HC sets aside Tribunal's order

The Madras High court bench here today set aside an order of a Maintenance Tribunal and suggested retired District Judges or working judges/advocates could be posted as Tribunal instead of RDO or Sub-Divisional Magistrates who are not legally trained in many places.
Justice S.Nagamuthu was allowing a petition filed by one M.Venugopal against the order of the Padmanabhapuram RDO/Tribunal in Kanyakumari district to provide Rs.3000 as maintenance for his 72-year-old father Murugesa Pillai, besides handing over the stock and equipment of the Oil Mill, where both were doing business jointly since 1997, to the father.
The RDO had granted maintenance,though the father did not ask for it. The Tribunal had no jurisdiction in respect of ordering to return stock in the joint business,the judge said.

As contended by the petitioner's counsel, the Tribunal, constituted under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act,2007, had no power to pass an order in respect of the joint business. Besides, the petitioner's father did not transfer his mill to his son on condition that he should take care of his basic amenities.
As per the Act, parents or senior citizens would be entitled to maintenance only if he was unable to maintain from his own earnings or out of income from the property owned by him. These two factual aspects should be proved before the Tribunal, only then can it order for maintenance.

In this case, the father had claimed he was earning Rs one lakh to 1.5 lakh a year and he was maintaining himself. In the absence of any evidence that the father was unable to maintain himself, the Tribunal could not pass an order for maintenance.

The RDO/Tribunal had accepted an undated written statement of the father and petitioner and had merely signed in the order "drafted by someone in the RDO office."
"I don't understand as to how the Tribunal had determined issues based on only two written statements. The order of the Tribunal does not satisfy even the basic requirements of law," the judge said.

The RDO has been "ignorant of procedures" to be followed by him. He has forgotten that he was discharging quasi-judicial function which required an element of adjudication.
The Judge said if a retired judicial officer or a serving judicial officer or a practising advocate was engaged as Tribunal, such problems could be avoided.