Person Receiving Pension Not Entitled To Maintenance Under Senior Citizens Act: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court has held that a senior citizen who is receiving regular pension as well as family pension and is able to maintain himself does not fall within the meaning of Section 4 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. The Court highlighted that the Act was brought on the statute book to provide for appropriate mechanism to be set up to provide need-based maintenance to the parents and senior citizens.
Justice Nandesh S. Deshpande was hearing a writ petition filed by a 65-year-old father challenging orders passed by the Senior Citizens Welfare Tribunal and the appellate authority rejecting his application under Section 5 of the Act. The petitioner is the father of Respondent No.1 and father-in-law of Respondent No.2.
The petitioner submitted that although he had not claimed maintenance, he had a right of existence in the property owned by him. He also contended that the property was purchased in his son's name with funds provided by him and that his son had subsequently executed a registered Gift Deed in his favour.
The respondents submitted that both authorities had recorded that the petitioner was receiving regular pension as well as the family pension of his deceased wife, who was also a government servant. They contended that the Act would not apply when a senior citizen was able to maintain himself.
The Court noted that while rejecting the application under the 2007 Act, the Competent Authority had noted that since the petitioner herein is regularly receiving pension as also family pension of deceased wife, the provisions of the Act of 2007 cannot be invoked to order eviction of respondent No.1
The Court observed that although the appellate authority had incorrectly recorded that the Gift Deed was not registered, the petitioner was not a person who was unable to maintain himself. It further held that the validity of the Gift Deed was not within the scope of the appellate authority.
Referring to Sections 4 and 5 of the Act, the Court noted that a senior citizen is entitled to make an application only where the senior citizen is unable to maintain himself from his own earning or out of the property owned by him. Hence, it observed:
“It, therefore, follows as a necessary corollary that a person like the petitioner, who admittedly receives a regular pension as well as a family pension of the deceased wife, would not fall within the meaning of Section 4 of the Act of 2007 so as to make him entitled to make an application under Section 5 of the said Act.”
The Court observed that various proceedings were pending between the parties concerning the property, but held that those proceedings were not relevant to deciding the present petition. Without making any observation about the pending civil suit, the Court found no perversity in the orders passed by the authorities below.
The Court accordingly rejected the petition.
Case Title: Bhimrao S/o Indeshwar Meshram v. Ashish S/o Bhimrao Meshram [Writ Petition No. 4949 of 2024]