ORDER: K. Lakshman, J. Heard Sri Syed Waheed Ali, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri L.Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4, Sri Subramanyam Kurella, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.5 and Sri Jarupulu Ramu, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.6 to 8. Perused the record. 2. Perusal of the record would reveal that respondent No.5 is the mother and respondent Nos.6 to 8 are sisters of the petitioners. Respondent No.5 filed an application before respondent No.4 against the petitioners and respondent Nos.6 to 8 seeking certain reliefs. Respondent No.4 issued notice, dated 20.12.2023 directing the petitioners to appear on 30.12.2023. According to learned counsel, petitioners appeared before respondent No.4 and sought time to file counter/reply. Thereafter, they have not received any notice from respondent No.4. In the meanwhile, they have received an application No.A/1957/2023 dated 02.12.2023 from respondent No.2, wherein, respondent No.2 directed the petitioners to appear before him on 22.12.2023. Petitioners appeared before respondent No.2 and sought time to file counter. Without affording any opportunity, respondent No.2 passed impugned order, dated 01.03.2024 directing the petitioners not to interfere in rental matters pertaining to the subject property bearing H.No.32-143/B, Plot No.10, Shapurnaga, IDA Jeedimetla, Near SV Model High School, Quthbullapur, Medchal Districts, belongs to respondent No.5. They have further directed to deposit the rent amount for the month of October 2023 in respondent No.5 bank account. Respondent Nos.6 to 8 are further directed to coordinate with all the tenants residing in the said property to deposit the rent amount in the bank account of respondent No.5. For want of maintenance, respondent No.5 is suggested to file a maintenance application with the jurisdictional R.D.O. (Revenue Divisional Officer). Challenging the said order, petitioners filed the present writ petition. 3. In the light of the same, it is apt to note that the object behind the Act, and the Telangana State Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2011 and amended Rules 2022 (for short, ‘the Rules’) made thereunder is to protect the senior citizens and their dignity to live in their own house from their own children. The procedure to file and decide an application seeking eviction by a senior citizen was added vide G.O. Ms. No. 40 dated 30.12.2022. The procedure to file and decide an application seeking eviction by a senior citizen was added vide G.O. Ms. No. 40 dated 30.12.2022. Rule 21(3) was added and the same is extracted below: (3) Procedure for eviction from property of Senior Citizen/Parents: (a) (i) A senior citizen/parent, may make an application before the Collector & District Magistrate of his/her district, for eviction of his/her children/legal heir from his/her property on account of his/her non- maintenance and/or ill-treatment. (ii) The Collector & District Magistrate shall immediately forward such application to the concerned Sub-Divisional Magistrate/Revenue Divisional Officer for verification of the title of the property and facts of the case within fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of such application. (iii) The Sub-Divisional Magistrate/Revenue Divisional Officer shall immediately submit his/her report to the Collector & District Magistrate for final orders within sixty (60) days from the date of receipt of the application. (iv) The Collector & District Magistrate during summary proceedings for the protection of senior citizens/parents shall consider all the relevant provisions of the Act. If the Collector & District Magistrate is of the opinion that any children/ legal heir of a senior citizen /parent is not maintaining the senior citizen/parent and/or ill-treating him/her/them and yet is occupying the property of the senior citizen/parent and that they should be evicted, the Collector & District Magistrate shall issue in the manner hereinafter provided a notice in writing calling upon all persons concerned to show cause as to why an order of eviction should not be issued against them/ him/ her. (v) The notice shall;- (i) specify the grounds on which the order of eviction is proposed to be made; and (ii) require all persons concerned, that is to say, all persons who are, or may be, in occupation of, or claim interest in, the property, to show cause, if any, against the proposed order on or before such date as is specified in the notice, being a date not earlier than ten (10) days from the date of issue thereof. (b) Eviction order from property of senior citizen/ parent: If, after considering the cause, if any, shown by any person in pursuance to the notice and any evidence he/she may produce in support of the same and after giving him/her a reasonable opportunity of being heard, the Collector & District Magistrate is satisfied that the eviction order needs to be made, the Collector & District Magistrate may make an order of eviction, for reasons to be recorded therein, directing that the property shall be vacated. (c) Enforcement of orders: - (i) If any person refuses or fails to comply with the order of eviction within thirty (30) days from the date of its issue, the Collector & District