hospital, Delhi being a case of heart attack. Petitioner was admitted
-2- in the Apollo Hospital and was diagnosed a case of Triple Artery Blockage and was advised bypass surgery. Petitioner underwent a bypass surgery and spent a sum of Rs.1,81,800/- on the treatment. He applied for reimbursement of the medical expenses which was not disbursed to him. Being aggrieved petitioner filed the complaint before the District Forum. District Forum allowed the complaint and directed the respondent to pay Rs.1,81,800/- to the petitioner along with interest @ 10% p.a. from the date of filing of complaint till realization. Respondent being aggrieved filed the appeal before the State Commission which has been allowed and the order of the District Forum has been set aside. State Commission relying upon a decision of Kerala State Commission in “Divisional Forest Officer Vs. Aravindaksha Menos’s case – 2002 (3) CPR 189” held that the dispute was not a consumer dispute. Counsel for the petitioner prays that he may be permitted to withdraw the complaint with liberty to the petitioner to seek redressal of his grievance before any other forum. -3- In view of prayer made by the petitioner, revision petition as well as the complaint are dismissed as withdrawn. Liberty is reserved with the petitioner to seek redressal of his grievance in any other forum along with an application under Section 14 read with Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act seeking exclude of the time spent in the consumer fora while calculating the limitation in the light of the observations of the Supreme Court in Laxmi Engineering Works vs.PSG Industrial Institute – (1995) 3 SCC 583. | 
