Court No. - 40

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 29229 of 2021

Petitioner :- Jagbiri Devi

Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others

Counsel for Petitioner :- Arun Kumar Tripathi

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.

This petition is by the petitioner, Jagbiri Devi, who is a senior

citizen and is a resident of Meerut. She alleges that she is being

ill-treated by her daughter-in-law and, therefore, the District

Magistrate, Meerut be directed to take appropriate action in

accordance with the provisions of U.P. Maintenance and

Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2014. The

complaint made to the District Magistrate is annexure 1 to the

writ petition.

The contents of the complaint would go to show that a threat

has been extended to petitioner by her daughter-in-law to

provide her share in the residential accommodation or else she

will falsely implicate in a criminal case. It has also been stated

that the daughter-in-law is not taking care of the petitioner and

is inflicting mental and physical cruelty.

We have perused the complaint and have also examined the

provisions of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and

Senior Citizens Act, 2007 as well as Rules framed thereunder.

The Act defines parent and relative in Sections 2(a), 2(d) and

2(g) which reads as under:-

"2(a) "children" includes son, daughter, grandson and grand-daughter

but does not include a minor;

2(d) "parent" means father or mother whether biological, adoptive or step

father or step mother, as the case may be, whether or not the father or the

mother is a senior citizen;

2(g) "relative" means any legal heir of the childless senior citizen who is

not a minor and is in possession of or would inherit his property after his

death."

Section 4 provides for maintenance for parents and senior

citizens and the obligation in that regard is also expected to be

performed by the children or a relative. The primary

responsibility of maintaining an elderly parent is on the son,

daughter, grandson and grand-daughter.

There is no specific allegation against the daughter-in-law

otherwise of having neglected the petitioner. So far as extending

of threats to falsely implicate the petitioner is concerned, such

issues cannot be examined by the Collector under Rule 21 of

the Rules of 2014 and issues in that regard can apparently be

investigated by the authority invested with powers under the

Code of Criminal Procedure at the first instance.

In such circumstances, we do not find any occasion in view of

the averments made in the writ petition and the annexures

annexed to issue any direction to the second respondent to take

any action upon the complaint of the petitioner.

The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

Order Date :- 2.12.2021

Bhaskar