Source:-https:\/\/www.tribuneindia.com<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Tribune News Service
Chandigarh, November 4<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Can a Subdivisional Magistrate (SDM) in Haryana entertain an application filed by parents under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act in his individual capacity instead of a duly constituted maintenance tribunal as envisaged under rules? This vital question of law has come under the judicial scanner with the filing of a writ petition by a son against his parents and other respondents.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Taking up the matter, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has not only issued a notice of motion on the petition, but also stayed the passing of the final orders by the respondent-SDM of Badshahpur in Gurugram district on the application preferred by the parents against the petitioner.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The direction by Justice Tejinder Singh Dhindsa came after the petitioner\u2019s counsel submitted that the Haryana Government, in exercise of powers conferred under Section 32 of the Act, had framed the Haryana Maintenance of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules 2009.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The counsel pointed out that Rule 3 laid down the constitution of a maintenance tribunal, which would consist of three members, including one official not below the rank of SDM, who would be the chairperson, with two non-official members to be nominated by the Deputy Commissioner.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe instant writ petition has been filed raising a grievance that an application preferred by the petitioner\u2019s parents under provisions of the Act is being entertained by the respondent-SDM in his individual capacity and not at the hands of a duly constituted maintenance tribunal as envisaged under Rule 3 of the rules,\u201d Justice Dhindsa observed.<\/p>\n