1997 Supreme(Ori) 92
High Court Of Orissa
ARIJIT PASAYAT, P. C. NAIK
PRASANNA KUMAR MISHRA - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF ORISSA - Respondent
O. J. C. 8793 Of 1995
Decided On : 09/10/1997
Anil Deo, B.S.TRIPATHY, D.K.SAHU, P.PANDEY, R.RATH, S.BEHERA, Sanjib Mohanty
The State Commission for Women lacks the jurisdiction to order salary deductions for maintenance payments. Its functions are limited to investigating and recommending actions related to women's issues.
Headnote:
MAINTENANCE - DEDUCTION FROM SALARY - JURISDICTION - STATE COMMISSION FOR WOMEN - ACT - ORISSA STATE COMMISSION FOR WOMEN ACT, 1993 - SECTIONS - 10(1), 10(3) - SUMMARY - The State Commission for Women, Orissa, lacks the authority to order salary deductions for maintenance payments. The Commission's functions are limited to investigating and recommending actions related to women's issues, not adjudicating maintenance disputes. The court directed the petitioner to pay maintenance to the respondent until the Family Court decides the maintenance application, considering the petitioner's earlier agreement before the Commission.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the State Commission for Women's order directing a monthly deduction of Rs. 350 from his salary for maintenance payments to his estranged wife, respondent No. 4. The petitioner argued that the Commission lacked jurisdiction to issue such an order.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the State Commission for Women lacked the authority to order salary deductions for maintenance payments. The Commission's functions, as defined in Section 10(1) of the Orissa State Commission for Women Act, 1993, are limited to investigating and recommending actions related to women's issues, not adjudicating maintenance disputes.
Issues: 1. Whether the State Commission for Women has the jurisdiction to order salary deductions for maintenance payments? 2. Whether the petitioner is liable to pay maintenance to the respondent?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court interpreted Section 10(1) of the Orissa State Commission for Women Act, 1993, and found that the Commission's functions are limited to investigating and recommending actions related to women's issues. The Commission does not have the authority to adjudicate maintenance disputes or order salary deductions. 2. The court acknowledged that the petitioner had agreed before the Commission to pay maintenance to the respondent at the rate of Rs. 350 per month. However, the court clarified that this agreement was made without prejudice to the petitioner's right to challenge the Commission's jurisdiction.
Final Decision: The court quashed the State Commission for Women's order directing salary deductions for maintenance payments. The court directed the petitioner to pay maintenance to the respondent at the rate of Rs. 350 per month until the Family Court decides the maintenance application. The court also directed the petitioner to deposit the maintenance amount in the Family Court within six weeks.
( 1 ) DIRECTION given by the State Commission for Women, Orissa, Bhubaneswar (in short, the 'commission') for deducting Rs. 350/- per month from the salary of the petitioner for payment to opposite party No. 4 is the subject-matter of challenge. Jurisdiction of the Commission to give such a direction is questioned.
( 2 ) A brief reference to factual aspects would suffice. Undisputedly the petitioner, and opposite party No. 4 entered into wed-lock in the year 1978. A suit bearing number O. S. 478 of 1979-I for injunction restraining opposite party No. 4 not to come to the house of petitioner as she was suffering from T. B. was filed. Same was dismissed for default. Subsequently a grievance was made by opposite party No. 4 before the Commission alleging that the petitioner had deserted her for non-fulfilment of dowry demands. An enquiry was conducted by the Commission. From the order dated 25-8-1995 (Annexure-3), it appears that there was an attempt for reconciliation which failed, but certain arrangements were made like return of articles and payment of some amount for maintenance to opposite party No. 4. According to opposite party No. 4, petitioner agreed to pay Rs. 350/- per month as reflected in the order. This statement is denied by the petitioner. The Sub-Inspector of Schools, Puri Circle I intimated the petitioner about direction given by the Commission to deduct Rs. 350/- from his salary so as to be deposited in the bank account in the name of opposite party No. 4. An application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, 'the Code') has been filed by opposite party No. 4 claiming maintenance from the petitioner.
( 3 ) PETITIONER has questioned jurisdiction of the Commission to make an order directing deduction from the salary of any person. Though the Commission has entered appearance through counsel, none appeared on its behalf when the matter was taken up. The Commission has been constituted under the Orissa State Commission for Women Act, 1993 (in short, 'the Act' ). The Commission has been constituted for the betterment of the women of the State, and its functions are enumerated in Section 10 appearing in Chapter III of the Act. Same reads as follows :"10. Functions of Commission - (1) The Commission shall perform all or any of the following functions, namely- (a) make indepth studies on- (i) the economic, educational and health situation of the women of the State, with particular emphasis on the tribal Districts and areas which are under-developed with respect to women's literacy, mortality and economic development. (ii) condition in which women work in factories, establishments construction sites and other similar situations,and recommend to the State Government on the basis of specific reports on improving the status of woman in the said areas; (b) compile information, from time to time, on instance of all offences against women in the State, or in selected areas, including cases related to marriage and dowry, rape, kidnapping, criminal abduction, eve-teasing, immoral trafficking in women and cases of medical negligence in causing delivery or sterilisation or medical intervention that relate to child bearing or child birth; (c) will coordinate with the State Cell and District Cells for atrocities against women, if any, mobilisation of public opinion in the State as a whole or in specific areas which would help in speedy reporting and detection of offences of such atrocities and mobilisation or public opinion against the offenders; (d) receive complaints on- (i) atrocities on women and offences against women, (ii) deprivation of women of their rights relating to minimum wages, basic health and maternity rights, (iii) non-compliance of policy decisions of the Government relating to women, (iv) rehabilitation of deserted and destitude women and women forced into prostitution, (v) atrocities on women in custody, and take up with authorities concerned for appropriate remedial measures, (e)