Disposed

Radha v. the District Collector

Madras HC2 Sept 2025WP/26230/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a writ petition filed by a senior citizen seeking police protection and disposal of her representation under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. The High Court directed the relevant authorities to consider her representation regarding maintenance and welfare without interference.

What did the court decide?

Direct respondents 3 and 4 to consider petitioner's representation under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 and dispose of the same expeditiously.

Radha Vs the District Collector — Maintenance and Alimony | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.No.26230 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 02.09.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR

¶6

W.P.No.26230 of 2024

Radha

... Petitioner

Vs.

The District Collector, Thiruvannamalai District, Thiruvannamalai.

¶11

The District Superintendent of Police, Thiruvannamalai District, Thiruvannamalai.

¶12

The District Social Welfare Officer, Thiruvannamalai District, Thiruvannamalai.

¶13

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thiruvannamalai District, Thiruvannamalai.

¶14

The Inspector of Police, Kadaladi Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District, Thiruvannamalai.

¶15

Elumalai

¶16

Rajakumari

¶17

Andal

¶18

... Respondents

¶19

1/5

¶20

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶21

W.P.No.26230 of 2024

¶22

PRAYER : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction, to direct the second and fifth respondents to give police protection to the petitioner till the disposal of the third and fourth respondent enquiry under Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.

¶23

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sasikumar

¶24

For Respondents : Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan Additional Public Prosecutor

¶25

O R D E R

¶26

The Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner, aged about 70

¶27

years, seeking a direction to respondents 2 and 5 for providing police protection till the disposal of the petitioner's representation under Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, by respondents 3 and 4.

¶28

Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶29

It is the grievance of the petitioner that after the execution of

¶30

settlement deeds in favour of her daughters/R7 & R8, they have not taken

¶31

care of her. Consequently, the petitioner sent a representation seeking to cancel those settlement deeds. Thereafter, based on the direction issued by this Court in W.P.No.10210 of 2024, the petitioner sent a fresh

¶32

2/5

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

W.P.No.26230 of 2024

¶35

representation under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. However, the sixth respondent, who is the son born through the first wife of the petitioner's husband, is interfering with the peaceful possession of the petitioner's land and respondents 7 and 8 are threatening the petitioner to withdraw the proceedings initiated against them and are attempting to evict her from her possession. Hence the present petition has been filed.

¶36

In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that since the petitioner has already sent a representation to the authorities concerned, the same has to be considered and decided by the said Authorities and no purpose would be served in interfering with the dispute between the mother and the children. Therefore, respondents 3 and 4 are directed to consider the petitioner's representation and dispose of the same in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.

¶37

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the above

¶38

directions. No costs.

¶39

02.09.2025

¶40

ham Neutral Citation:Yes/No

¶41

3/5

¶42

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶43

W.P.No.26230 of 2024

¶44

¶45

The District Collector, Thiruvannamalai District, Thiruvannamalai.

¶46

The District Superintendent of Police, Thiruvannamalai District, Thiruvannamalai.

¶47

The District Social Welfare Officer, Thiruvannamalai District, Thiruvannamalai.

¶48

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thiruvannamalai District, Thiruvannamalai.

¶49

The Inspector of Police, Kadaladi Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District, Thiruvannamalai.

¶50

The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

¶51

4/5

¶52

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶53

W.P.No.26230 of 2024

¶54

N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.

¶55

ham

¶56

W.P.No.26230 of 2024

¶57

02.09.2025

¶58

5/5

¶59

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Radha v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Radha v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.S.Engineering Works Vs the Superintendent of Police

M/S.Elite Builders and Developers, Vs Khaja Mohideen

K.Arunachalam Vs the Superintendent of Police

P.Geethanjali Vs State Rep by

Kyra Photon Tech Private Limited Vs the Superintendent of Police

S.Rajagopalan Vs Mr. Rakesh Nigam