Back
2014 Supreme(Del) 659
High Court of Delhi
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH
Chhatravas, Chandra Arya Vidya Mandir
Versus
The Director, Deptt of Women & Child Dev & Another
WP(C) No. 9590 of 2009
Decided On : 03-03-2014
For the Petitioner:Maninder Singh, Sr. Advocate instructed by Nitinjya Chaudhary, Advocate. For the Respondents:Rajeeve Mehra, ASG instructed S. Pushkarna, CGSC, Neeraj Chaudhary, CGSC, Aditya Malhotra, Ravjot Singh, Gaurav Sharma, Sana Sundaram, Aditi Mohan, Advocates for UOI with A. Kapoor, Deputy Secretary, Ministry of Women and Child Development G. Tushar Rao, Advocate for Intervener Arya Bal Griha Digvijay Rai, Advocate for Intervenor Arya Kanya Sadan, Amit Mahajan, Advocate for Chandravati Chaudhary Smarak Trust Anant Kumar Asthana, Sushil Dutt Salwan, Advocate Latika Dutta, Advocate for GNCT.
The Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 prevails over the Licensing Act, 1956 for institutions housing neglected and orphaned children, and recognition and registration under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 are required.
Headnote:
Licensing Act - Confusion over licensing requirements under the Women and Children Institutions Licensing Act, 1956 and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 - Acts and Sections Referred: Licensing Act, 1956; Children Act, 1960; Orphanages Act, 1960; Juvenile Justice Act, 1986; Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 - The court discussed the confusion over the licensing requirements for institutions housing neglected and orphaned children, the definitions and provisions of the relevant acts, and the need for recognition and registration under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000. The court directed the petitioner to seek recognition and registration under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought renewal of a license under the Licensing Act, 1956 for housing neglected and orphaned children. The respondent was confused about the licensing requirements, sometimes stating that no license was required and at other times requiring registration under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000. The petitioner provided free boarding and lodging to orphaned and destitute children.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the confusion over licensing requirements stemmed from the overlapping provisions of the Licensing Act, 1956 and the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000. It directed the petitioner to seek recognition and registration under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000.
Issues: The confusion over the licensing requirements for institutions housing neglected and orphaned children, the interpretation of the relevant acts, and the need for recognition and registration under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000.
Ratio Decidendi: The provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 prevail over the Licensing Act, 1956 for institutions housing neglected and orphaned children. The petitioner was directed to seek recognition and registration under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000.
Final Decision: The court directed the petitioner to seek recognition and registration under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000.
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.
1. No doubt the officers of the Department of Women and Child Development, Government of NCT of Delhi are an illuminating lot, but it appears that half of them are fused and the remaining half are confused. Sometimes the stand taken is that with the promulgation of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, the Women and Children Institutions Licensing Act, 1956 has been repealed and thus it is pleaded that the petitioner would not be entitled to a renewal of the license granted to it under said Act for running a home for orphans or parents who cannot support their children and that the petitioner should obtain a permission under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. At other time the stand taken is that a license under the Women and Children Institutions Licensing Act, 1956 has to be obtained but after the petitioner obtained the necessary permission under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. Shifting the stand in the pleadings and the communications as aforesaid, a lot of confusion was created by the shifting stand taken. As recorded in the order dated July 30, 2012 the final stand taken was that the Women and Children Institutions Licensing Act, 1956 stood repealed with the promulgation of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000.
2. The fused and the confused stand taken by the first respondent therefore compelled us to issue a notice to the Additional Solicitor General so that proper assistance could be rendered to the Court.
3. Hearing arguments on February 03, 2014 and February 04, 2014 the matter was reserved for judgment.
4. Since there would be a reference to various statutory provisions and as we intend to refer to the same in a brief manner, we record at the outset that the statutory provisions under column No.A would be referred to by the short name under column No.B. The same would be:-
A. B.
1. Women and Children Institutions Licensing Act, 1956 Licensing Act, 1956
2. The Children Act, 1960 Children Act, 1960
3. Orphanages and other Charitable Homes (Supervision and Control) Act, 1960 Orphanages Act, 1960
4. The Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 JJ Act, 1986
5. Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 JJ Act, 2000
5. The Constitution of India has accorded a special status to the children and we find a reference to the children in the Articles of the Constitution concerning Fundamental Rights as also the Directive Principles of State Policy. To wit: Article 24, 39(e) and (f) as also Article 45.
6. With the increase in the number of neglected children and orphans at the time of partition, the Licensing Act, 1956 was promulgated noting that a large number of children houses and orphanages had mushroomed where destitute children were exploited; conditions being inhumane in these institutions. Section 2(b) of the Act defined an institution to mean an institution established and maintained for the reception, care, protection and welfare of women or children and Section 2(a) defined a child to mean a boy or a girl who had not completed the age of 18 years. Section 3 barred establishment or maintenance of an institution after the commencement of the Act except under and in accordance with the conditions of a license granted as per the Act.
7. The writ petitioner had established an institution for the reception, care and protection as also welfare of children and had obtained a license for the same under the Licensing Act, 1956. The license was for running a home for orphan girls and destitute boys and girls with effect from August 8, 1973. The same was renewed from time to time and lastly till August 06, 2008.
8. Aforesaid writ petition was filed because of an ambivalent stand taken by respondent No.1. Flip flopping, sometimes the stand taken was that no license was required to be issued and sometimes the stand was that after the registration was granted under sub-Section 3 of Section 34
