Allahabad High Court
Singeshwar Singh And Another vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 20 March, 2025
Author: Ashwani Kumar Mishra
Bench: Ashwani Kumar Mishra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:40967-DB
Court No. - 29
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 31943 of 2024
Petitioner :- Singeshwar Singh And Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashish Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Prem Narayan Rai
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
Hon'ble Donadi Ramesh,J.
1. Heard Sri Ashish Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Prem Narayan Rai, learned counsel appearing for Union of India and Sri S.C. Upadhyay, learned Standing Counsel for the State.
2. Petitioner No.1 is the husband of Smt. Manju Singh (petitioner No.2), who is stated to be in coma since 2016 and she is represented by petitioner No.1 as her next of friend/guardian. Various certificates of doctor are annexed in order to contend that the situation of petitioner No.2 has not improved and she is not in a position to take any conscious decision, which may have legal implications.
3. Petitioner No.1 contends that there is a piece of land admeasuring 167.286 square meter, which is part of Khasra No.171 situated in Woodland Garden at Village-Barkhurdarpur, Pargana-Muhana, Tehsil Bakshi Ka Talab, District-Lucknow and a flat being Flat No.C-401, Super Build Up Area 2015 sq.ft., i.e., 187.267 sq. meter in Block-C, 4th Floor at Celebrity Gardens in Sushant Gold City, Sultanpur Road, Lucknow, UP, which is jointly owned by the petitioners.
4. It is urged that the petitioners intend to dispose of these properties, but as the second petitioner is in coma, she cannot execute transfer-deed etc. A prayer is, accordingly, made to command the respondents to permit petitioner No.1 to execute sale-deed of the aforesaid property as it would facilitate treatment of petitioner No.2.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance upon a judgment of this Court in Pooja Sharma vs. State of UP and others, 2023 10 ADJ 497, wherein several other judgments of different High Courts have been relied upon to contend that the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India be invoked to grant such permission to the petitioner.
6. Taking note of such contention, on the previous occasion, we examined the applicable statute, i.e., Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, and found that there exists a provision in law for guardianship of a person with disability, who has been provided adequate and appropriate support, but is unable to take legally binding decision. Section-14 of the aforesaid Act reads as under:
"14. Provision for Guardianship.-(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, on and from the date of commencement of this Act, where a district court or any designated authority, as notified by the State Government, finds that a person with disability, who had been provided adequate and appropriate support but is unable to take legally binding decisions, may be provided further support of a limited guardian to take legally binding decisions on his behalf in consultation with such person, in such manner, as may be prescribed by the State Government:
Provided that the District Court or the designated authority, as the case may be, may grant total support to the person with disability requiring such support or where the limited guardianship is to be granted repeatedly, in which case, the decision regarding the support to be provided shall be reviewed by the Court or the designated authority, as the case may be, to determine the nature and manner of support to be provided.
Explanation. - For the purposes of this sub-section, "limited guardianship" means a system of joint decision which operates on mutual understanding and trust between the guardian and the person with disability, which shall be limited to a specific period and for specific decision and situation and shall operate in accordance to the will of the person with disability.
(2) On and from the date of commencement of this Act, every guardian appointed under any provision of any other law for the time being in force, for a person with disability shall be deemed to function as a limited guardian.
(3) Any person with disability aggrieved by the decision of the designated authority appointing a legal guardian may prefer an appeal to such appellate authority, as may be notified by the State Government for the purpose."
7. The instructions were invited from the respondents with regard to the competent authority appointed by the State Government under Section 14 (1) of the aforesaid Act of 2016.
8. Instructions have been received from the Director of the concerned department dated 12th March, 2025. Along with such instructions, a notification dated 28th August, 2018, has been produced, which reads as under:
"?????? ???, ????? ??????
????? ???????? ????? ?????? ????????
???????
?????? ????????
???-4, ???? (?)
(??????? ??????? ????)
????, ???????, 28 ?????, 2018
??????? 6, 1940 ?? ??????
????? ?????? ????
?????????? ????????? ??????-3
?????? 279/65-3-2018-40-2018
????, 28 ?????, 2018
????????
????????-86
????? ?????? ?????????? ?????? ????????, 2017 ?? ???? 5 ?? ??? ???? ?????????? ?????? ???????, 2016 (??????? ?????? 49 ??? 2016) ?? ???? 14 ?? ???? ??????? ???????? ?? ?????? ???? ????????-
(?) ?????????? ??, ???? ?? ?? ????? ??? ?? ????????? ???????? ???? ?? ???????, ????? ??????? ?? ?????? ?????? ???? ???? ????????? ???? ?? ???? ?????????? ??, ????? ?????????? ??????? ???? ???? ????? ??????? ?? ?????? ?????? ???? ?? ????? ????? ?????????? ?? ????? ?????? ?????????? ?????? ????????, 2017 ?? ???? 5 ?? ???????? ?? ???? ??????? ??????????? ?? ?????? ???? ????;
(?) ????? ?????????? ?????? ????? ??????? ?? ???????? ?? ??????? ??? ???? ??? ???? ???????? ?? ??????? ?? ??? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ?? ??? ????????? ???? ?? ?????????? ?? ???? ?????????? ??????? ???? ????
????? ??,
???? ????? ??????,
??? ????? ?????"
9. Once the State Government has already specified the authority for exercising powers of the guardian in respect of person suffering with disability, who is not in a position to take legally binding decisions despite adequate and appropriate support, then the proper course available to this Court would be to relegate the petitioner to such authority.
10. It goes without saying that competent authority in terms of notification dated 28th August, 2018 will have ample jurisdiction to invite opinion of a Medical Board with experts of the concerned field so as to take an appropriate decision in the matter. We may note that the notification dated 28th August, 2018 confers such power to appoint a guardian on the District Magistrate of the concerned district.
11. In that view of the matter, we dispose of this writ petition with the liberty reserved to the petitioner to approach the concerned District Magistrate, who shall get necessary inquiry conducted in the matter and take an appropriate decision on the petitioner's prayer for grant of permission to dispose of the aforesaid properties in accordance with law. Such decision would be taken within a period of two months from the date of presentation of a copy of this order.
12. The petitioner also undertakes to provide full support for medical examination by the Board etc. of second petitioner.
Order Date :- 20.3.2025
LN Tripathi
