Rules framed in 2010: Bombay HC pulls up state for not forming council of senior citizens in 13 yrs
he Court, while hearing a PIL seeking detailed guidelines for licensing, registration and management of the old age homes across the State, asked the government to file additional an affidavit giving details of steps taken to implement various provisions of the rules.
3 min read
The bench questioned the state as to why it could not find subject experts to be appointed on the council in the last 13 years since the rules were framed. (File) The Bombay High Court directed the state government to place on record the details regarding the State Council, District Committees/District Co-ordination-cum Monitoring Committees on implementation of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007.
The Court, while hearing a PIL seeking detailed guidelines for licensing, registration and management of the old age homes across the State, asked the government to file additional an affidavit giving details of steps taken to implement various provisions of the rules.
The bench questioned the state as to why it could not find subject experts to be appointed on the council in the last 13 years since the rules were framed. Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya-led bench remarked, “Aap court ki baat maante nahi, kam se kam Parliament (statute) ki baat toh suno! ( You don’t listen to the court, at least listen to the Parliament!)”
A division bench of CJ Upadhyaya and Justice Arif S Doctor was hearing a PIL by one Nilofer Amlani seeking directions in respect of 2010 Rules notified by the state Department of Social Justice and Special Assistance for taking care and protection of senior citizens. As per Rule 21 and 22 of the 2010 Rules, the State Council and District Committees would advise the State Government on effective implementation of the Act.
On June 14, the HC had directed the state to file the affidavit giving details of steps taken to ensure various compliances by the government. The state, in its affidavit stated that various steps had been taken to constitute state council and district committees for senior citizens. However, the bench on Wednesday noted that “it appeared the state council and district committees are still not functioning”.
After Additional Government Pleader Abhay L Patki submitted that district councils are functioning, the bench said the government has obligations under the Act and the same need to be fulfilled.
The Court also pulled up the state for not having a regulatory mechanism under the Act. When AGP Patki said once the state council is formally constituted, the regulatory mechanism will also be in place, CJ Upadhyaya asked the government to abide by the law made by the parliament.
The bench orally remarked, “We are not conducting a roving enquiry. The mechanism and what is provided in the Act should be implemented. For thirteen years you could not find experts (to be inducted on state council)?”
The bench also asked the state government to disclose if no regulatory mechanism was available, what steps have been taken by the state government with the same and posted further hearing to January 9.
You May Like