Magistrate or any other officer duly authorised by the Collector & District Magistrate in this behalf may evict that person from the premises in question and take possession; (ii) The Collector & District Magistrate shall have powers to enforce the eviction orders through police and the District Superintendent of Police or Commissioner of Police, in case of cities, concerned shall be bound to carry out execution of the eviction order; (iii) The Collector & District Magistrate will further hand over the property in question to the concerned senior citizen /parent; and (iv) The Collector & District Magistrate shall forward monthly report of such cases to the Director, Department for Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities, Senior Citizens and Transgender Persons by 7th of the following month. (d) Appeal: - (i) Any appeal against the order of the Collector & District Magistrate shall lie before the Commissioner/Director, Department for Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities, Senior Citizens and Transgender Persons, Telangana, within thirty (30) days of the issue of the orders by the District Collector & Magistrate. (ii) Provisions regarding disposal of appeals before Appellate Tribunal shall apply mutatis mutandis to the appeals before the Commissioner/Director, Department for Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities, Senior Citizens and Transgender Persons, Telangana. 4. Thus, as can be seen from the above Rule, a senior citizen can seek eviction of his/her children from his/her property on account of non-maintenance or ill-treatment. A senior citizen can file an application seeking eviction before the Collector & District Magistrate. 4. Thus, as can be seen from the above Rule, a senior citizen can seek eviction of his/her children from his/her property on account of non-maintenance or ill-treatment. A senior citizen can file an application seeking eviction before the Collector & District Magistrate. On receipt of such application, the Collector & District Magistrate, within 15 days from date of receipt of the application, shall forward the said application to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate/Revenue Divisional Officer to verify the title of the property and the facts. 5. After receiving the application, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate/Revenue Divisional Officer shall conduct enquiry into the question of title and the fact of non-maintenance/ill-treatment. A report in this regard shall be submitted to Collector & District Magistrate within a period of 60 days from the date when the application was received by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate/Revenue Divisional Officer. 6. After perusing the report, the Collector & District Magistrate, if he/she is of the opinion that, the senior citizen was not being maintained or was being ill-treated, issue a show cause notice to the child/children who are staying in the senior citizen’s house. 7. The Rule also provides the form of the show cause notice. The show cause notice shall mention the grounds on which their eviction from the property is proposed. At least 10 days’ time is to be granted to the children to file a reply to the show cause notice. 8. After perusing the show cause notice, giving an opportunity to produce evidence and a reasonable opportunity of hearing, the Collector & District Magistrate can order eviction, if it is found that the senior citizen was ill-treated or was not maintained. 9. It is relevant to note that the proceedings for eviction under Rule 21(3) of Rules, 2011 are summary in nature. This means that no detailed inquiry into the question of title or the allegations is necessary. Further, there is no requirement of strict examination of the evidence led by the parties. What is required is a fair opportunity to the parties to place their case on record 10. Once an application is filed and the procedure under Rule 21(3) of Rules, is followed, the Collector & District Magistrate’s duty is only to satisfy himself/herself that the senior citizen’s life or dignity is threatened by the children/legal heirs on account of non-maintenance or ill-treatment. Once an application is filed and the procedure under Rule 21(3) of Rules, is followed, the Collector & District Magistrate’s duty is only to satisfy himself/herself that the senior citizen’s life or dignity is threatened by the children/legal heirs on account of non-maintenance or ill-treatment. A detailed inquiry akin to proceedings before a court of law is not necessary. The scope of enquiry in eviction applications filed by senior citizens was explained by the Delhi High Court in Pawan Kumar v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2022 SCC OnLine Del 3354 as follows: 9. As rightly pointed out by the authorities below and by the learned Single Judge of this Court the exercise under the Senior Citizens Act is not to ascertain the title of the property in question. The enquiry is limited to see as to whether the senior citizen is being harassed by his children or not and if the senior citizen is harassed then for his/her welfare it is necessary that the children/legal heirs are asked to evict the property. The proceedings which are summary in nature are not to decide the title of the property. In view of the above, the principle contention of the Appellants herein that the Respondent No. 2 is not the owner of the property in question is insignificant. Any right which the Appellants want to establish has to be established under the Civil Code by filing a suit before the Civil Court. 