IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 03-06-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
W.P.No.19677 of 2026
J.Dhanalakshmi,
W/o.Jayachandran (Late),
No.57, Udayar Street,
Thiruvenkaranai Village,
Kunnam Post, Valajabad Taluk,
Kancheepuram - 631604.
...Petitioner
Vs
1. The Sub Divisional Executive
Magistrate/RDO/Tribunal for
Maintenance & Welfare of
Parents & Senior Citizens Act,
Kancheepuram District.
2. The District Social Welfare Officer,
Office of the Social Welfare Officer,
Kancheepuram District.
3. Mr.J.Kumar,
S/o.Jayachandran (Late),
No.57, Udayar Street,
Thiruvenkaranai Village,
Kunnam Post, Valajabad Taluk,
Kancheepuram - 631 604.
4. Mr.J.Mahendran,
S/o.Jayachandran (Late),
No.57, Udayar Street,
Thiruvenkaranai Village,
Kunnam Post, Valajabad Taluk,
Kancheepuram - 631 604.
...Respondents
For Petitioner: Mr.D.Charlesmuthushanthan
For R1 & R2: Mr.M.Sivavarthanan, GA
PETITION under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the 1st respondent to dispose the representation dated 04.4.2026 submitted by the petitioner under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 as expeditiously as possible.
ORDER
This is a petition filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the first respondent to dispose of her representation dated 04.4.2026 under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate accepting notice for respondents 1 and 2. In view of the limited nature of relief this Court proposes to grant, notice to respondents 3 and 4 is dispensed with and the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.
3. The case of the petitioner is as follows:
(i) The petitioner claims to be a senior citizen. Her husband – one Mr.Jayachandran passed away on 28.4.2025 leaving behind him the petitioner, their three sons and two daughters. Respondents 3 and 4 are two of their sons. They did not take care of the petitioner and her husband. Only one of their sons – one Mr.Veerabathran took care of the petitioner’s husband when he fell in in 2017 till he was alive. They abandoned the petitioner and her husband.
(ii) Due to individual income derived out of hard work, the petitioner purchased an agricultural land in S.No.35/5, Thiruvangkaranai Village, Vallajahbad Taluk measuring 84 cents vide sale deed dated 22.7.1993 registered as doc.No.1659 of 1993 on the file of the Sub-Registrar, Vallajabad. It was assigned patta No.86 in favour of the petitioner. Immediately after the petitioner’s husband had fallen ill, the third respondent dispossessed the petitioner from the said property and is enjoying the harvest income including the revenue yield.
(iii) When the petitioner made a request to respondents 3 and 4 to provide a share in the income derived out of the said property, he refused to do so and instead, humiliated the petitioner several times. When the petitioner suffered from chest pain and was admitted in a hospital on 02.4.2026, they did not take care of her. In the meantime, the petitioner filed a complaint to the District Collector, Kanchipuram District on 29.9.2025 to hand over the said property illegally grabbed by the third respondent and it was forwarded to the Sub-Collector, Kanchipuram District.
(iv) Later, at the instance of the petitioner filing a petition dated 09.10.2025, the second respondent, vide proceedings dated 14.10.2025, issued a notice to both the petitioner as well as respondents 3 and 4 to attend an enquiry on 23.10.2025 at 10.30 AM. The petitioner also attended the enquiry and stated that the third respondent did not have any title or ownership over the said property and also requested to direct the third respondent to hand over the said property to the petitioner. According to the petitioner, the third respondent was advised to hand over the subject property to the petitioner. But, till date, no orders have been passed on that.
(v) The petitioner also sent a representation dated 04.4.2026 to the District Collector, Kanchipuram stating the entire facts with a request to direct either the first respondent or the second respondent to pass appropriate orders on the said representation of the petitioner dated 09.10.2025. As it did not evoke any response, the petitioner is before this Court.
5. This Court has carefully considered the submissions of the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.
6. In the considered view of this Court, the District Collector, Kanchipuram is not a party before this Court. Hence, ends of justice would be met if the second respondent is directed to pass orders on the enquiry conducted on 23.10.2025 pursuant to the representation of the petitioner dated 09.10.2025.
7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the secon
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.