JUDGMENT

Pankaj Mithal and Mukhtar Ahmad, JJ.—Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioners claim themselves to be the husband and wife. They have married on 27.11.2016 after the petitioner no. 1 had left her parental house and had reached Mumbai where petitioner no. 2 was said to be based.

3. The Child Welfare Committee passed an order on 25.4.2017 holding her to be a major. Thus, the father of petitioner no. 1 who is fourth respondent in this petition preferred a representation/appeal under Section 27 (10) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (in short of the Act) before the District Magistrate.

4. On the aforesaid representation/appeal District Magistrate has passed the impugned order dated 4.5.2017 and on the basis of the High School certificate of petitioner no. 1 has held that her date of birth is 26.1.2001 and therefore she has not completed the age of 18 years rather she is only 16 years and 3 months of age. Accordingly, the order the Child Welfare Committee has been set aside and the petitioner no. 1 has been directed to be lodged in Nari Niketan, Faizabad as she refused to go with her parents.

5. The above order passed by the Dis