11. When this Court states that the nature of enquiry is summary in nature, it should also be borne in mind that the children shall have to suffer an order of eviction. Therefore, it is important to balance the right of the senior citizen in light of the object of the Act, and the duty not arbitrarily evict children. 12. Such balance can be achieved by strictly following the procedure laid down. It must be noted that the procedure to be followed is summary in nature. Rule 21(3) permits the Collector/District Magistrate to pass an eviction order in a summary proceeding. Such order can be punitive and onerous, if the law on protection of senior citizens is misused. Therefore, the procedure needs strict compliance. 13. Compliance of the procedure also becomes necessary as rights of senior citizens can be used to evict children by by-passing the civil court proceedings. Such order can be punitive and onerous, if the law on protection of senior citizens is misused. Therefore, the procedure needs strict compliance. 13. Compliance of the procedure also becomes necessary as rights of senior citizens can be used to evict children by by-passing the civil court proceedings. For instance, where there is a serious title dispute between the children of the senior citizens or between the senior citizens and the children, the eviction proceedings under the Act and Rules thereunder can be used to obtain an order of eviction. 14. Therefore, while technicalities can be overlooked to give affect to the object of the Act and the Rules thereunder, it must also be ensured that there is substantial compliance of the procedure. Total non-compliance of procedure in a summary proceeding is impermissible and has the potential of substantially prejudicing one party. 15. There is no dispute with regard to the legal position that under the following three exceptional circumstances though an alternative remedy is available, the writ petition is maintainable. The said three circumstances are as follows:- i. A breach of fundamental rights; ii. A violation of the principles of natural justice; iii. An excess of jurisdiction; or a challenge to the vires of the statute or delegated legislation. 16. The said principle was also laid down by the three Judge Bench of the Apex Court in Asst. Commissioner of State Tax Vs. Commercial Steel Limited Manu/SC/0801/2021 and also Whirlpool Corporation Vs. Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai (1998) 8 SCC]. Whereas, in the present case, it is not falling in any of the aforesaid four categories. Therefore, the petitioner herein cannot contend that though there is an alternative and efficacious remedy, the present writ petition is maintainable. There are several factual aspects which this Court cannot consider in a petition filed under Section 226 of the Constitution of India. 17. If respondent No.5 is seeking eviction of petitioners or respondent Nos.6 to 8, she has to file an application before respondent No.2. If respondent No.5 wants only maintenance including rental amount, she has to file an application before respondent No.4, but not before respondent No.2. There is procedure laid down under Telangana Rules, 2011 and amended Rules 2022 (for short, ‘the Rules’) for eviction of petitioners from the subject property and respondent No.2 has to follow the same. If respondent No.5 wants only maintenance including rental amount, she has to file an application before respondent No.4, but not before respondent No.2. There is procedure laid down under Telangana Rules, 2011 and amended Rules 2022 (for short, ‘the Rules’) for eviction of petitioners from the subject property and respondent No.2 has to follow the same. There is procedure contemplated under the Rules, 2011 and amended Rules 2022 for filing application before respondent No.4 seeking maintenance including collection of rents etc., and respondent No.4 has to consider the same and pass appropriate order. The said principle was also laid down by this Court vide order dated 02.09.2024 in W.P.No.33080 of 2023. 18. In the light of the same, impugned order dated 01.03.2024 in application No.A/1957/2023 passed by respondent No.2 is contrary to the procedure laid down under the Act and the aforesaid rules, principle laid down by this Court in the aforesaid order and on the said ground alone the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 19. In the light of the above discussion, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order, dated 01.03.2024 in application No.A/1957/2023 passed by respondent No.2 is set aside. However, respondent No.4 shall decide the application filed by respondent No.5 pursuant to the notice No. L1/464/2023 dated 20.12.2023 and pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law by putting the petitioners and respondent No.5 on notice and affording them an opportunity. He shall pass orders strictly in accordance with law within 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall stand closed.