Saurabh Aswani S/O Shri Jai Kishan @ Rajkumar… — Writ and Judicial Review | Rajasthan HC (2025)

Saurabh Aswani S/O Shri Jai Kishan @ Rajkumar… — Writ and Judicial Review | Rajasthan HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty granted to the petitioner to file an application before the Sub-Divisional Officer for expeditious hearing/disposal of the main case; upon such filing, the SDO is expected to hear and decide the main case as early as possible. No relief granted against the interim maintenance direction, the challenge on merits having been not pressed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner's challenge to the impugned interlocutory order dated 26.09.2024 (interim maintenance) could be sustained — the challenge was not pressed on merits by learned counsel for the petitioner. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Considering the grievance and limited prayer of the petitioner, the Court finds it just and proper to grant liberty to the petitioner to file an application before the SDO for expeditious hearing/disposal of the main case.

Key takeaways

If any such application is filed, the Sub-Divisional Officer is expected to hear and decide the main case as early as possible.ratio¶20
With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of, and all pending applications stand disposed of.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the interlocutory order dated 26.09.2024 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Jaipur-I, in Case No.35/2023 ('Jai Kishan Aswani Vs. Saurabh Aswani'), directing the petitioner — natural son of the respondent — to pay interim maintenance @ Rs.5,000/per month under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007; the petitioner's appeal thereagainst had been dismissed as not maintainable by the District Collector, Jaipur, on 26.11.2024. Counsel did not press the challenge on merits and confined the prayer to expeditious disposal of the main case, which remains pending despite the petitioner's reply. Held: liberty granted to the petitioner to file an application before the SDO for expeditious hearing/disposal; on such filing the SDO is expected to hear and decide the main case as early as possible. Writ petition disposed of alongwith pending applications. (Sudesh Bansal, J.)

[2025:RJ-JP:9090]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 876/2025

Saurabh Aswani S/o Shri Jai Kishan @ Rajkumar Aswani, Aged About 34 Years, R/o House No. 400-B, 20 Dukan, Adarsh Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.)

----Petitioner

Versus

Jai Kishan Aswani S/o Late Shri Kewal Ram, Aged About 59 Years, R/o Plot No. 31-A, Ramgali No. 7, Rajapark, Jaipur.

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. JK Moolchandani Ms. Anupama Dhamaniya For Respondent(s) :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

Order

03/03/2025

Petitioner has preferred instant writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, impugning the interlocutory order dated 26.09.2024 passed in Case No.35/2023 titled as ‘Jai Kishan Aswani Vs. Saurabh Aswani’ by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Jaipur-I, against which the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed as not maintainable by the District Collector, Jaipur, vide order dated 26.11.2024.

It is apparent that vide interlocutory order dated 26.09.2024, petitioner being natural son of respondent has been directed by the SDO, to pay interim maintenance @ Rs.5,000/per month to the respondent, in exercise of powers under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.

(2 of 2)

[2025:RJ-JP:9090]

[CW-876/2025]

Counsel for petitioner, during course of arguments, does not press the challenge to the impugned order on merits and has confined his prayer to the limited extent that after passing of the interlocutory order dated 26.09.2024, the respondent has not proceeded in the main case, due to which the proceedings before the Sub-Divisional Officer are pending. Counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner has filed reply to the main case and the SDO be directed to hear and decide the case earliest.

Before this Court, order-sheets of proceedings pending before the Sub-Divisional Officer, post to passing of the interlocutory order dated 26.09.2024, have not been placed on record, however, considering the grievance and limited prayer of petitioner, this Court finds it just and proper to grant liberty to the petitioner to file an application before the SDO, for expeditious hearing/ disposal of the main case.

In case, any such application is filed, the Sub-Divisional Officer is expected to hear and decide the main case, as early as possible.

With aforesaid observations, instant writ petition stands disposed of.

All pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

RONAK JAIMAN/6