Satbir Singh v. State Of Haryana And Others

CWP No.5047 of 2017 -1IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.5047 of 2017 Date of Decision.10.03.2017 Satbir Singh .......Petitioner Vs State of Haryana and others ........Respondents

Present:

Mr. Angel Sharma, Advocate for Mr. D.D. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL -.- AMIT RAWAL J. (ORAL) The petitioner, who is a senior citizen, approached this Court for appropriate direction to the District Magistrate, Panchkula-respondent No.2 to decide the complaint filed under Rule 23(1)(2) of the Haryana Maintenance of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2009 framed under Section 32 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents & Senior Citizens Act, 2007 seeking eviction of respondent Nos.1 to 5 therein. However, the aforementioned petition had been entrusted to the Sub Divisional Magistrate i.e. the Maintenance Tribunal, which fact is evident from the zimni orders but after 14.06.

2016, there has been no order and whereabouts of the aforementioned case are not known, thus, the petitioner had been left in lurch and forced to knock the doors of this Court for appropriate direction. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and appraised the paper book. The case of the petitioner is for eviction of the private respondents as set out in the complaint (Annexure P-3). Instead of pondering upon the merits and demerits of the case, I deem it appropriate to direct the District Magistrate, Panchkula-respondent No.2 to decide the PANKAJ KUMAR 2017.03.

CWP No.5047 of 2017 -2petition as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, after affording opportunity of hearing in accordance with law. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms. (AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE March 10, 2017 Pankaj* Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No PANKAJ KUMAR 2017.03.14 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document