Point of Law: Rule 20 gives indication that being a piece of welfare legislation, it adjures administration to avert threat of life and property of senior citizens.

JUDGMENT :

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated 20.10.2015 passed by the Maintenance Tribunal and S.D.O., Bali (hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal’) and order dated 09.02.2016 passed by the Appellate Tribunal and District Collector, Pali (hereinafter referred to as ‘Appellate Tribunal’) whereby the prayer of the petitioner seeking eviction of respondent Nos.3 and 4 from the property situated behind Nagar Palika, Khudala-Falna, Tehsil-Bali, District-Pali (hereinafter referred to as ‘residential property’) as per the provisions of Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (for short ‘Act of 2007’) was rejected.

2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the petitioner filed an application as per the provisions of the Act of 2007 before Tribunal on 21.07.2015 stating inter alia that the petitioner is a senior citizen, retired from the post of Teacher in the year 2012. The petitioner married Shabbir Khan on 28.10.1993 who had one son i.e. respondent No.3 from his previous marriage. Unfortunately, only after 16 months of the marriage, Shri Shabbir Khan passed away. In the application, it was further stated that the petitioner maintained respondent No.3 like her own son. The petitioner after superannuation from services purchased a house behind Nagar Palika, Khudala-Falna, Tehsil-Bali, District-Pali from the amount received against retiral benefits. Thus, the said property is a self-acquired property of the petitioner. The respondent No.3 married Smt. Najma i.e. respondent No.4 on 28.12.2014. Soon after the marriage, there was a drastic change in the behavior of respondent Nos.3 and 4 who started misbehaving and maltreating the petitioner. On 04.07.2015, the petitioner was forcibly thrown out from the residential property and since then, she has been residing with her brother, Farooq. In the application filed before Tribunal, it was prayed that respondent Nos.3 and 4 may be evicted from the residential property and appropriate arrangement for peaceful possession over the residential property be ordered.

3. The Maintenance Tribunal and S.D.O., Bali after holding summary inquiry as contemplated under the Act of 2007, vide order dated 20.10.2015 concluded that the object of the Act of 2007 is to ensure inexpensive and speedy procedure to settle claims regarding monthly maintenance for parents and senior citizens. However, since the petitioner had only sought eviction of respondent Nos.3 and 4 from residential property situated at Nagar Palika, Khudala-Falna, Tehsil-Bali, District-Pali, no relief could be granted and the petitioner was required to approach civil court for the aforesaid relief. Against the order dated 20.10.2015, an appeal under Section 16 of Act of 2007 was preferred before Appellate Tribunal and District Collector, Pali which came to be rejected vide order dated 09.02.2016 after examining the records and providing opportunity of hearing to the parties. The orders dated 20.10.2015 and 09.02.2016 passed by the Tribunal and Appellate Tribunal are assailed in the present writ petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submitted that by rejecting the application filed by the petitioner under the Act of 2007 seeking eviction of respondent Nos.3 and 4 from the residential property, the courts below have deprived a senior citizen from enjoying his/her self acquired property, contrary to the objects sought to be achieved by the Act of 2007. Learned counsel further submitted that Rule 21 of the Government of Rajasthan Maintenance of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2010 (for short ‘Rules of 2010’) clearly provides for an action plan for protection of life and property of senior citizens through police authorities/district administration which casts a responsibility upon them to ensure that no senior citizen is deprived of his/her property without due process of law. Reliance was placed on judgments rendered by Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of Jayantram Vallabhdas Mes