Judgment

ORDER - We issued notice by our order dated 23rd September, 1991 but none has entered an appearance. We inquired of Mr. Javli, the learned counsel for the petitioners, if the children were in India or were already handed over to the foreign couples. We were told that the children have been taken abroad by the foreign couples who were permitted to adopt them.

2. The real grievance made by counsel for. the petitioners is in regard to certain observations made by the High Court in the context of S. 7 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, and related provisions, which are capable of being understood to run counter to the guidelines laid down by this Court in Lakshmi Kant Pandey v. Union of India, (1984) 2 SCR 795 and (1985) Suppl 3 SCR 71. In paragraph 16 of the judgment it is observed that the Court while exercising its judicial discretion under 5. 7 should not allow itself to be persuaded by any considerations other than the legislative guideline found in the section itself, The High Court then proceeds to add:

"In other words, what really falls for determination is the locus standi and legal competence of the Council to supervene with its recommendations and displace legislati