✦ Karnataka High Court

SMT. G. MADHU v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Writ Petition No. 50661 of 2017E S INDIRESH, LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT4 min read

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Judgment

1. SRI. G. MADHU S/O MAHABALESHWARAPPA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/O D.NO.1663/43 10TH CROSS, BHADRA P U COLLEGE ROAD SIDDAVEERAPPA BADAVANE DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT - 577101.

2. SMT. GEETHA W/O G. MADHU AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O D.NO.1663/43 10TH CROSS, BHADRA P U COLLEGE ROAD SIDDAVEERAPPA BADAVANE DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT - 577101. (BY SMT. AISHWARYA HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SANTHOSH R. NELKUDRI, ADVOCATE) SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA …PETITIONERS - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:39617 WP No. 50661 of 2017 C/W WP No. 55406 of 2017 HC-KAR AND:

1.

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD BENGALURU-560 001.

2.

DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT FOR THE EMPOWERMENT OF DIFFERENTLY ABLED AND SENIORS CITIZENS PODIUM BLOCK VISHVESWARAIAH TOWER DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD BENGALURU-560 001.

3.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DAVANAGERE DISTIRCT DAVANAGERE-577001.

4.

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER DAVANAGERE SUB DIVISION DAVANAGERE-577001.

5.

SRI MAHABALESHWARAPPA G. S/O LATE GOWDRA KARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS R/O D. NO.1663/43A 10TH CROSS, BHADRA P U COLLEGE ROAD SIDDAVEERAPPA BADAVANE DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT-577001.

6.

SMT. KENCHAMMA W/O MAHABALESHWARAPPA G. AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS R/O NO.1663/43A 10TH CROSS, - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:39617 WP No. 50661 of 2017 C/W WP No. 55406 of 2017 HC-KAR BHADRA P U COLLEGE ROAD SIDDAVEERAPPA BADAVANE DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT-577001.

7.

UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO LAW & JUSTICE LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT, SHASTRI BHAVAN, 4TH FLOOR, DR. RAJENDRA PRASAD ROAD, NEW DELHI-110001. (BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA FOR R1 TO R4; SRI. SHANTHI BHUSHAN H., DSGI FOR R7; R5 AND R6 ARE SERVED) …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT SECTION 17 OF THE MAINTENANCE AND WELFARE OF PARENTS AND SENIOR CITIZENS ACT, 2007, BARRING THE REPRESENTATION BY THE LEGAL PRACTITIONERS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL OR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IS INVALID, WITHOUT AUTHORITY OF LAW AND ULTRA VIRES OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA; AND ETC. IN WP NO. 55406/2017 BETWEEN:

1. SMT. G. MADHU S/O MAHABALESHWARAPPA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/O D.NO.1663/43 - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:39617 WP No. 50661 of 2017 C/W WP No. 55406 of 2017 HC-KAR 10TH CROSS, BHADRA P U COLLEGE ROAD, SIDDAVEERAPPA BADAVANE DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT.

2. SMT. GEETHA W/O G MADHU AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O D.NO.1663/43 10TH CROSS, BHADRA P U COLLEGE ROAD, SIDDAVEERAPPA BADAVANE DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT. ...PETITIONERS (BY SMT. AISHWARYA HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SANTHOSH R. NELKUDRI, ADVOCATE) AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, DR.AMBEDKAR ROAD BENGALURU-560 001.

2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DAVANAGERE DISTRICT DAVANAGERE-577001.

3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER DAVANAGERE SUB DIVISION, DAVANAGERE-577001.

4. SRI. MAHABALESHWARAPPA G S/O LATE GOWDRA KARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, R/O D.NO.1663/43A, 10TH CROSS, BHADRA P U COLLEGE ROAD, - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:39617 WP No. 50661 of 2017 C/W WP No. 55406 of 2017 HC-KAR SIDDAVEERAPPA BADAVANE DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT.

5. SMT. KENCHAMMA W/O MAHABALESHWARAPPA G. AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/O D.NO.1663/43A 10TH CROSS, BHADRA P U COLLEGE ROAD, SIDDAVEERAPPA BADAVANE DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT. (BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. JAGADEESHGOUD PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR C/R4 & R5) ...RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 29.11.2017 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.3 VIDE ANNEXURE-P. THESE WRIT PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER IN W.P. No.50661/2017:

1. In this writ petition, petitioners have questioned the vires of Section 17 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:39617 WP No. 50661 of 2017 C/W WP No. 55406 of 2017 HC-KAR Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), barring the representation by the Legal Practitioners before the Tribunal or Appellate Tribunal as unconstitutional, inter alia, questioned the endorsement dated 16.10.2017 (Annexure-K).

2. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, I am the view that, the endorsement dated 16.10.2017 (Annexure-K) issued by respondent No.4, requires to be quashed, as this Court in W.P.No.1912/2023, by Order dated

26.06.2023, held that Section 17 of the Act is ultra vires and unconstitutional. In that view of the matter, the matter requires to be reconsidered by the respondent No.4 afresh, after providing fair opportunity to all the parties concerned and to take decision in the matter, in accordance with law.

3. Accordingly, the W.P.No.50661/2017 is allowed. The impugned endorsement dated 16.10.2017, as per Annexure-K, is hereby quashed. The matter is remitted to respondent No.4 - Assistant Commissioner, Davanagere Sub Division, Davanagere, to re-consider the matter afresh and take decision in accordance with law. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:39617 WP No. 50661 of 2017 C/W WP No. 55406 of 2017 HC-KAR IN W.P. No.55406/2017:

4. In view of allowing W.P.No.50661/2017 by quashing the endorsement dated 16.10.2017 (Annexure-K) passed by respondent No.4 therein, I am of the view that, the impugned order in this Writ Petition, passed on 29.11.2017 does not survive for consideration and requires to be re-considered afresh by respondent - Assistant Commissioner, Davanagere Sub Division, Davanagere.

5. Accordingly, the W.P.No.55406/2017 allowed and the impugned order (Annexure-P) dated 29.11.2017 in W.P.No.55406/2017 is hereby quashed. The matter is remitted to the Assistant Commissioner, Davanagere Sub Division, Davanagere, to reconsider the matter afresh, in accordance with law. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Karnataka High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Writ Petition No. 50661 of 2017). ← Search more judgments