IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
M.M.S. Bedi, J.
Surinder Kaur – Appellant
Vs.
State of Punjab – Respondent
CWP No. 19006 of 2016
Decided On : 05-04-2017
Senior Citizen - Eviction Proceedings - Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizen Act, 2007, Sections 22, 23, and 32 - The court discussed the provisions of the Act, the relevant Rules, and the Action Plan for protection of life and property of senior citizens. It highlighted the authority of the District Magistrate to order eviction of unauthorized occupants and the procedure to be followed for the same. The court set aside the remand order and directed the District Magistrate to proceed in accordance with the law based on the material supplied by the Sub Divisional Magistrate.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a senior citizen, sought protection of life and property under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizen Act, 2007. She filed an application for eviction against her daughter-in-law, which was remanded back to the Sub Divisional Magistrate by the District Magistrate.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the District Magistrate is entitled to pass an eviction order from the property of a senior citizen after following the prescribed procedure. It set aside the remand order and directed the District Magistrate to proceed in accordance with the law based on the material supplied by the Sub Divisional Magistrate.
Issues: The main issue was the jurisdiction for eviction proceedings under the Maintenance Act, 2007, and the authority of the District Magistrate to order eviction of unauthorized occupants.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the District Magistrate has the authority to order eviction of unauthorized occupants and must follow the prescribed procedure for the same. It set aside the remand order and directed the District Magistrate to proceed in accordance with the law based on the material supplied by the Sub Divisional Magistrate.
Final Decision: The court set aside the remand order and directed the District Magistrate to proceed in accordance with the law based on the material supplied by the Sub Divisional Magistrate.
M.M.S. Bedi, J.
The petitioner is a senior citizen lady aged about 87 years who besides claiming protection of life and liberty has sought the right of dignified life of honour and have challenged order annexure P-6 dated June 22, 2016 whereby an appeal filed by her under Section 16 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizen Act, 2007, for short ‘the Act' before the District Magistrate was not decided on merits but was remanded back to the Sub Divisional Magistrate. The petitioner is mother-in-law of respondent No.4.
2. Brief facts as pleaded in the writ petition are that being a senior citizen, with an objective to live a life of dignity and honour and not mere animal existence at the fag end of her life, the petitioner seeks the protection as per Section 22, 23 and 32 of the Act. She claims to be in possession of her house situated in Village Nasipur near Punjabi University, Patiala situated in 15 bighas 17 biswas of land. She feels that her daughter-in-law, respondent No.4 in collusion with Mr. Gurinder Singh Dhillon, DIG, Punjab Police, wants to dispossess her and forcibly evict her from her house. The petitioner being harassed and humiliated by respondent No.4 who had made her life hell bereft of any human dignity, filed an application under Section 22 of the Act on January 20, 2014. Copy of the application dated January 20, 2014 has been appended as annexure P-3 before Sub Divisional Magistrate, Patiala. Respondent No.4 filed reply to the petition taking up number of pleas. Petitioner claims that respondent No.4 had taken wrong and baseless pleas in the reply with an objective to prolong the matter on one pretext or other, as a result of which the petitioner was compelled to approach this Court to file CWP No. 8056 of 2015 for issuance of a direction to the SDM, Patiala to decide her case expeditiously. On May 15, 2015, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, sought telephonic instructions and stated that the case will be decided within a period of six weeks. Copy of the order dated May 15, 2015 has been appended with the petition as annexure P-4. The SDM dismissed the application filed by the petitioner vide order dated July 24, 2015 with an observation that respondent No.4 is in authorized possession of the property, therefore, application was not maintainable. The order dated July 24, 2015 passed by SDM, Patiala,- 0Sh.Gurcharan Singh Chahal, annexure P-5 was challenged before the Appellate Authority-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Patiala and the said order was set aside vide order dated June 22, 2016 and case was remanded back to decide the same afresh as per the rules. Copy of the order passed by Deputy Commissioner, Patiala has been appended with the petition as annexure P-6. The operative part of the order passed by the District Magistrate is reproduced hereunder:-
"5. Application presented by counsel for the respondent, perused properly and file perused properly. After perusing thoroughly regarding this, it is found that proceedings was to be initiated in view of notification issued by Punjab Government regarding present act but didn't initiate proceedings as per the notification issued by Punjab Government. Therefore, appeal is entitled to be decided on merits. After hearing the parties and after perusing the case file, it is found that appellant party is claiming that appellant is an old aged person and remained ill, who needs medical care. Whereas as per respondent party, appellant has filed this present complaint only with an intention to grab the property and filed on the instances of her girl. Respondent is still ready to take care for her and she is ready to take care for her in every means. As far as question arises regarding the dismissal of complaint of appellant which was sent to Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Patiala, as per rules order passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Patiala cannot be dismissed through appeal. Proceedings to be done as per notification No. 10/20/2014-1/D.C. 353259/1 d
Hamina Kang v. District Magistrate (UT), Chandigarh and others
AI
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.