HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17914/2019
Kanhaiya Lal S/o Late Lakhpat Ram, Aged About 37 Years, By
Caste Panwar (Mali), R/o Near Gherulalji Ka Kunwa, Jassolai
Tallai, Bikaner (Raj.)
—-Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Director, Directorate Of
Pension And Pensioners Welfare, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. Joint Director, Medical And Health Services Zone, Bikaner
(Raj.)
3. Additional Director, Pension And Pensioners Welfare
Department, Bikaner (Raj.)
4. Assistant Director, Pension And Pensioners Welfare
Department, Bikaner (Raj.)
5. Gavra Devi W/o Shyam Gehlot, Naya Shahar, Behind Mm
Ground, Bikaner (Raj.)
6. Sannu Devi W/o Shivnarayan Gehlot, Naya Shahar,
Behind Mm Ground, Bikaner (Raj.)
7. Santosh W/o Sudhir Tanwar, Mudiya Mali Mohalla, Behind
City Kotwali, Near Naya Kunwa, Bikaner (Raj.)
—-Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Surendra Thanvi
Mr. Vivek Firoda
For Respondent(s) :
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI
Order
11/02/2020
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved
against order dated 24.09.2018 (Annexure-3) passed by
respondent No. 4, whereby, the respondents have required the
petitioner to produce a valid guardianship certificate qua his
brother Ghanshyam Panwar for grant of family pension to him.
(Downloaded on 14/02/2020 at 08:35:03 PM)
(2 of 4) [CW-17914/2019]
It is claimed that the petitioner’s brother Ghanshyam Panwar
is suffering from multiple disability and mental illness, which is
reflected from the certificate dated 27.06.2018 (Annexure-1)
issued by the competent authority.
Father of the petitioner Mr. Lakhpat Ram retired on
31.10.2004 and died on 26.01.2008. Whereafter, his mother was
getting family pension, who also died on 30.03.2018.
When the petitioner Kanhaiya Lal filed application with the
respondents that as Ghanshyam Panwar, his brother and son of
deceased Lakhpat Ram is mentally ill and was dependent on the
pension received by his mother and there was no other source of
income, the family pension be continued to be paid to him, the
application, which was forwarded to the Pension Department, the
same was responded vide Annexure-3 requiring a valid
guardianship certificate qua Ghyanshyam Panwar, as he was
claimed to be mentally ill and thereafter the case be sent back to
the department.
For the said purpose, the petitioner approached the Family
Court, Bikaner under Section 8 of the Guardians and Wards Act,
1890.
The application was returned by the Family Court vide its
order dated 21.08.2019 (Annexure-5) indicating that as the
provisions of Mental Health Act, 1987 stood repealed and in the
Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 there was no provision for according
guardianship, the petition was not maintainable.
Learned counsel for the petitioner made submissions that the
powers of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
can be invoked for the purpose of appointment of guardian.
(Downloaded on 14/02/2020 at 08:35:03 PM)
(3 of 4) [CW-17914/2019]
Reliance has been placed on judgment in Shobha Gopalkrishnan
Ors. v. State of Kerala Ors. : 2019 (1) KLT 801.
I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel
for the petitioner and have perused the material available on
record.
As the prayer made by the petitioner pertains to the
appointment of guardian for his physically challenged (mentally ill)
brother, the said power can be exercised by the authority under
the provisions of The National Trust for Welfare of Persons with
Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities
Act, 1999 (‘the Act of 1999’).
Under the Act of 1999 provisions of Section 14 deal with
appointment of guardian wherein a parent of a person with
disability or his relative may make an application to the local level
committee for appointment of any person of his choice to act as a
guardian of the person with disability.
The term ‘multiple disability’ has been defined under Section
2(h) of the Act of 1999 as meaning a combination of two or more
disabilities as defined in clause (i) of Section 2 of the Persons with
Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full
Participation) Act, 1995 (‘the Act of 1995’).
Though the Act of 1995 has been replaced by the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, however, in the Act of 1995
under Section 2(i)(viii) ‘disability’ inter alia means ‘mental illness’
and as the certificate (Annexure-01) issued to the petitioner’s
brother indicates his disability as multiple disability/mental illness,
the case would be governed by provisions of the Act of 1999 and
the petitioner can approach the local level committee for
appointment of guardian under the said Act.
(Downloaded on 14/02/2020 at 08:35:03 PM)
(4 of 4) [CW-17914/2019]
The petitioner may approach the competent authority under
the Act of 1999 and if an application is filed, the same may be
dealt with by the said authority appropriately and most
expeditiously.
With the above observations and directions, the writ petition
filed by the petitioner stands disposed of.
(ARUN BHANSALI),J
197-AK Chouhan/-
(Downloaded on 14/02/2020 at 08:35:03 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
