Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
SANJEEV KUMAR, PUNEET GUPTA, JJ.
Khair-Un-Nisa (Dr.) & Ors. – Petitioners
Versus
UT of Jammu and Kashmir & Ors. – Respondents
WP(C) No. 1742 Of 2022, c/w WP(C) No. 1748 Of 2022
Decided On : 28-03-2023
JUVENILE JUSTICE - APPOINTMENT EXTENSION - Jammu and Kashmir Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2013 - Rules 4 and 24 - The court discussed the extension of appointment of Chairpersons/Members of Child Welfare-Committees and Members of Juvenile Justice Boards under the Act of 2013, and the subsequent selection process initiated under the Act of 2015 and Model Rules of 2016. The court highlighted the provisions of Rules 4 and 24 of the Rules of 2014, emphasizing the term of office, re-appointment eligibility, and performance appraisal system for the members. The court also addressed the abuse of process of law, forum shopping, and bench hunting by the petitioners, and imposed exemplary costs.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, Chairpersons/Members of Child Welfare-Committees and Members of Juvenile Justice Boards, sought to challenge the Advertisement Notifications for selection process and prayed for extension of their tenure. The court found that the petitioners engaged in forum shopping and bench hunting by filing multiple petitions on the same cause of action in different wings of the Court.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioners' conduct of filing multiple petitions on the same cause of action in different wings of the Court amounted to abuse of process of law, forum shopping, and bench hunting. The court dismissed both petitions and imposed exemplary costs of Rs. 1.00 lac on the petitioners.
Issues: The issues involved the extension of appointment of Chairpersons/Members of Child Welfare-Committees and Members of Juvenile Justice Boards, abuse of process of law, forum shopping, and bench hunting.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioners' conduct of filing multiple petitions on the same cause of action in different wings of the Court amounted to abuse of process of law, forum shopping, and bench hunting, and imposed exemplary costs.
Final Decision: The court dismissed both petitions and imposed exemplary costs of Rs. 1.00 lac on the petitioners.
JUDGMENT :
[Sanjeev Kumar, J.]
WP(C) No. 1742/2022
1. The petitioners, ninety six(96) in number, are either Chairpersons/Members of the Child Welfare-Committees ['CWCs'] or Members of Juvenile Justice Boards ['JJBs'] appointed under the different provisions of Jammu and Kashmir Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2013 ['the Act of 2013'] and the Rules framed thereunder. The Chairpersons and Members of CWCs and JJBs were appointed initially for a period of three years. The term of JJBs Members expired on 12.01.2021 and so far as Chairpersons/Members of CWCs are concerned, their term came to be an end on 06.02.2021. However, in terms of Government Order No. 13-SW of2021, dated 27.01.2021, the term of existing members of JJBs and CWCs was extended for a further period of one year or till fresh selection was made as per the prescribed procedure whichever was earlier. The process of selection for appointment of the Members of JJBs and the Chairpersons/Members of CWCs was initiated vide Advertisement Notification No. 01 SC (MV), dated 01.08.2022 and Notification No. 02 SC (MV) of 2022, dated 01.08.2022 respectively. All the petitioners herein are aggrieved of and have called in question both the Advertisement Notifications (supra) on multiple grounds. The petitioners have prayed for, inter alia, the following reliefs:
(b) A writ of mandamus directing the respondents to allow the petitioners to discharge their duties as Chair-persons/Members of CWCs and the Members of JJBs in terms of Jammu and Kashmir Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2014.
2. From a reading of the entire petition, it becomes crystal clear that the cause of action to approach this Court accrued to the petitioners primarily on expiry of their initially term of appointment and, more particularly, when the respondents vide Government order dated 27.01.2021 (supra), while extending the term of appointment of the petitioners by one year, also made it clear that the process of selection to constitute JJBs and CWCs under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Welfare) Act, 2015 ['the Act of 2015'] and Juvenile Justice (Care and Welfare) Model Rules, 2016 ['the Model Rules of 2016] shall be undertaken. The petitioners knew fully well that, after expiry of extension of one year or with the fresh selection to the JJBs and CWCs made under the Act of 2015, they were to give way, unless they were selected in the fresh selection process. The petitioners, however, approached this Court by way of instant petition only when the process of selection was set in motion by the respondents by issuing impugned Notifications aforesaid. Not only the petitioners threw challenge to the Advertisement Notifications, but they also sought extension of their tenure by three years more by placing strong reliance on Rule 4 of the Jammu and Kashmir Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children ) Rules,2014 ['the Rules of 2014']. For facility of reference, Rules 4 and 24 of the Rules of 2014 is reproduced hereunder:
1. The term of office of the members of the Board shall be three years.
2. A social worker members of the Board shall be eligible for re-appointment up to three consecutive terms based on performance appraisal to be made by Selection-cum-Oversight Committee based on recommendations of the District Child Protection Unit.
3. For the objective performance appraisal of social worker members of the Board, the Government shall develop a standard performance appraisal system.
4. A social worker member may resign, by giving one month's notice in writing.
5. Any casual vacancy in the Board may be filled by appointment of another person out of the panel prepared by the Selection cum Oversight Committee as per merit.
6. The panel prepared by the Selection cum
Abuse of process of law, forum shopping, and bench hunting are not permitted under law and may result in dismissal of petitions and imposition of exemplary costs.
The court emphasized the importance of following the mandatory provisions prescribed by law while working as members of the Child Welfare Committee, and the refusal to issue directions to accept resi....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the termination of the petitioners as members of the Child Welfare Committee was justified due to their breach of mandatory provisions of the ....
Point of law : If there is some minor irregularity in selection of a candidate but if such a candidate has put in a number of years of service, it may not be advisable to disturb his appointment.
The court holds that it cannot interfere with the selection made by the Selection Committee unless there is arbitrariness or statutory aberration. The court emphasizes the importance of maintaining t....
Reference to previously dismissed petitions in an appointment advertisement constitutes an irregularity but does not invalidate the appointment process, which is subject to ongoing appeals.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
