- (1.) Affidavit of service, filed in Court today, be taken on record. Despite service no one appears to contest this revisional application. This revisional application is directed against an Order dated 3rd September, 2014 passed by the learned Maintenance Tribunal, Barrckpore, North 24-Parganas in Maintenance Tribunal Case No 6 of 2014. The petitioner is the widow of pre-deceased son of the opposite party no.1 and 2. It is the contention of Mr. Chaturvedi, learned Advocate for the petitioner that pursuant to the application filed by the opposite parties before the learned Maintenance Tribunal, he entered appearance and sought for time to file objection. He has raised preliminary objection that the application for maintenance is also not maintainable having regard to the provision of Section 4 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.
(2.) It is also the contention of Mr. Chaturvedi that although, the petition for maintenance was not maintainable, without giving his client any opportunity to controvert the allegations made against her by filing a written objection, the learned Maintenance Tribunal by the order impugned directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.4,000/- (Rupees four thousand) only per month from her salary and 50% share of family pension from the present petitioner. It is the specific contention of Mr. Chaturvedi that the learned Maintenance Tribunal has acted illegally with material irregularity and of course without jurisdiction in passing an order directing attachment of 50% of the family pension which the petitioner is entitled to for the death of her husband who served in the Panchayet as Nirman Sahayak. From the order impugned it does not appear that the said authority has given any minimum opportunity to the petitioner to file her objection. From the order sheets it appears that the matter was first taken up on 14th August, 2014 and notice was directed to be issued to the present petitioner and fixing 3rd September, 2014 for hearing and on 3rd September, 2014 the learned Maintenance Tribunal passed the final order. Therefore, it is apparent from the order itself that no opportunity was given to the petitioner to controvert the allegations by filing objection. That being so, the order impugned is set aside. However, on humanitarian ground I direct that the petitioner will continue to pay a sum of Rs.4,000/- to the opposite parties as earlier directed by this Court by an Order dated 25th November, 2014. The learned Maintenance Tribunal shall rehear the matter after giving an opportunity to the opposite parties to file their objection and to dispose of the application after hearing the parties within a period of three months from the date of communication of this order. The aforesaid order for payment of Rs.4,000/- shall continue and shall be subject to the final order that may be passed by the said Tribunal.
(3.) The revisional application is allowed. Urgent certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.;