JUDGMENT : Heard Mr. N. Syngkon, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Mr. V.G.K. Kynta, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Ms. M. Kynta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. The brief fact of the petitioner’s case in a nutshell is that: “The Petitioner states that he has received a notice dated 31.05.2017 from the office of the Meghalaya State Commission for Women, Lower Lachumiere, Shillong, for his personal appearance on 20.06.2017 at 11 a.m. That the Petitioner after receiving the said notice has appeared personally before the said office on 20.06.2017 at 11 a.m. That to utmost surprise and shock without giving any opportunity to the petitioner to be represented by a lawyer or represent the case, the commission has directed the petitioner to pay a maintenance amount of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) per month to one Smti. Maria Syiemlieh in her Saving Account No. 0043010284066 of the United Bank of India, Iawmusniang Branch and the said order was thereafter typed in the official letter head of the Meghalaya State Commission for Women, Lower Lachumiere, Shillong, and the petitioner was asked to sign the same without his willingness to do the same but the petitioner had to put his signature therein for reason that he was asked by an authority established by law to do the same and in the event of his not doing the same he may face other legal consequences and therefore having no alternative the petitioner had signed the said order which was in the form of an agreement under the letter head and seal of the commission. That the petitioner states that Meghalaya State Commission for Women which is constituted under the Meghalaya State Commission for Women Act, 2005 does not provide the Commission with the power to grant maintenance as the same is the subject under sec 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. That the petitioner states that granting of maintenance by the commission is way beyond the powers, functions and jurisdiction of the said women commission and therefore the order granting such maintenance without any application of mind and without any jurisdiction is void and is liable to be set aside. That the petitioner states that the maintenance amount of Rs. That the petitioner states that granting of maintenance by the commission is way beyond the powers, functions and jurisdiction of the said women commission and therefore the order granting such maintenance without any application of mind and without any jurisdiction is void and is liable to be set aside. That the petitioner states that the maintenance amount of Rs. 15,000/- per month is highly exorbitant and is beyond the capacity of the petitioner to pay the same and as such humbly pray before your Lordship that the order dated 20.06.2017, passed by the said commission, without having any power and jurisdiction be set aside and quashed.” 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the Meghalaya State Commission for Women has no power to direct to deduct the maintenance at the source of the petitioner or to compel the parties to make any agreement or paying the compensation. He further submits that in this instant case, the respondent No. 1 i.e. the Meghalaya State Commission for Women had called the parties directing them to sign the agreement, wherein compelling the petitioner to pay the maintenance amount of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand) per month. Being aggrieved by the said illegal order of the Commission, the petitioner approached this Court and prayed that necessary directions may be given. 4. On the other hand, the learned Sr. counsel for the respondents submits that the respondent did not force the parties to sign the agreement, but merely asked them to settle the matter voluntarily and amicably and the parties entered into an agreement by their own. He further argued that the Commission has rightly passed the order and there is nothing wrong in the order. So, the Court may not interfere with the decision of the Women Commission. 5. Section 10 at Chapter-III of the Orissa State Commission for Women Act, 1993 defines the functions of Women Commission, which is reproduced herein below: “10. (I) The Commission shall perform all or any of the following functions namely :- (a) make in-depth studies on- (i) the economic, educational and health situation of the women of the State, with particular emphasis on the tribal districts and areas which are under-developed with respect to women’s literacy, mortality and economic development. (ii) Condition in which women work in factories, establishments, construction sites and other similar situations. (ii) Condition in which women work in factories, establishments, construction sites and other similar situations. and recommend to the State Government on the basis of specific reports on improving the status of women in the said areas; (b) compile information, from time to time, on instance of all offences against women in the State, or in selected areas, including cases related to marriage and dowry, rape, kidnapping, criminal abduction, eve-teasing, immoral trafficking in women and cases of medical negligence in causing delivery or sterilization or medical intervention that relates to child bearing or child birth; (c) will co-ordinate with the State Cell and District Cells for atrocities against women, if any for mobilization of public opinion in the State as a whole or in specific areas which would help in speedy reporting and detection of offences of such atrocities and mobilization or public opinion against the offenders. (d) Receive complaints on- (i) atrocities on women and offences against women, (ii) deprivation of women of their rights relating to minimum wages basis health and maternity rights, (iii) non-compliance of policy decisions of the Government relating to women, (iv) rehabilitation of deserted and destitute women and women forced into prostitution, (v) atrocities on women in custody, and take up with authorities concerned for appropriate remedial measures, (e) assist, train and orient the non-Government organization in the State in legal counseling of poor women and enabling such women to get legal aid, (f) inspect or cause to be inspected, a jail, remand home, women’s institution or other place of custody where women are kept as prisoners or otherwise and take up with the concerned authorities for remedial action, if found necessary. (g) perform functions in relating to any other matter which may be referred to it by the State Government. (2) The State Government shall cause all the recommendations or reports, or any part thereof, as may be presented to it by the Commission under sub-section (1), which relate to any matter with which the State Government is concerned, to be laid before the Legislature of the State along with a memorandum explaining the action taken or proposed to be taken on the recommendations of the Commission and the reasons for the non-acceptance, if any of such recommendation. (3) The Commission shall while investigating any matter referred to in clause (a) or clause (d) of sub-section (1) have all the powers of a Civil Court trying a suit and, in particular, in respect of the following matters, namely:- (a) summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person from any part of India and examining him on oath; (b) requiring the discovery and production of any documents; (c) receiving evidence on affidavits; (d) requisitioning any public record or copy thereof from any court or office; (e) issuing commissions for examination of witness and documents; and (f) any other matter which may be prescribed”. 