High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPC/3681/2019disposed off

Kamaldev Singh v. Sapan Singh

2019-10-16Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy3 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (C) No. 3681 of 2019 Kamaldev Singh S/o Late Shri Arjun Singh, Aged About 70 Years, R/o Behind Chudi Line, Supela, Bhilai, Tahsil And District Durg, Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Sapan Singh S/o Shri Kamaldev Singh, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Shop Number 29 B, Dakshin Gangotri, Supela Bhilai, Tahsil And District Durg, Chhattisgarh.

2. Rakesh Singh S/o Shri Kamaldev Singh, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Shop Number 29 B, Dakshin Gangotri, Supela Bhilai, Tahsil And District Durg, Chhattisgarh.

3. Raja Singh S/o Shri Kamaldev Singh, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Shop Number 29 B, Dakshin Gangotri, Supela Bhilai, Tahsil And District Durg, Chhattisgarh.

4. Sonu Singh S/o Shri Kamaldev Singh, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Shop Number 29 B, Dakshin Gangotri, Supela Bhilai, Tahsil And District Durg, Chhattisgarh.

5. Abhishek Singh S/o Shri Kamaldev Singh, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Shop Number 29 B, Dakshin Gangotri, Supela Bhilai, Tahsil And District Durg, Chhattisgarh.

6. The Collector Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh.

7. Superintendent Of Police Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh.

8. Additional Tehsildar Bhilai Nagar, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents

For Petitioner :

Mr. Shikhar Bakhtiyar, Advocate For State :

Ms. Sunita Jain, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 16.10.2019

1. The limited relief that the petitioner has sought for in the present writ petition is that the petitioner being a senior citizen and the father of respondents 1 to 5 has an order in his favour dated 14.08.2019 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), District Durg under the provisions of Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (for short "the Act of 2007")

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that though about 2 months have passed from the date the order was passed, the respondents 1 to 5 till date have not implemented the order or executed the order in his favour. The petitioner has already approached the respondent no.8 in this regard and notice has also been issued by the respondent no.8 to the private respondents but there is no further development in the execution of the order dated 14.08.2019.

3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly keeping in view the object under which the provisions of the Act of 2007 have been enacted and also taking note of the fact that the petitioner is aged more than 70 years, this Court is of the opinion that ends of justice would meet if the respondents 6 to 8 are directed to ensure that the order dated 14.08.2019 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) under the provisions of the aforementioned Act of

2007 is executed at the earliest preferably within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. It shall be the responsibility of the petitioner to apprise the respondents 6 to 8 so far as the order passed by this Court is concerned.

4. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) JUDGE Khatai