HC raps UT judicial officer for 'causal approach'

Bench describes as shocking failure to decide maintenance plea

Saurabh Malik

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, November 17

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has rapped a UT judicial officer for “causal approach” after describing as shocking her failure to decide a maintenance plea in a pending divorce case. The Bench made it clear that the presiding officer would send her explanation in case the application was not decided on the next date of hearing before her court.

“In case the application is not decided on that date, the presiding officer shall send her explanation for not doing so and the District and Sessions Judge, Chandigarh, would append his comments thereon, which will then be placed before this court,” Justice HS Madaan ruled.

The matter was placed before Justice Madaan after the wife filed a plea against the husband with a limited prayer for issuance of “necessary directions” to the court concerned to decide the plea for maintenance for herself and her minor daughter under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act in the divorce petition by her husband. The Bench was told that the plea was pending before UT Additional District Judge for the past more than two years and eight months.

Section 24 entitles not only the wife, but also the husband, to claim maintenance “pendente lite” on showing that he or she has no independent source of income. The court, under Section 24, can, in its discretion, grant maintenance to a spouse with no independent income while the matrimonial petition is pending.

Referring to the facts of the case in hand, Justice Madaan asserted: “It is very surprising rather shocking that such type of application which requires urgent attention and prompt action by the court concerned is pending for such a long time and that points towards the causal approach of the presiding officer.”

Disposing of the revision petition, Justice Madaan directed the court concerned to decide the application under Section 24 filed by the petitioner-wife by the next date of hearing, which was stated to be November 26.