Allahabad High Court Mulls Guidelines For Senior Citizens' Safety In State; Seeks 'Action Plan' Status From UP Govt

The Allahabad High Court recently expressed its intent to lay down certain guidelines to give more effect to the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.

While hearing a plea by an 80-year-old woman, a bench of Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Siddharth Nandan directed the Principal Secretary (Home), Uttar Pradesh, to file a personal affidavit clarifying whether the State Government has prepared a "comprehensive action plan" for the protection of life and property of senior citizens, as mandated by the 2007 Law.

The bench passed this order, noting that several such petitions have been filed by senior citizens in the HC whose properties are under threat of encroachment or complete takeover by private parties.

Briefly put, the petitioner (Gulab Kali) had moved the HC claiming that she is suffering from ill health and is living alone with her two granddaughters, one of whom is physically disabled. 

She approached the High Court, apprehending coercive action by the private individuals named in the petition. She feared that those persons intended to dispossess her illegally and take over her ancestral abadi land.

Considering her plea, the Division Bench said that, normally, it would not interfere in such civil disputes between private parties; however, the facts of the case necessitated that the Court address the broader issue of protecting vulnerable senior citizens.

Perusing the definition clause of the special act, the bench found that 'maintenance' is not limited to financial support but also includes providing for food, clothing, residence and medical attendance/treatment. It noted that a tribunal is vested with the authority to consider the grievances of senior citizens under this Act.

However, the bench was informed by the parties that no such tribunal has been established to date in the State.

The State counsel drew the Court's attention to Section 22 of the Act, which empowers State authorities to enforce its provisions. Specifically, Section 22(1) vests the District Magistrate with authority to enforce the Act, subject to the conferment of such powers by the State.

Furthermore, Section 22(2) imposes a statutory duty on the State to prescribe a "comprehensive action plan" for providing protection of the life and property of senior citizens.

The Court referred to the UP Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2014, framed under Section 32 of the Act. It noted that Rule 21 of the said Rules mandates that the DM shall act in a manner to ensure the protection of the life and property of senior citizens so that they can live with security and dignity.

To further clarify the implementation of these provisions, the Court posed a specific question to the Chief Standing Counsel as to "whether the State Government has prepared a comprehensive action plan as required of them under Section 22(2) of the Act".

Consequently, the High Court requested the Principal Secretary (Home), UP, to file an affidavit to the Court's query regarding the actions which the District Magistrate can take for the protection of the life and property of senior citizens, especially those who are in a vulnerable state.

The matter has been posted for a further hearing on February 12.