The High Court allowed a writ petition contesting the rejection of an appeal filed by children under Section 16 of the Senior Citizens Act, holding that such appeals are maintainable.
The impugned order dated 01.11.2025 rejecting the appeal was set aside and the matter remanded to the Appellate Tribunal with directions for notice to parties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
I
[32ee I
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL
WRIT PETITION NO: 36446 OF 2025
Between:
Banda Muralider Reddy, S/o.Pulla Reddy, years, Occ.Business, R/o.Garidepally Village and Mandal ,Aged Suryapet Districtabout49
...PETITIONER
AND
I
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of theConstitutionof lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in theaffidavit filed therewith,the High Courtmaybe pleased to issue an order/direction or any appropriatewrit, more particularlyone in the nature of WRIT OFMANDAMUS to declaring the order passedin proceedings No.B/645/2024, dt.12-08-2125 by the3rd respondent and its
consequential appeal proceedings bearing Fite.No.D/256/cDR/2025, dt.01-112025 passed by the 2nd respondent as iltegal, arbitrary, and viotation of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of tndia, against to the provisions of Maintenance of welfare of Parents and senior citizen Act 2007 and violation of principles of natural justice, and set aside the proceedings No.B/645/2024, dt.1208'2025 passed by the 3rd respondent, in the interest of justice.
lA NO: 1 OF 2025
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pteased to stay of all further proceedings of order in proceedings No.B/645/2024, dt.12-og-2025 passed by the 3rd respondent, pending disposal of the above writ petition, in the interest of justice.
counsel for the Petitioner : sRl HARI KISHAN KUDIKALA, counsel for the Respondents No.1toS : sRl M.yADAGlRt, . AGP FOR WOMEN DEVELOPMENT AND CHTLD WELFARE
Counsel for the Respondents No.6tog :
The Court made the following: ORDER
I
rt
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL
WRIT PETITION No.36446 of 2O2S
Date: 01.12.2o25
Between:
Banda Muralider Reddy
Petitioner
And
The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary (Revenue), Secretariat, Hyderabad and seven others
..Respondents
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed praying this Court to declare the order, dated t2.O8.2O25 passed by respondent No.3 in Proceedings No.B/645 12024 and its consequential appeal proceedings bearing File No.D/256 ICDR/2O25, dated 01.11.2025 passed by respondent No.2, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 14, 16 and 2L of the Constitution of India and against the provisions of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2OO7 (for short "the Senior Citizens Acf') and consequently,prayed to set asidethe same. \
a
\
2
EVV, J Wp_36446 .2025
I
fr
3
EW, J Wp_36446 2025
a
the Tahsildar to transfer the patta in the name of his mother_ smt- Banda Kanthamma and further directed that if their health condition is not good, they should be taken to hospital and their medical expenses shourd be borne equally, by their two sons. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 16 of the Senior citizens Act before respondent No.2. Learned counser for the petitioner would further submit that' respondent No.2, uide end,orsement, dated 01.11 .2o2s in File No'D /2s6/cDRr2o2s, rejected the said appeal stating that, as per Section 16 0f the senior citizens Act, onry a Senior Citizen or a parent, as the case may be, courd file an appear within sixty days. challenging the same, the present writ petition is filed.
5' At this stage, rearned counsel for the petitioner would submit that appeal filed by the children before the appelrate ^ aathority is also maintainabre and relied upon the decision of this court rr.Deepika a. Maintenance and. welfare of the
^/1
'-{
4
i I It: lr li
EvV, J \Yp]6446-2025
('
Parents dnd SeniorCitizensApPellate Tribunap,utherein this Court held thatthe appealhled by the children against the order passed by theMaintenanceTribunal under the Senior Citizens Act ismaintainable and the said order was also conflrmed by a DivisionBench of this Court uide order,dated 22.03.2022 inW.A.No.537 of 2O2O.
\
I Order in WP No.5125-2017, dt.05.03.2020
\
5
EW, J Wp_36446_2025
7 - Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. No costs.
SD'-MOHD.ISMAIL DEiUWREGISTRAR //TRUECOPY// SECTIONOFFICER
To,
1
t
BSK
BS
w
i t
HIGH COURT
DATED:01 11212025
+
.+
-n.Ltf s
f
z.
't O E JAN 2M$
,t
Cl'.( )
ORDER
WP.No.36446 ot 2025
r.r
q =.t WRIT PETITION c c
.{gd"
" xd"
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an appeal filed by the children under Section 16 of the Senior Citizens Act is maintainable.
Whether the impugned order rejecting the children's appeal violates principles of law.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Banda Muralider Reddy
The State of Telangana
The Appellate Tribunal Maintenance, Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens
The Tribunal under Maintenance, welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens
The Tahsildar, Garidepally Mandal, Suryapet District
Banda Pulla Reddy
E. V. Venugopal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
