MUMBAI: The Bombay high court on Wednesday rapped the Maharashtra government for not establishing the State Council of Senior Citizens, a body tasked with advising it to effectively implement the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.
“When will you form the State Council? When will you take a decision? You don’t listen to the court. Listen to the Parliament,” said Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Arif Doctor.
The context was non-compliance by the state with the statutory requirement under the law enacted by Parliament.
The court heard a PIL by Bangalore resident Nilofer Amlani to direct the state to issue guidelines for licensing, registration and management of old-age homes across the state.
Her petition said the Act, and the rules under it, provide for a scheme to manage such homes and for establishment of state council and district committees.
Amlani’s advocate Shantanu Shetty said HC’s June 14 order had sought details of names and numbers of members, decisions taken and minutes of the meetings held, which the State’s reply does not provide.
The October 3 reply affidavit by the Social Justice and Special Assistance Department stated that “with regard to the establishment and functioning” of the State Council, the state government is in process of identifying experts and specialists in the field of welfare of senior citizens and as well as eminent senior citizens.
State’s advocate Abhay Patki said “suitable” experts were not found to establish the State Council. “The Act came in 2007. The Rules in 2010. We are in 2023. It has been 13 years. You have not found experts in the field?’’ the CJ asked.
Patki said the district committees are functioning headed by district collectors.
In the order, the judges said that it appears from the Department’s affidavit that the State Council and district committees “are still not functioning.” They directed the State to file an additional affidavit giving details about steps taken for implementing provisions of the Act and Rules and about the constitution of the Council as well.
Amlani’s PIL cited personal experience of her father (86) who was admitted temporarily to a home in Powai in July 2019 for dementia care.
The Department’s reply said Amlani’s father was admitted to a private elder care home and he unfortunately died due to negligence. “…private old age homes are neither registered with nor are they licensed by the … Department,’’ it added.
Therefore, the judges also directed that the State “shall disclose as to whether at present there is any policy/scheme/guidelines to regulate the old age homes run and managed by the private sector.”
Also, “if there are no such regulatory measures available, what steps have been taken by the State government to put such regulatory measures in place.”
“When will you form the State Council? When will you take a decision? You don’t listen to the court. Listen to the Parliament,” said Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Arif Doctor.
The context was non-compliance by the state with the statutory requirement under the law enacted by Parliament.
The court heard a PIL by Bangalore resident Nilofer Amlani to direct the state to issue guidelines for licensing, registration and management of old-age homes across the state.
Her petition said the Act, and the rules under it, provide for a scheme to manage such homes and for establishment of state council and district committees.
Amlani’s advocate Shantanu Shetty said HC’s June 14 order had sought details of names and numbers of members, decisions taken and minutes of the meetings held, which the State’s reply does not provide.
The October 3 reply affidavit by the Social Justice and Special Assistance Department stated that “with regard to the establishment and functioning” of the State Council, the state government is in process of identifying experts and specialists in the field of welfare of senior citizens and as well as eminent senior citizens.
State’s advocate Abhay Patki said “suitable” experts were not found to establish the State Council. “The Act came in 2007. The Rules in 2010. We are in 2023. It has been 13 years. You have not found experts in the field?’’ the CJ asked.
Patki said the district committees are functioning headed by district collectors.
In the order, the judges said that it appears from the Department’s affidavit that the State Council and district committees “are still not functioning.” They directed the State to file an additional affidavit giving details about steps taken for implementing provisions of the Act and Rules and about the constitution of the Council as well.
Amlani’s PIL cited personal experience of her father (86) who was admitted temporarily to a home in Powai in July 2019 for dementia care.
The Department’s reply said Amlani’s father was admitted to a private elder care home and he unfortunately died due to negligence. “…private old age homes are neither registered with nor are they licensed by the … Department,’’ it added.
Therefore, the judges also directed that the State “shall disclose as to whether at present there is any policy/scheme/guidelines to regulate the old age homes run and managed by the private sector.”
Also, “if there are no such regulatory measures available, what steps have been taken by the State government to put such regulatory measures in place.”