APHC010027662026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] FRIDAY,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 1850/2026 Between: 1. NUNNA CHALAMAIAH, S/O LATE NARASAIAH, AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS, R/O, MUSUNURU VILLAGE, MUSUNURU RURAL, KAVALI POST, NELLORE DISTRICT, 524201. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, SOCIAL WELFARE, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.522237. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CUM APPELLANT AUTHORITY, UNDER A.P MAINTENANCE AND WELFARE OF AND THE SENIOR CITIZENS ACT 2007, NELLORE, NELLORE DISTRICT.524001. 3. THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, AND DIVISIONAL SR.CITIZEN TRIBUNAL, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,KAVALI KAVALI, NELLORE DISTRICT.524201 4. THE SUBREGISTER, KAVALI, KAVALI MANDAL, NELLORE DISTRICT.524201. 5. LINGAM RATNAMMA, W/O LATE MOHAN RAO, AGED 73 YEARS, R/O, 9TH MILE, BHARMANAKRAKA VILLAGE, JALADHANKI MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE 524223. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toPleased to issue appropriate writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the impugned action of the 3rd respondent in not considering the representation dt. 14-07-2025 made by the petitioner under Senior Citizen Ship Act 2007, which is highly arbitrary, illegal and violation of Article 14,21 and 300-A Constitution of India and Consequentially direct the 3rd respondent to conside the represetnation dt.14- 07-2025 made by the petitioner and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 pleased Pleased to direct the 3rd respondent to consider the representation dt. 14-07- 2025 made by the petitioner, forthwith, pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. VARDHINEEDI SAI KIRAN Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE 3. GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS The Court made the following: 3 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION No.1850 OF 2026 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:- “to issue appropriate writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the impugned action of the 3rd respondent in not considering the representation dt.14.07.2025 made by the petitioner under Senior Citizenship Act, 2007 which is highly, arbitrary, illegal and violation of Article 14, 21 and 300-A Constitution of India and Consequentially direct the 3rd respondent to consider the representation dt.14.07.2025 made by the petitioner and to pass such other order or orders...” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. The case of the petitioner herein is that the petitioner herein is the absolute owner and possessor of the property admeasuring to an extent of Ac.260.96 Sq.yds in Sy.No.869-2, D.No.19-1 situated at Musunuru Village, Kavali Municipality, SPSR Nellore District and the petitioner has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property without there being any interference or hindrance from any quarter. The further case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a senior citizen suffering from age related aliments and respondent No.5 approached the petitioner and falsely represented that she would take care of the petitioner and to look after his day to day activities and pressurized the petitioner to execute gift settlement deed in respect of the subject property in her favour. Subsequently, the petitioner 4 herein executed a registered gift settlement deed in favour of respondent No.5 on 26.12.2022. Since from the date of registration of gift deed, the respondent No.5, refused to provide basic physical needs and welfare of the petitioner and is trying to alienate the subject property in favour of third parties. For which, the petitioner herein submitted an application dated 14.07.225 under Section 4(5) of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to ‘the Act 56 of 2007) to the respondent No.3 requesting to cancel the registered gift settlement deed executed by the him in favour of the respondent No.5. Considering the said representation, initially, the respondent No.3 issued notices on 28.07.2025 and 06.08.2025 to the respondent No.3 as well as the petitioner respectively. After issuance of such notices, so far, the respondent No.3 neither proceeded further nor disposed of the application of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner herein preferred the present writ petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Section 5(4) of the Act 56 of 2007 contemplates to dispose of the representation of senior citizen once received within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of the application. But, in the case on hand, even after lapse of more than 180 days, the respondent No.3 neither proceeded nor disposed of the representation after issuance of notices. 5. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for the respondents submits that as per Section 5(4) of the Act, 56 of 2007, the respondent No.3 has to dispose of the representation submitted by the petitioner or any other 5 senior citizen within a period of 90 days. Admittedly, in the instant case, the representation was received and notices were issued on 28.07.2025 and 06.08.2025. Therefore, respondent No.3 is under statutory obligation to consider and dispose of the applications filed by the petitioner. He further submits that let there be a direction to the respondent No.3 to dispose of the representation dated 14.07.2025 submitted by the petitioner. 6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties and on perusal of the material placed on record, it is an admitted fact that the application of the petitioner was received and notices were issued by the 3rd respondent to the respondent No.5 as well as the petitioner on 28.07.2025 and 06.08.2025 respectively. As contended by both the learned counsels, section 5(4) of the Act 56 of 2007 contemplates as under: “5. Application for Maintenance: 4. An application filed under sub-section (2) for the monthly allowance for the maintenance and expenses for proceeding shall be disposed of within ninety days from the date of the service of notice of the application to such person: Provided that the Tribunal may extend the said period, once for a maximum period of thirty days in exceptional circumstances for reasons to be recorded in writing.” 7. On perusal of the Section 5(4) of the Act 56 of 2007, it mandates that any application received by the respondent No.3 under Section 5(4) of the Act, the said application should be disposed of within a period of 90 days. It is not in dispute the said application was received in the month of July, 2025 itself. 6 Therefore, it is statutory obligation on part of the respondent No.3 to dispose of the representation submitted by the petitioner within the time stipulated. 8. In view of the reasons stated above, this Court is of the considered view that the present writ petition can be disposed of, directing the respondent No.3 to dispose of the representation/petition dated 14.07.2025 submitted by the petitioner, after conducting detailed enquiry within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, in accordance with law. 9. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J Date:23.01.2026 BSP 7 64 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO.1850 OF 2026 Date:23.01.2026 BSP