Suthakar v. The District Collector

ORDER This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order passed by the first respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.C1/38032/2021 dated

19.07.2022

¶2The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the son of the fourth respondent. He further submitted that the fourth respondent had executed irrevocable settlement deeds in favour of his other sons and daughter / petitioner's brothers and sister. Subsequently, the fourth respondent filed a petition under Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 before the second respondent seeking cancellation of the settlement deeds. The second respondent, upon enquiry, found that the petitioner and the fourth respondent were financially well placed, that there was no necessity for payment of maintenance and that the settlement deeds did not contain any condition requiring the beneficiaries to maintain the settlor. Accordingly, the second respondent refused to cancel the settlement deeds. Aggrieved by the said order, the fourth respondent preferred an appeal before the first respondent. The first respondent, after adjudication, directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- per month towards maintenance to the fourth respondent. Challenging the said order, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner has two sons to support and is finding it difficult to meet his day-to-day expenses. In spite of the same, the first respondent directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- per month towards maintenance. He therefore prayed for setting aside the impugned order.

¶4However, this Court is of the view that the direction to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- per month towards maintenance is just and reasonable and cannot be said to be excessive or arbitrary. The petitioner is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 2,000/- towards monthly maintenance to the fourth respondent. Therefore, no interference is called for with the impugned order. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

10.07.2026 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No TSG To

1.The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Divisional Office, Thiruchendur, Thoothukudi District.

3.The Village Administrative Officer, Office of the Village Administrative Office, Valavallan, Eral Taluk, Thoothukudi District.

M.DHANDAPANI, J. TSG

10.07.2026

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 10.07.2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI and W.M.P.(MD).No.14382 of 2022 Suthakar ...Petitioner Vs 1.The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi. 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Divisional Office, Thiruchendur, Thoothukudi District. 3.The Village Administrative Officer, Office of the Village Administrative Office, Valavallan, Eral Taluk, Thoothukudi District. 4.Pillayar Nadar ...Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the first respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.C1/38032/2021 dated 19.07.2022 and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Vikram For Respondents : Mr.Mahaboob Athiff, Counsel for State-for R1 to R-3 Mr.Ramkumar Adityan for R-4