PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-13587-2026 Date of Decision : May 04 v. STATE OF HARYANA & Ors.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
be passed by this Court and, therefore, the writ petition is dismissed
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. The instant writ petition is premature, inasmuch as the District Magistrate, Rohtak, has already, vide order dated 03.04.2026, directed the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Rohtak, to ensure expeditious disposal of the petitioner’s application. In view thereof, no further directions are required to be passed by this…
Judgment
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present: Mr. Sanjiv Kumar Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Bhupender Singh, Addl. A.G., Haryana. *** KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL)
The prayer enclosed in the instant writ petition is for issuance of a direction to the respondent No.3 to expeditiously decide the petitioner’s application filed under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.
Operative part
The instant writ petition is premature, inasmuch as the District Magistrate, Rohtak, has already, vide order dated 03.04.2026, directed the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Rohtak, to ensure expeditious disposal of the petitioner’s application. In view thereof, no further directions are required to be passed by this Court and, therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. May 04, 2026 devinder (KULDEEP TIWARI) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : : Whether Reportable Yes/No Yes/No DEVINDER YADAV 2026.05.05 09:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: be passed by this Court and, therefore, the writ petition is dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 04 May 2026. The bench was KULDEEP TIWARI.
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.