BHUPINDER SINGH Vs. DELHI COMMISSION FOR WOMEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is directed against the letter dated 03.07.2006 issued by a member of the Delhi Commission for Women to the Accounts Officer, MTNL, Telephone Exchange, 4th Floor Hari Nagar, New Delhi. The subject of the letter is interim maintenance. It appears that a complaint was filed with the Delhi Commission for Women by the respondent No.3, who is the wife of the petitioner. The petitioner is an employee of MTNL. As per the respondent No.3's case, she and her two minor children are living along with her aged mother and her husband (the petitioner) was not maintaining her for the last five years. On the basis of this submission, the Commission, by virtue of the impugned letter made the following instruction:-

(2.) The petitioner submits that such an instruction/direction issued by the Delhi Commission for Women is wholly without jurisdiction and the Commission does not have any power to pass an order on interim maintenance. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that if such a direction/instruction is permitted to run its course then it would amount to supplanting the Commission over the Courts. He submitted that the rights and obligations with regard to maintenance of the petitioner and the respondent No.3 are governed by the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 and, in case of emergent situations, under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. He further submits that the respondent No.3 has already filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the same is pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Rohini Courts. It is further submitted that in that matter, an application for interim maintenance has also been moved and that has been receiving consideration from the court. He, therefore, submits that in these circumstances this letter whereby the MTNL has been directed to deduct an amount of Rs.6,000/- each month from the salary of the petitioner and to send the deducted amount directly to the respondent No.3, is entirely without jurisdiction and is liable to be set aside.

(3.) In response, the respondent No. 1 (the Delhi Commission for Women) has filed an affidavit and the relevant portion of the affidavit reads as under:-