G.Dhanalakshmi v. The District Collector
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 17.09.2025
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA G.Dhanalakshmi
...Petitioner
Vs.
1.
The District Collector, Chennai District, Chennai - 600 001.
2.
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chennai - 600 001.
3.
G.N.Jayantheeswari 4.
V.Sathya Narayana Rao
...Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to conduct an enquiry upon the petitioner's representation dated 05.06.2025 in the light of the provisions of Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.
1/7
For Petitioner : Mr.D.Murthy For Respondents : Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan, Spl.GP
ORDER
This Writ petition has been filed seeking to direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 05.06.2025 and consequently, conduct enquiry in the light of the provisions of Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.
2. Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of the 1st and 2nd respondents. In view of the consent expressed by the learned counsel on either side, this Writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
3. Since no adverse order is being passed against the 3rd and 4th respondents, notice to the 3rd and 4th respondents is dispensed with.
4. The case of the petitioner is that, she is a senior citizen and mother 2/7
of five children, including the 3rd respondent herein. The petitioner's husband worked in the Air Force Academy at Hyderabad and he retired from service in the year 2000. Thereafter, the petitioner and her husband purchased the property measuring an extent of 610 sq. ft situated at Tharamani, Chennai, by using the terminal benefits of her husband and later, they constructed a house in the said property and let out three rooms to tenants and were getting certain rental income, from which, they were eking out their livelihood. While so, in the month of June 2002, as the petitioner's husband was suffering from a slightly unsettled state of mind, he went missing.
Thereafter, the petitioner, her first daughter, who lost her husband, her minor grandson and her younger son, who is a visually challenged person are residing in the subject property. While so, due to some unavoidable circumstances, the petitioner let her second daughter, the 3rd respondent herein and her husband/the 4th respondent herein to stay in the 1st floor of the petitioner's house by renovating the same. The petitioner has also given 21 sovereign of gold jewels and Rs.7,00,000/- in cash to the 3rd and 4th respondents to put up additional constriction in the 2nd floor.
portion to the petitioner as promised by them, but also prevented the petitioner from collecting the monthly rents from the tenants of the 2nd floor portion and were illegally collecting the monthly rents and they were causing threats to the petitioner's life and property. Aggrieved by the said action of the 3rd and 4th respondents, the petitioner made a representation dated 05.06.2025 before the District Collector, the 1st respondent herein seeking to take suitable action against the 3rd and 4th respondents under the provisions of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007. However, till date, no action has been taken by the 1st respondent. Hence the present writ petition.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, it would suffice, if this Court issues direction to the 1st and 2nd respondents to conduct an enquiry based on the petitioner's representation dated 05.06.2025 and consequently, take action as against the 3rd and 4th respondents in the light of the provisions of Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.
4/7
6. Per contra, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the 1st and 2nd respondents submits that the competent authority to consider the petitioner's representation is the 2nd respondent. However, no such representation has been made by the petitioner before the 2nd respondent, enabling him to take action in that regard.
7. In view of the above, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, directs the petitioner to make a fresh representation before the 2nd respondent within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and upon such representation being made, the 2nd respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve (12) weeks thereafter, after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the 3rd and 4th respondents and other aggrieved persons, if any. 5/7
8. With the above directions, this Writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.
17.09.2025 skt Index : Yes/No Speaking order : Yes/No NCC : Yes/No To:
1.
The District Collector, Chennai District, Chennai - 600 001.
2.
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chennai - 600 001.
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
6/7
skt 17.09.2025 7/7