Custody decisions should respect established legal jurisdictions and remedies, emphasizing parental rights.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is the mother of a minor daughter, born out of the wedlock between the petitioner and one Mr. Ajit Kumar. The aforesaid Mr. Ajit Kumar passed away on 28.02.2020. The child is stated to have been studying in UKG during the year 2023 and is in the custody of the petitioner-

mother.

2. The petitioner has approached this Court contending that she was contacted telephonically by the 3^rd respondent, directing the petitioner to appear before the Child Welfare Committee on the basis of some representation/complaint filed by R4 and R5 – the parents of Mr. Ajit Kumar.

3. Heard Sri R. Reji, the learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as Sri N. B. Sunil Nath, the learned Government Pleader.

4. In spite of service of notice, there is no appearance on the side of R4 and R5. No counter affidavit has also been filed from their end.

5. While admitting the writ petition on 07.08.2023, this Court had directed the parties to maintain status quo.

6. In the light of the pleadings in the writ petition that the minor child is in the custody of the petitioner, who is none other than the mother, I am of the opinion that the steps stated to have been initiated by the 3^rd respondent are without jurisdiction.

7. If the 4^th and 5^th respondents have any case as regards the custody, the remedy available to them is elsewhere.

In such circumstances, without prejudice to the right of R4 and R5 to seek remedy in accordance with law, I dispose of the writ petition by making the interim order dated

07.08.2023 absolute.