IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision:26.02.2026 MEHMA SINGH ….Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CUM APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ROOPNAGAR AND OTHERS ….Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present: Mr. Hiten Chugh, Advocate and Mr. S.S.Salar, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Ms. Pratibha Bali, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Tarun Singla, Advocate, for respondent No.3.

****

KULDEEP TIWARI , J. (Oral)

1. The instant writ petition impugns the order dated 20.03.2024 (Annexure P-8), vide which, the learned Additional Deputy Commissioner- cum-Appellate Tribunal, Roopnagar, has dismissed the appeal filed against the order dated 04.09.2023 (Annexure P-7), passed by the learned Mainte- nance Tribunal, wherethrough the application preferred by the petitioner (senior citizen), under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, (the Act of 2007), for cancelling the transfer deed, was dismissed.

2. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner points out that the impugned order dated 20.03.2024 (Annexure P-8), has been passed by an authority devoid of statutory jurisdiction, and therefore, warrants interference on this ground alone.

3. Consequently, it is submitted that since the impugned order has not been passed by the statutory authority, i.e. District Magistrate, but by an authority exercising sub-delegated powers, i.e. Additional Deputy Commissioner concerned, the same is liable to be set aside.

4. Upon being pointedly asked, as to whether, under the statu- tory provisions, the District Magistrates/Presiding Officers of the Appel- late Tribunals are competent to sub-delegate the quasi-judicial functions and powers vested in them by statute, learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for respondent no.3, fairly concede that such functions and powers cannot be sub-delegated. Moreover, they haves furnished a copy of the instructions dated 27.10.2025, issued by the Directorate So- cial Security and Women & Child Development, Punjab, wherethrough, it has been categorically clarified to all the concerned authorities that the District Magistrates/Presiding Officers of the Appellate Tribunals consti- tuted under the Act of 2007 are not authorized to sub-delegate their quasi- judicial functions and powers to any subordinate or other officer, irre- spective of rank or competence. The relevant portion of the instructions is extracted hereunder:-

“To All District Magistrates/Presiding Officers, Appellate Tri- bunal Constituted under Sections 15(1) & 15(2) of The Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.

No. P-3(SS)/2025/82189 Dated, Chandigarh 27-10-2025 Sub: Implementation of the Hon'ble High Court Order dated 26.09.2025 in CWP No. 27866 of 2025 - Davinder Singh vs. Ad-

ditional District Magistrate & Others.

In continuation of this Department's Notification No.

8/10/2008-8SS/798 dated 27th August 2008, (Flag-A) whereby the District Magistrates were designated as Presiding Officers of the Appellate Tribunals constituted under The Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, attention is in- vited to the recent directions issued by the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh, in CWP No. 27866 of 2025 -

Davinder Singh vs. Additional District Magistrate & Others de-

cided on 26.09.2025. (Flag-B)

2. The Hon'ble Court has categorically clarified that the Dis- trict Magistrates/Presiding Officers of the Appellate Tribunals constituted under the said Act are not authorized to sub-delegate their quasi-judicial functions and powers to any subordinate or other officer, irrespective of rank or competence.

3. Pursuant to the said judgment, the Office of the Worthy Chief Secretary to Government of Punjab, vide letter No.OSD(L)/CS/2025/64708997 dated 09.10.2025, (Flag-C) has directed that the above order be circulated to all concerned au- thorities for meticulous compliance.(Copy enclosed along with Hon'ble Court orders).

4. It is, the