Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Pandiammal, a 76-year-old senior citizen, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus to direct the District Collector, Revenue Divisional Officer, and Tahsildhar (respondents 1-3) to remove an alleged encroachment made by the fourth respondent, V.Marudhupandi, on her property in Sy.No. 542/22B1 and 542/22C, Kamuthakudi Village, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District, measuring 0.0079 sq.mt and 0.0037 sq.mt respectively. The petitioner claimed she inherited the property from her father and had been in exclusive possession for years. She alleged that the fourth respondent, a stranger, attempted to survey her land with revenue officials and forcibly encroached upon it. She made a detailed representation to the second respondent on 17.04.2023 under Rule 20 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2009, but it was not considered. The court noted that the nature of the order allowed dispensing with notice to the fourth respondent, and with consent of both parties, the writ petition was taken up for final disposal at the admission stage. The Government Advocate for the official respondents argued that the matter should be placed before a Division Bench as it involved encroachment. However, the court, considering the petitioner's age and the purpose of the Senior Citizens Rules, directed the second respondent (Revenue Divisional Officer) to consider the petitioner's representation dated 17.04.2023 on its own merits, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the fourth respondent, and pass appropriate orders within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Senior Citizens - Encroachment - Representation under Rule 20 - Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, Rule 20 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2009 - The petitioner, a 76-year-old senior citizen, alleged encroachment by a stranger on her inherited property and filed a representation under Rule 20 of the Rules, 2009, seeking removal. The court held that the representation must be considered by the Revenue Divisional Officer within a stipulated time, as the Rules provide for protection of senior citizens' property. (Paras 1-6) B) Writ Jurisdiction - Alternative Remedy - Writ of Mandamus - Constitution of India, Article 226 - The court rejected the Government Advocate's contention that the matter should be placed before a Division Bench due to civil implications, and instead directed the authority to consider the representation on merits, emphasizing that the writ petition could be disposed of at the admission stage with consent. (Paras 4-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the revenue authorities are obligated to consider a representation filed by a senior citizen under Rule 20 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2009, seeking removal of encroachment on her property.
Final Decision
The court disposed of the writ petition by directing the second respondent (Revenue Divisional Officer, Paramakudi) to consider the petitioner's representation dated 17.04.2023 on its own merits, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the fourth respondent, and pass appropriate orders within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act
- 2007
- Rule 20 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules
- 2009
- Writ of Mandamus
- Encroachment
- Senior Citizen Protection
