Deputy Commissioners cannot pass Eviction order on Senior Citizens’ complaint

Simrat Randhawa Vs State of Punjab and Others

Punjab and Haryana HC

23/01/2020

CWP No. 4744 of 2018

About/from the judgment:

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana has held that Deputy Commissioners (DCs) settling a dispute between family members on the complaint of a senior citizen can’t pass eviction orders.

 

The HC Bench quashed these provisions in the action plans of Punjab, Haryana Chandigarh terming these in violation of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.

 

The Bench said that “Even beneficial legislation can’t be stretched beyond the confines of the law and to the breaking point in the grave matter of eviction beyond the provisions of the parent Act".

 

The HC was hearing a petition from a Patiala woman having 2 children against whom eviction orders were passed by the Deputy Commissioner on the complaint of her mother-in-law. The husband of the petitioner woman and her father-in-law had died. The woman, who came to India in 2014, and her mother-in-law entered into a dispute as soon as the former’s husband died. The matter reached HC in Feb 2018.

 

The case was argued over four months and finished in a 148-page Judgment. Advocates said it is the first-of-its-kind Judgment in India on the issue.

 

The action plans were prepared under state Govt rules for the effective implementation of the Central Act. Punjab action plan was notified in 2014.

 

The petitioner had argued that the action plan was ultra vires the Act itself, further saying that objects and purposes of the law was only to establish only a maintenance tribunal and eviction was not mandated in central law. The DCs act as maintenance tribunal under the Act.

 

Both Punjab and Haryana governments had reasoned that action plan was for the welfare of senior citizens.

 

The high court termed these action plans as an “executive order” observing that the DCs do not possess the power of eviction. It is open to wide abuse of the process of law in the hands of the executive, the court said, adding that plans do not lay down any guidelines to control, guide or supervise such extreme harsh and tyrannical quasi-judicial powers by the DCs.

 

The court further said that the Maintenance Tribunal is not an eviction tribunal and eviction can take place only through civil suits dealt with by the Judicial Courts, which adjudicate on disputes with regard of property. “Laws of land reform in India …all of which have greatly contributed to a new social order ….has led to complexities in litigation which happens only in India. Only Judges should handle this and not the executive officers,” the Court observed.

Read the Judgment

Knowledge and content of about almost all their respective descriptions are borrowed from law-related blogs and websites, we, therefore, wish to give proper credit to all the respective law-related blogs and websites like LiveLaw, Bar and Bench, LatestLaws, PathLegal, FirstLaw, Lawctopus, IndianKanoon, Manupatra, LegallyIndia etc.. Many of the judgments are also taken from them websites of Hon'ble Supreme Court and other respective Hon'ble High Courts!

Formats for use
Please reload

Talk to our volunteer on our #Helpline

8882-498-498

Single Helpline Number For Men In Distress In India

Join our mailing list!  Stay up-to-date on upcoming projects, offers & events.

  • Follow Daaman on Facebook
  • Follow Daaman on Twitter

©2018-2020 Daaman Welfare Society & Trust.

All rights reserved.

Beware, anyone can be a victim of gender bias in society and laws! 

Don't wait: Schedule a conversation with a trusted, experienced Men's Rights Activist to find out how only awareness is the key to fight and remove prevailing gender bias against men in society.