Natarajan v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 22.04.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH Natarajan : Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector, Virudhunagar District.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Aruppukkottai Virudhunagar District.

3. Kamala

4. Manjula : Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the petitioner representation dated 11.02.2025 made under the maintenance and welfare of Senior Citizens Act 2007 . For Petitioner : Mr.G.Mariappan For Respondents : Mr.C.Venkatesh Kumar Special Government Pleader R1 & R2 1/6

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 11.02.2025, submitted under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. By consent of both parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. Having regard to the nature of the order proposed to be passed in this writ petition, notice to the respondents 3 and 4 is dispensed with.

3. Alleging that the respondents 3 and 4, who are the wife and daughter of the petitioner, have not been taking care of him, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 11.02.2025 to the respondents 1 and 2, requesting cancellation of the settlement deed executed in favour of the fourth respondent. As no action has been taken, the petitioner has now filed the present writ petition.

2/6

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, it would suffice, if this Court issues a direction to the second respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders, within a time frame that may be stipulated by this court.

5. It is needless to point out that whenever a representation of this nature is made to a Statutory Authority, there is a duty cast upon him to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in one way or other, instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely. As such, non-consideration of the representation by the Statutory Authority would amount to dereliction of duty and hence, this Court will be justified in invoking its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and direct them to consider the same within a stipulated time.

6. In the light of the above observations, there shall be a direction to the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 11.02.2025, on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner, as well as all other persons, who may be interested in the 3/6

subject matter, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is also made clear that this Court has not expressed any of its views with regard to the merits of the matter and that it is open to the second respondent to consider the same on its own merits.

7. With the above directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 22.04.2025 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No PKN 4/6

To

1. The District Collector, Virudhunagar District.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Aruppukkottai Virudhunagar District.

5/6

VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J.

PKN W.P.(MD) No.10994 of 2025 22.04.2025 6/6