W.P.(MD)No.8337 of 2025 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 27.07.2026 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI W.P.(MD)No.8337 of 2025 and W.M.P.(MD)No.6239 of 2025 Veerasamy @ Gunasekaran ... Petitioner -vs- 1.The District Collector, Collectorate, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur – 613 010. 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Revenue Divisional Office, Pattukkottai – 614 602, Thanjavur District. 3.The Inspector of Police, Pattukkottai Town Police Station, Pattukkottai, Thanjavur District. ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.8337 of 2025 4.Kasaiyammal ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order dated 18.12.2024 in Mu.Mu.Tha.Pa.03/2024/A6 passed by the second respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the second respondent to conduct re-enquiry by following the procedures prescribed under Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. For Petitioner : Mr.P.Balamurugan For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr.M.Mahaboob Athiff Counsel for the State of Tamil Nadu For Respondent No.3 : Mr.R.Mohamed Riyaz, Government Advocate [Crl. Side] For Respondent No.4 : K.M.Karunakaran O R D E R Challenging the proceedings of the second respondent in Mu.Mu.Tha.Pa.03/2024/A6 dated 18.12.2024, the present Writ Petition has been filed. ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.8337 of 2025 2.The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is the son of the fourth respondent. The fourth respondent mother made a complaint before the second respondent on 07.02.2024 under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 as against the petitioner. The second respondent, after enquiry, passed the impugned order dated 18.12.2024, directing the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.8,000/- as monthly maintenance to the fourth respondent and also to provide shelter. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court. 3.Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has four sisters and the petitioner's father died in the year 2002. The petitioner was working in Dubai and since he met with an accident, he returned to India and now he is jobless. Further, the petitioner is in possession of 2 ½ acres of land with coconut trees and only with the meagre income derived from the said property, he is surviving. He would also submit that the fourth respondent has given a complaint only at the instigation of his sisters and the petitioner is ready to maintain the fourth respondent mother. However, a sum of Rs.8,000/- ordered by the second respondent is uncertainable and accordingly, prays for appropriate orders. ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.8337 of 2025 4.Learned Government Counsel appearing for the official respondents submitted that the impugned order came to be passed on the complaint of the senior citizen alleging failure of maintenance by the petitioner. The order of the second respondent is well within his powers and the second respondent has rightly awarded the maintenance amount and hence, prays for appropriate orders. 5.Learned Counsel for the fourth respondent would submit that the fourth respondent is the mother of the petitioner, who is an aged person and the petitioner has failed to take care of his mother. Only thereafter, the fourth respondent filed a petition before second respondent and the second respondent, upon enquiry has rightly awarded maintenance amount, which need not be interfered with. 6.Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 7.Admittedly, the petitioner is the son of the fourth respondent and since the petitioner failed to take care of his mother, the fourth respondent made a complaint before the second respondent under the Act. The second ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.8337 of 2025 respondent conducted enquiry and passed the impugned order dated 18.12.2024, granting maintenance of a sum of Rs.8,000/- to the fourth respondent to be paid by the petitioner and also to provide shelter. The sum of Rs.8,000/- ordered by the second respondent as maintenance is a just and reasonable amount and hence, the impugned order does not warrant interference by this Court. 8.Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 27.07.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet: Yes / No MR ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.8337 of 2025 To 1.The District Collector, Collectorate, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur – 613 010. 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Revenue Divisional Office, Pattukkottai – 614 602, Thanjavur District. 3.The Inspector of Police, Pattukkottai Town Police Station, Pattukkottai, Thanjavur District. ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.8337 of 2025 M.DHANDAPANI, J. MR W.P.(MD)No.8337 of 2025 27.07.2026 ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis