##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

103 CWP-6590-2026

Date of Decision : May 14, 2026

JAGE RAM

-PETITIONER

V/S

DISTRICT MAGISTRATE CUM APPELLATE AUTHORITY AND

OTHERS

-RESPONDENTS

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

Present: Mr. Rishabh Gupta, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Mr. Bhupender Singh, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

Mr. Devesh Nehra, Advocate

for the respondents No.4 to 7.

***

KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL)

1. Through the instant writ petition, the petitioner, an octogenarian

senior citizen, impugns the orders dated 20.03.2025 and 12.11.2025, passed

respectively by the Maintenance Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal.

2. Succinctly stated, the petitioner instituted 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 eviction of respondents No.3 to 7 from the

house in question as well as maintenance @ ₹8,000/- per month. Vide order

dated 20.03.2025, the Maintenance Tribunal partly allowed the application,

directing respondent Nos.3 to 7 to permit the petitioner to reside in the

house in question and to pay him maintenance @ ₹3,000/- per month. The

order dated 20.03.2025, granting partial relief, caused pain to the petitioner

DEVINDER YADAV

2026.05.15 10:49

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this

order/judgment

CWP-6590-2026 2

and propelled him to institute a statutory appeal before the Appellate

Tribunal, which, although dismissed the appeal vide order dated 12.11.2025,

increased the amount of maintenance from ₹3,000/- to ₹5,000/- per month

(payable by each of the petitioner’s three sons). Thus, having remained

unsuccessful in obtaining the desired relief even from the Appellate

Tribunal, the petitioner has approached this Court assailing the orders

(supra).

3. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner draws the

attention of this Court to Haryana Government’s notification dated

08.12.2020, prescribing the composition of the Maintenance Tribunals and

Appellate Tribunals, to submit that the impugned order dated 20.03.2025

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/District Magistrate

acting as their respective Chairmen. In the present case, however, the

impugned order dated 20.03.2025 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

DEVINDER YADAV

2026.05.15 10:49

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this

order/judgment

CWP-6590-2026 3

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