BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
B. PUGALENDHI, J.
Bharathvarun – Appellant
Versus
The Assistant Primary Educational Officer, Office of the Assistant Primary Educational officer, Kadaladi & Others – Respondents
CRP(PD)(MD) No. 1259 of 2022
Decided on : 05-07-2022
Guardianship - Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 - The court upheld the decision of the Principal District Judge to return the petition seeking appointment as a guardian of a mentally retarded person, as the District Collector is the designated authority for such appointments under Section 14(1) of the Act.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought appointment as the guardian of his mentally retarded mother under Section 14(1) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. The Principal District Judge returned the petition, citing the District Collector as the designated authority for such appointments.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the Civil Revision Petition, upholding the decision of the Principal District Judge. The petitioner was advised to file the necessary application before the District Collector.
Issues: Appointment of Guardian under Section 14(1) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016
Ratio Decidendi: The State Government had designated the District Collector as the authority for appointing guardians under Section 14(1) of the Act, and the court found no reason to interfere with this decision.
Final Decision: The Civil Revision Petition was dismissed, and the petitioner was advised to file the necessary application before the District Collector.
JUDGMENT :
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the order passed in unnumbered GWOP No.Nil of 2022 on the file of the Principal District Court, Ramanathapuram, dated 07.04.2022.)
1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order dated 07.04.2022 passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Ramanathapuram, in unnumbered petition filed by the petitioner seeking to appoint him as Guardian of the mentally retarded person, Tmt.Jesinthamary, W/o.A.Glittus, under Section 14(1) of Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.
2. The petitioner herein filed a petition before the Principal District Court, Ramanathapuram, for appointing him as Guardian of his mother Tmt.Jesinthamary, W/o.A.Glittus, a mentally retarded person, under Section 14(1) of Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. The learned Principal District Judge, Ramanathapuram, by order dated 07.04.2022, returned the papers by referring that as per Rule 5 of the Tamil Nadu Rights of Persons with Disabilities Rules 2018, the District Collector is the designated authority as notified by the State Government in G.O.Ms.No.28, Welfare of Differently Abled Person Department dated 27.07.2018. Aggrieved over the same, the Civil Revision Petition has been filed.
3. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record including the order passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Ramanathapuram.
4. Section 14 of Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, deals with the guardianship and the same is extracted 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.”
5. The designated authority is notified by the State Government under Rule 5 of the Tamil Nadu Rights of Persons with Disabilities Rules 2018, which reads as follows:
“5. Limited Guardianship – (1) Appointment of designated authority and appellate authority:-
(i) The District Collector shall be the designated authority for the purpose of sub-section (1) of section 14 of the Act.
(ii) The Commissioner for Welfare of the Differently Abled shall be the appellate authority for the purpose of sub-section (3) of section 14 of the Act.”
6. Since the State Government has notified the District
AI
The designated authority for appointing guardians under Section 14(1) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 is the District Collector, as notified by the State Government.
Rule 8 deals with ‘qualification of person to be appointed as a limited guardian’.
The court interpreted the relevant provisions of the Rights of Persons With Disabilities Act, 2016 and National Trust Act, 1999 liberally to effectuate their purpose and emphasized the formation of t....
The Court clarified the interpretation of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, emphasizing the broader categorization of disabilities and the duty of the District Collector to consider ....
Court directed timely consideration of the petitioner's application for guardianship without ruling on the case merits.
The Disabilities Act permits only limited guardianship for persons with disabilities, rejecting the notion of permanent guardianship.
Limited guardianship must follow statutory preference for appointment; without proof of disability, the uncle has no standing for guardianship.
Person who is mentally retarded and who has lost his parents cannot be permitted to remain without a guardian for a long period of time and considering the object of the Act, it is imperative on the ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.