Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 37013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J
R.Janabhai – Appellant
Versus
The District Collector – Respondent
Writ Petition
For Petitioner(s): Mr.V.Manisekaran
For Respondent(s): Ms.C.Meera Arumugam, AGP for R1 & 2
Court directs expeditious disposal of maintenance application under Senior Citizens Act on merits within fixed timeframe.
Headnote:Under Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, the petitioner filed an application against respondents seeking maintenance, which was heard and reserved by the District Revenue Officer on 22.07.2025 without final orders. The High Court found undue delay in disposal causing prejudice to the petitioner. The issue framed was whether directions could be issued for expeditious disposal of the pending application. The Court observed that no prejudice would be caused to parties by directing disposal on merits after hearing objections, adhering to natural justice principles, without opining on merits. The writ petition is disposed of by directing the second respondent to pass final orders within 4 weeks from receipt of the order.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition seeks early disposal of reserved maintenance application. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. no prejudice in directing disposal after hearing parties. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. direct final orders within 4 weeks per natural justice. (Para 7 , 8) |
Order
This writ petition has been filed seeking for a limited relief.
2.The petitioner seeks for an early disposal of her application filed against respondents 3 and 4 under Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act pending on the file of the second respondent.
3.Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the second respondent has already heard the matter and reserved the same for pronouncement of orders. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, even though the second respondent has reserved the matter for pronouncement of orders as early as on 22.07.2025, till date, no final order has been passed by the second respondent.
4.Ms.C.Meera Arumugam, learned Additional Government Pleader accepts notice on behalf of respondents 1 and 2. Since no adverse order is being passed against respondents 3 and 4, notice to respondents 3 and 4 is dispensed with by this Court.
5.No prejudice would be caused to any of the parties if a direction is issued to the second respondent to dispose of the petitioner's application filed against respondents 3 and 4 under Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, on merits and in accordance with law, after hearing the objections of respondents 3 and 4 and by adhering to the principles of natural justice, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
6.This Court is not expressing any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's application.
7.Since the application of the petitioner has already been heard by the second respondent, this Court deems it fit to direct the second respondent to pass final orders, on merits and in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to respondents 3 and 4, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8.For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the second respondent to pass final orders, on merits and in accordance with law on the petitioner's application filed against respondents 3 and 4 under Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, after hearing the objections of respondents 3 and 4 and by adhering to the principles of natural justice, within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
