An order passed by a tribunal without the mandated coram (composition of members) as prescribed by the governing government notification is coram non judice and constitutes a nullity in the eyes of law.

***

KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL)

1. Through the instant writ petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 30.11.2022 passed by the Appellate Tribunal, whereby the statutory appeal filed by respondent No.4 was allowed, and the order dated 17.02.2022 passed by the Maintenance Tribunal has been set aside.

2. Succinctly stated, the respondent No.4 filed a petition under the provisions of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 2007”) before the Maintenance Tribunal, seeking cancellation of the transfer deed dated 20.04.2018 executed in favour of the petitioner and respondent No.5. Although the Maintenance Tribunal dismissed the petition vide order dated 17.02.2022, it directed the petitioner and respondent No.5 not to transfer the house in question to any third party without the permission of respondent No.4. Aggrieved thereby, respondent No.4 filed a statutory appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, which was allowed vide the impugned order dated 30.11.2022, resulting in cancellation of the transfer deed dated 20.04.2018.

3. At the outset, learned State counsel draws the attention of this Court to Haryana Government’s notification dated 08.12.2020, prescribing the composition of the Maintenance Tribunal and Appellate Tribunal, to submit that the order dated 17.02.2022 passed by the Maintenance Tribunal suffers from illegality, having been passed coram non judice. It is submitted that under the notification (supra), both the Maintenance Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal are required to comprise three members, with the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and the Deputy Commissioner acting as their respective Chairmen. In the present case, however, the order dated 17.02.2022 was passed solely by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate. Therefore, the said order was rendered without the mandated coram, rendering it illegal and without jurisdiction. In support of this contention, reliance is placed on the judgment dated 26.10.2016 rendered by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No.18784 of 2015, the relevant paragraph whereof is extracted hereunder:

“I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with able assistance and am of the considered opinion that the impugned order passed by the Appellate Authority is patently without jurisdiction because as per the Scheme of the Act, the Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal are constituted by the State Government by way of notification and the appeal has to be decided by the duly constituted Tribunal. In the present case, notification dated 10.12.2012 has been relied upon to which there is no contrary notification produced before this Court. In this notification, the Tribunal has been specifically constituted for Kurukshetra in which there are three Members. District Magistrate may be the Chairman of the Tribunal but once there is a Tribunal of three Members, the District Magistrate has no jurisdiction to take decision alone and the decision has to be taken unanimously or by way of majority. Therefore, on this ground alone, the impugned order deserves to be set aside and thus the present writ petition is hereby allowed and impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal constituted as per notification dated 10.12.2012 to decide the matter afresh after affording due opportunity of hearing to both the parties and by passing a reasoned order.”

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner and for the responden