The central legal point established in the judgment is the urgency in filling up the vacancies in the NCPCR to ensure the effective implementation of the statutory functions prescribed by the Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005.

Gita Mittal, J.

1. This writ petition was filed on the 23rd of September, 2016 making a grievance that the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (hereinafter referred to as “NCPCR”) has to be statutorily constituted under the provisions of Section 8 of the Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005. However, the petitioner submits, that the NCPCR is unable to transact any business at all because of vacancies of its members.

2. The petitioner has placed Sections 3 & 8(2) of the of the Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005 providing for constitution of the Commission and vacation of office by the Chairperson and Members. These statutory provisions read as follows:

“Section 3.

Constitution of National Commission for Protection of Child Rights.-

(1) The Central Government shall, by notification, constitute a body to be known as the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights to exercise the powers conferred on, and to perform the functions assigned to it, under this Act.

(2) The Commission shall consist of the following Members, namely:-

(a) a Chairperson who is a person of eminence and has done outstanding work for promoting the welfare of children; and

(b) six Members, out of which at least two shall be women, from the following fields, to be appointed by the Central Government from amongst persons of eminence, ability, integrity, standing and experience in,-

(i) education;

(ii) child health, care, welfare or child development;

(iii) juvenile justice or care of neglected or marginalized children or children with disabilities;

(iv) elimination of child labour or children in distress;

(v) child psychology or sociology; and

(vi) laws relating to children.

(3) The office of the Commission shall be at Delhi.

xxx xxx xxx

Section 8 - Vacation of office by Chairperson or Members.-

(1) ...........

(2) If a casual vacancy occurs in the office of the Chairperson or a Member, whether by reason of his death, resignation or otherwise, such vacancy shall be filled within a period of ninety days by making afresh appointment in accordance with the provisions of section 4 and the person so appointed shall hold office for the remainder of the term of office for which the Chairperson, or a Member, as the case may be, in whose place he is so appointed would have held that office.”

3. Additionally, our attention is drawn to Rule 18(5) of the National Commission for Protection of Child Right Rules, 2006, which provides the following quorum of the Commission:

“Rule 18 - Procedure for transaction of business.-

(1) ..........

xxx xxx xxx

(5) Four members including the Chairperson shall form the quorum at every meeting of the Commission.”

4. We are informed that the NCPCR came into existence on 5th March, 2007 by virtue of a notification issued by the respondent.

Ms. Santha Sinha was appointed its first Chairperson and she demitted the office on or around 4th March, 2010. Two Members were also appointed to the NCPCR on 10th April, 2007 who were in such position till 9th April, 2010.

5. We are informed that earlier, the NCPCR remained without Members between a period from 22nd November, 2013 to November, 2015 and without a Chairperson with effect from 10th October, 2014 till September, 2015. Ms. Stuti Narain Kacker was appointed as Chairperson in September, 2015 while four Members came to be appointed in November, 2015, one of whom demitted the office only after five days serving in such position on superannuation.

6. Mr. Radhakanta Tripathy, the petitioner who appears in person, has been agitating the failure of the respondents to fill up the three vacancies amongst the members of the NCPCR since 2014. The present writ petition was filed in September, 2016 seeking issuance of writ of mandamus to appoint these three members of the NCPCR and to make it fully functional.

7. In the affidavit which came to be filed by the respondent no.2 – Ministry of Women and Child Development, Government of India, we were informed that the respondent