Madras High Court
Pandi Krishnaveni vs The District Collector on 13 June, 2023
W.P(MD)No.13737 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 13.06.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
W.P(MD)No.13737 of 2023
and
W.M.P(MD)Nos.11550 & 11551 of 2023
Pandi Krishnaveni ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Collector
Sivagangai.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Devakottai.
3.Pandaiarajan ... Respondents
PRAYER : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating
to the impugned proceedings in Na.Ka.A1/2457/2023 dated 28.3.2023
and 25.5.2023 on the file of the 2nd respondent herein and quash the
same.
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.13737 of 2023
For Petitioner : Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan
For Respondents : Mr.J.Ashok,
Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
The learned counsel for the petitioner questions a show
cause notice issued by the second respondent dated 28.03.2023 in
Na.Ka.A1/2457/2023, which had been issued on a petition given by the
father of the petitioner who had taken recourse to the provisions under
Section 23(1) of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior
Citizens Act, 2007.
2. The notice is questioned on two grounds.
3. The learned counsel states that the second respondent /
Revenue Divisional Officer, has no authority to enquire into the
complaint, since a reading of the settlement deed which had been
executed by the third respondent does not reveal that there was a
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.13737 of 2023
corresponding duty on the part of the petitioner to maintain the third
respondent.
4. In this connection, the learned counsel states that Section
23(1) of the aforementioned Act, is very clear in its terms that only when
there is a specific covenant in the settlement deed or any document
sought to be cancelled, that the settlee or beneficiary under the document
should look after the Senior Citizen can an enquiry at all be conducted
under Section 23 of the said Act.
5. The petitioner may put forth these points before the
second respondent and I am confident that if the petitioner does draw
attention to the specific covenants before the second respondent, it
would be examined and given due credence.
6. The position of law had been stated by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court on this aspect and the learned counsel placed reliance on
the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.174 of
2021 Sudesh Chhikara Vs. Tamti Devi and another, dated 06.12.2022.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.13737 of 2023
7. I am confident that if the second respondent is properly
informed about the rationale laid in said judgment, he would realize the
limits to which or the jurisdiction to which the statutory duty would
extend and pass appropriate orders.
8. The second ground on which the notice is questioned by
the learned counsel is actually a grievance expressed. That grievance is
that the second respondent has apparently deputed his Personal Assistant
to conduct the enquiry. This is not proper.
9. The petitioner had given a complaint in this regard to the
first respondent/ District Collector. It is further represented by the
learned counsel that the first respondent had called for remarks from the
very Officer against whom such complaint has been lodged namely, the
second respondent. It is only but natural that remarks are called for, since
opportunity has to be granted to the second respondent to explain
whether such complaint is correct or not.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.13737 of 2023
10. Let me place a caveat on the second respondent that he
and he alone authorised by the statute, to enquire into the complaint
given by any Senior Citizen and under no circumstances should he
depute his Personal Assistant to conduct such enquiry. The Personal
Assistant can be of assistance to him, in discharge of any other duty, but
certainly not in discharge of a statutory obligation which is thrust on him
under an Enactment.
11. Giving necessary leverage to the petitioner herein to
raise all these aspects, the Writ Petition stands disposed of even without
issuing notice to the third respondent. No costs. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
13.06.2023
Index :Yes/No
Internet :Yes/No
NCC : Yes / No
RM
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.13737 of 2023
To
1.The District Collector
Sivagangai.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Devakottai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.13737 of 2023
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
RM
W.P(MD)No.13737 of 2023
13.06.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
