Senior Citizen Protection Law Cannot Be Used for Neighbour Property Conflicts: HC Clarifies

The Allahabad High Court held that disputes with neighbours over property construction do not fall under the scope of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, advising senior citizens to approach a competent civil court.

The Bench, comprising Honourable Justice Arindam Sinha and Justice Dr Yogendra Kumar Srivastava of the Allahabad High Court, has delivered a significant judgement dated July 16, 2025, in the case titled Ishak vs State of U.P. and 4 Others.

The writ petition was filed seeking protection of his life and property. He requested the court to direct the police authorities to ensure his safety because he claimed that his neighbours were threatening and obstructing him from constructing a gate on his property. The petitioner claimed that he is a senior citizen, and it is the duty of the concerned authorities to protect him from this issue under Rule 21 of the U.P. Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2014.

To support his argument, the petitioner cited provisions of Sections 20 and 21 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, claiming that these provisions protect senior citizens from distress and harassment caused by others.

When the court analysed the provisions of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, it noted that the provision has been developed to protect senior citizens who are unable to support themselves, not only from their children and relatives but also from everyone who causes them tension. The law permits senior citizens to seek financial maintenance from their children or relatives who may inherit their property. For such types of matters, they can furnish applications before the Maintenance Tribunal established under the Act.

However, the court noted that in the present case, the issue raised by the petitioner was regarding obstruction caused by his neighbours in constructing a gate on his property, and these types of disputes with some third party do not fall under the ambit of the 2007 Act or the 2014 Rules and these types of disputes should be resolved before a competent civil court.

Since the petitioner could not show that any legal right under the Act had been violated, the High Court dismissed the writ petition of the senior citizen. However, the court clarified that the petitioner is free to seek appropriate legal remedies available under other laws.