The court emphasized the importance of compliance with the orders of the Revenue Divisional Officer regarding living arrangements under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act.

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by Dr.Anita Sumanth J.)

This Contempt Appeal is filed as against order dated 02.07.2025 passed in Cont.P.No.1927 of 2025. W.P.No.5698 of 2023 had been filed by this appellant seeking a mandamus for implementation of order passed by the Sub- Divisional Magistrate – cum – Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) on

08.02.2022.

2. The sum and substance of the aforesaid order that was passed in terms of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 is that the appellant must be maintained comfortably in their home at No.14/54, 2^nd Street, Tiruvalluvar Nagar, Korrukupet, Chennai -21 (subject property) by R4 in W.P.No.5698 of 2023, his son, during the appellant’s life time.

3. The Writ Petition was disposed on 21.10.2024 permitting the appellant to make a complaint before the Inspector of Police, R.K.Nagar Police Station/R3 in the Writ Petition, for non-compliance with the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO), and thereafter directing R3 to implement the order passed by the RDO.

4. Since the appellant was of the view that the direction of the Writ Court had not been complied, Contempt Petition No.1927 of 2025 was instituted, which came to be dismissed on 02.07.2025, the Court noting that R4 in the Writ Petition had been paying monthly maintenance of Rs.3,000/- as ordered by the RDO.

5. According to the appellant, the direction of the RDO has been misunderstood by the Writ Court, as the direction was not for paying of monthly maintenance but to ensure that he was permitted to live peacefully in the subject property.

6. Mr.Muniyapparaj, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, who appears for the respondent is fully briefed and has instructions to state that the respondent in the Contempt Petition had caused a thorough enquiry and filed a closure report, which points primarily to the fact that the appellant and his son do not get along.

7. Having regard to the aforesaid position, we are of the view that the order of the RDO which has been confirmed by the Writ Court has to be implemented in full. In fact, the appellant’s son had filed W.P.No.34037 of 2024 challenging order dated 08.02.2022, wherein the dispute inter se the appellant and his son had been referred to mediation, which, we are told, has failed. The said Writ Petition is, however, still pending.

8. Be that as it may, since as on date, it is the direction of the RDO, as confirmed by this Court in W.P.No.5698 of 2023 that holds the field, we are of DR.ANITA SUMANTH J.

AND SUNDER MOHAN J.

the view that the order of the RDO must be complied with, for now.

9. Should it be necessary, we direct the respondent to accord protection to the appellant to reside along with his son in the subject property until, and subject to orders of the Writ Court in W.P.No.34037 of 2024.

10. This Contempt Appeal is allowed. No costs.