1 2025:CGHC:39702 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4231 of 2025 1 - Krishnakant Sharma S/o Late Shri Ramdev Sharma Aged About 62 Years R/o Village Godhora, Block - Bharatpur, District M C B Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Collector Cum Chairman District Committee National Trust, District M C B Chhattisgarh 2 - Miss Mamta Sharma Alias Gudiya D/o Late Shri Ramdev Sharma Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Godhora, Block - Bharatpur, District M C B Chhattisgarh 3 - Ramakant Sharma S/o Late Shri Ramdev Sharma Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Godhora, Block - Bharatpur, District M C B Chhattisgarh 4 - Chandrakala W/o Shatrughan Prasad Aged About 58 Years R/o Village Basna, Block Jaisinghnagar, Dist. Shahdol Madhya Pradesh 5 - Saroj W/o Rambadan Pandey Aged About 46 Years R/o New Ramnagar Block Satna Dist. Satna Madhya Pradesh 6 - Block Education Officer Block Bharatpur, M C B Chhattisgarh ----Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For petitioners : Mr. Mayank Chandrakar, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Soumitra Kesharwani, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 08/08/2025 1. With the consent of parties, the matter is heard finally. 2. The present writ petition has been filed for the following relief:- Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2025.08.13 11:30:09 +0530 2 10.1 That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be directed to call for the records of the case for the kind perusal of this Hon’ble Court. 10.2 That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order and direct the respondent No. 1 to form the local level committee under the national trust Act 1999 or if already constituted to make it functional and further to decide the application of the petitioner for appointing him as guardian of Respondent No. 2 as per the Act of 1999 within a time frame in the interest of justice. 10.3 Any other relief deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be granted. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and res, no. 2 to 5 are brother and sisters. The father of petitioner was a government employee and was retired from the post of head master from school education department. During the service period he nominated res. no. 2 as his nominee for receiving family pension and other benefits. The Respondent no. 2 is more than 80% disabled and is unable to do her daily routine works. She is completely dependent upon petitioner who is her elder brother and also takes care of her day to day needs. That due to the disability it is impossible for res. no. 2 to move from place to another place for fulfilling departmental formalities and due to which she could not get the benefits of family pension and other benefits. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner with the consent of res. no.2 and other relatives made an application before concerned department for appointing him as legal guardian and to fulfill the formalities and receive the benefit on her behalf, but the respondent no. 6 3 directed the petitioner to get a valid guardian certificate from the appropriate court. The petitioner thereafter filed an application under sec. 10 of Guardian and Wards Act 1890 before learned Additional District Judge Manendragarh, but same was rejected on the ground that since res. no. 2 is a major lady and would not come within the purview of Guardian and Wards Act and therefore guardian cannot be appointed under the said Act. Thereafter the petitioner again made a fresh application before res. no.1 for deciding his application to appoint him as guardian under national trust Act, but same was not accepted by the concerned office stating that since the committee is not functional at present in the concerned district. As per sec.13 r/w sec. 14 of National Trust Act, 1999 the power to decide the application for appointment of guardian for person with multiple disability has been accorded to local committee which is a district committee headed by the District magistrate. As per the Act the local level committee is to be headed by district magistrate, but since the committee is not functional in MCB district, the application of the petitioner is not being accepted. Hence this petition. 5. Learned State Counsel submits that as per Section 13 r/w Section 14 of the National Trust Act, 1999, a local level committee has been constituted in MCB district. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 4 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case instead of keeping this petition pending, I find it appropriate to dispose of the same at this stage directing the petitioner to file a fresh application under Section 14 of the National Trust Act 1999 before the concerned Local Level Committee within a period of 15 days from today and in turn the concerned Local Level Committee shall decide the application of the petitioner in accordance with law, rules and regulations as expeditiously as possible. 8. It is made clear that this Court has not observed anything on the merits of the case. 9. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti