RAVINDER SINGH vs THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUM ADDITIONALL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PATIALA AND OTHERS — CWP/20873/2024

Disposed: --DISPOSED OF on 12th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 28-Aug-2024

CNR: PHHC011110972024

Filing Number

CWP/46133/2024

Filing Date

22-Aug-2024

Registration No

CWP/20873/2024

Registration Date

23-Aug-2024

Judge

Mr. Justice Kuldeep Tiwari

Coram

Mr. Justice Kuldeep Tiwari

Bench Type

Single

Category

63.72 - MAINTENANCE AND WELFARE OF PARENTS/SENIOR CITIZENS ( 764 )

Sub-Category

( 944 )

Judicial Branch

WRITS -I BRANCH

Decision Date

12-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RAVINDER SINGH

    Adv. GURMINDER SINGH SALANA

  2. 2.THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUM ADDL. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUM ADDITIONALL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PATIALA AND OTHERS

  2. 2.THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUM ADDL. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,

  3. 3.THE ADDL. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,

  4. 4.RAJESHWARI

  5. 5.HARVINDER SINGH

  6. 6.DEPINDER SINGH

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 12-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Kuldeep TiwariView PDF

    Case Summary: CWP/20873/2024 Court Decision: The Punjab and Haryana High Court set aside both the Additional District Magistrate's order (19.12.2018) and the Appellate Tribunal's order (05.07.2022) as void and lacking jurisdiction, finding they violated the principle that quasi-judicial powers cannot be sub-delegated. The court remitted the maintenance case under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, to the proper Maintenance Tribunal for fresh adjudication within four months. Key Reasoning: The District Magistrate had no authority to decide a maintenance application; only the designated Maintenance Tribunal could do so. The Appellate Tribunal's subsequent order implementing the invalid order was also illegal. The court emphasized that statutory quasi-judicial functions cannot be delegated to subordinate officers regardless of their rank or competence, supporting this with government instructions dated 27.10.2025. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 22-Aug-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/20873/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CWP/20873/2024 Court Decision: The Punjab and Haryana High Court set aside both the Additional District Magistrate's order (19.12.2018) and the Appellate Tribunal's order (05.07.2022) as void and lacking jurisdiction, finding they violated the principle that quasi-judicial powers cannot be sub-delegated. The court remitted the maintenance case under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, to the proper Maintenance Tribunal for fresh adjudication within four months. Key Reasoning: The District Magistrate had no authority to decide a maintenance application; only the designated Maintenance Tribunal could do so. The Appellate Tribunal's subsequent order implementing the invalid order was also illegal. The court emphasized that statutory quasi-judicial functions cannot be delegated to subordinate officers regardless of their rank or competence, supporting this with government instructions dated 27.10.2025. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case