Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
News Updates

Jurisdiction Of Senior Citizens Maintenance Tribunal Can't Be Invoked When Complainant Woman Is Aged Below 58 Yrs: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Drishti Yadav
18 May 2022 4:44 AM GMT
Punjab and Haryana High Court, Right, Convict, prisoners, Conjugal Relations, Absolute, parole, Justice Augustine George Masih, Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi, Madras High Court, recent ruling, jail reforms committee, murder-convict, The Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Amendment Act,
x

Punjab and Haryana High Court

Punjab and Haryana High Court while dealing with a challenge to the order of the Additional District Magistrate passed in response to a maintenance petition filed by a woman claiming to be a senior citizen under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizen Act, 2007, held that the Maintenance Tribunal could not have invoked its jurisdiction for the reason that the age of the woman was less than 58 years on the relevant date i.e. the date of institution of the proceedings before such Tribunal.

The bench comprising Justice Arun Monga quashed the impugned order and further held that in the premise, on that short ground alone, Tribunal could not have invoked the jurisdiction of the Maintenance Tribunal under the Act because the respondent was not a senior citizen on the relevant date.

In the premise, on that short ground alone, Tribunal could not have invoked the jurisdiction of Maintenance Tribunal under the Act, as respondent No.2 herein was less than 58 years not a senior citizen on the relevant date.

The instant case came as a result of a writ petition in the form of certiorari to set aside the impugned order whereby the application filed by respondent No.2 under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizen Act, 2007 was allowed and the petitioner was directed to vacate the property of respondent No.2 within 30 days of the order passed.

After perusing the Ration Card, Aadhar Card, and an earlier petition filed in this court, the court came to the conclusion that the respondent has herself stated her age to be less than 58 years on the date of instituting proceedings before the Maintenance Tribunal.

Perusal of the record vis-à-vis Annexures particularly, Annexures P-1 (Ration Card), P-1-A (Aadhar Card) and P-4 (an earlier petition filed in this court by the respondent No.2) reflects that on her own volition, respondent No.2 has stated her age to be less than 58 years as on the date of instituting proceedings before the Maintenance Tribunal vide petition Annexure P-5, which is dated 04.09.2020.

In the light of the above statement the court concluded that on that short ground alone, Tribunal could not have invoked the jurisdiction of the Maintenance Tribunal under the Act.

Accordingly, the court quashed Impugned Order for lack of jurisdiction.

Case Title: RANI versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND ANR

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 106

Click Here To Read/Download Order


Next Story