6. Similarly, Section 12 at Chapter-III of the Meghalaya State Commission for Women Act, 2005 defines the power of the Commission, which is reproduced herein below: “12.(1) The Commission shall, for the purpose of any inquiry under this Act have the same powers as are vested in a Civil Court while trying a suit under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Central Act 5 of 1908), in respect of the following matters, namely :- (a) summoning and enforcing the attendance of any witness and examining him/her. (b) requiring the discovery and production of any document; (c) receiving evidence on affidavit; (d) requisitioning any public records or copy thereof from any public office; (e) issuing commissions for examination of witnesses. (2) Any proceeding before the Commission shall be deemed to be a judicial proceedings within the meaning of Sections 193 and 228 of the Indian Penal Code (Central Act 45 of 1860) and the Commission shall be deemed to be a court for the purpose of Section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (Central Act 2 of 1974).” 7. After perusal of the powers as defined both in the Orissa State Commission for Women Act, 1993 and the Meghalaya State Commission for Women Act, 2005, it is understood that though, the Commission has given some civil powers, but it cannot be said that it is a full-fledged civil Court or having power to enforce its orders. 8. On bare perusal of the power as defined under Section 10 at Chapter-III of the Orissa State Commission for Women Act, 1993 and Section 12 at Chapter-III of the Meghalaya State Commission for Women Act, 2005 Meghalaya State Commission for Women Act, 2005 is almost similar. 9. 8. On bare perusal of the power as defined under Section 10 at Chapter-III of the Orissa State Commission for Women Act, 1993 and Section 12 at Chapter-III of the Meghalaya State Commission for Women Act, 2005 Meghalaya State Commission for Women Act, 2005 is almost similar. 9. Now, after perusal of both the Acts, the question which remains is that, whether the Meghalaya State Commission for Women can determined the maintenance and directs the petitioner to deduct the maintenance amount? 10. Hon’ble the Apex Court in the case of Bhabani Prasad Jena v. Convenor Secretary, Orissa State Commission for Women and Anr., (2010) 8 SCC 633 at Para 9, 10 and 13 has observed as under: “9. It would be seen from Section 10 of the 1993 Act that the State Commission has been authorized to take up studies in respect of economic, educational and health situation of the women of the State and also the working conditions of women in the factories, establishments, construction sites and make its recommendations to the State Government. The State Commission is empowered to compile information in respect of the offences against women and to coordinate with the State Cell and District Cells for atrocities against women. Further, the State Commission is competent to receive complaints in respect of the matters specified in Section 10(1)(d) and take up the grievances raised in the complaint(s) with the authorities concerned for appropriate remedial measures. The State Commission is also given the role of assisting, training and orienting the nongovernmental organizations in the State in legal counseling of poor women and enabling such women to get legal aid. Under clause (f) of Section 10(1), the State Commission is authorized to inspect or cause to be inspected, a jail, remand home, women’s institution or other place of custody where women are kept as prisoners or otherwise and take up with the authorities concerned these matters for remedial action. 10. In other words, the State Commission is broadly assigned to take up studies on issues of economic, educational and health care that may held in overall development of the women of the State; gather statistics concerning offences against women; probe into the complaints relating to atrocities on women, deprivation of women of their rights in respect of minimum wages, basic health, maternity rights etc. and upon ascertainment of facts take up the matter with the authorities concerned for remedial measures; help women in distress as a friend, philosopher and guide in enforcement of their legal rights. However, no power or authority has been given to the State Commission to adjudicate or determine the rights of the parties. 13. It is clear to us that the legislature has not gone so far as to give jurisdiction to the State Commission to make an order such as the one that has been made. From whatever angle we may examine the validity of the directions given by the State Commission in its order dated 11-5-2009, it appears to us that the said order was outside the jurisdiction, power or competence of the State Commission. It was an order which the State Commission had no competence to make and, therefore, a void order. The High Court instead of correcting that order went a step further and directed that DNA test of the child as well as the appellant shall be conducted”. 11. After hearing the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and after examining the facts and circumstances of the case quoted above, I am of the view that the Commission has no scope or authority to determine the maintenance of the parties and direct the petitioner to pay the maintenance amount. At best, the Commission can assist the aggrieved party to place his/her case before the competent Court having a competent jurisdiction. Accordingly, the Agreement dated 20.06.2017 at Annexure-2 of the writ petition is hereby set aside. However, this judgment and order will not preclude the respondent for claiming the maintenance or any other financial support against the writ petitioner from a Court of competent jurisdiction. Petitioner succeeded. 12. With this observation and direction the instant writ petition is allowed to that extent and stands disposed of. 13. No order as to costs.