SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(TEL) 22938

HIGH COURT OF TELANGANA
SUREPALLI NANDA, J
Bukya Sukya – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WP/33344/2024



The court clarified that the District Child Protection Officer has no jurisdiction over adoption deed registrations, which are under the Sub-Registrar’s authority.

Headnote:(A) Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 - The petitioner sought a writ of Mandamus against interference in the adoption of their son, asserting the actions of the respondents were arbitrary and illegal. The court noted previous orders covered the issue, leading to the dismissal of the petition. (Paras 2, 3, 7)

(B) Adoption Registration - The court directed the petitioner to approach the Sub-Registrar for the registration of the adoption deed, clarifying the District Child Protection Unit's non-involvement in the matter. (Paras 5, 7)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought to protect their adopted son’s personal liberty regarding adoption, claiming interference by certain respondents.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the District Child Protection Officer had no involvement in the adoption process and that the petitioner should approach the Sub-Registrar for registration of the adoption deed.

Issues: The main issue was whether the District Child Protection Officer had interfered in the petitioner’s adoption process.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the District Child Protection Officer had no jurisdiction in the registration of adoption deeds, which falls under the Sub-Registrar’s office.

Result: Writ petition disposed of.

ORDER: 

Hear d  M/ s. An got h u Neh r u , lear n ed cou n sel appear in g on beh alf of t h e pet it ion er , lear n ed Assist an t Gover n m en t Pleader for W om en an d Ch ild W elfar e, appear in g on beh alf of r espon den t Nos.1 , 5 & 6 an d lear n ed Assist an t Gover n m en t Pleader for St am ps an d Regist r at ion , appear in g on beh alf of r espon den t Nos.2 t o 4 . 

2 .Th e pet it ion er appr oach ed t h e Cou r t seek in g pr ay er as u n der :

“… to issue a writ direction order or orders more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the action of the respondents particularly respondent Nos.5 and 6 in interfering into the personal life and liberty of the petitioner’s adopted Son Master Bukya Santhosh in respect of his adoption as being arbitrary and illegal and consequently direct the respondent Nos.5 and 6 not to interfere into the personal life and liberty of the petitioner’s adopted son Master Bukya Santhosh in respect of adoption and pass… ”.

3 .It is represented by both the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Women and Child Welfare that the subject issue in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the order of this Court dated 29.11.2024 passed in W.P. No. 33522 of 2024, and hence, the present writ petition could be disposed of in terms of the aforesaid order.

4 . The learned Government Pleader referring to the written instructions submits that the 6 th respondent herein i.e. The District Child Protection Officer, Mahabubabad has no involvement in the subject issue or any relevant proceedings.

5 . Th e said W r it t en in st r u ct ion s ar e ex t r act ed h er eu n der :-

“Respectfully submit that, the District Child Protection Unit (DCPU), Mahabubabad, has been wrongly impleaded in the present writ petition (W.P. No… ./ 2024). The DCPU has neither received any complaints nor has it interfered in the adoption. The DCPU operates under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, with a mandate to protect children in need of care and protection. The registration of adoption deeds under HAMA is outside the purview of the DCPU and falls solely under the jurisdiction of the Sub- Registrar’s office.

Th e allegat ion s of in t er fer en ce in t o t h e  per son al life an d liber t y of t h e pet it ion er ’s adopt ed son , Mast er Bu k ya San t h osh , ar e baseless an d n ot su ppor t ed by an y fact u al ev iden ce. Th e DCPU h as n o in volv em en t in t h e case or an y r elat ed pr oceedin gs” .

6 .The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be permitted to approach the competent authority for registration of the Adoption Deed.

7 . Tak in g in t o con sider at ion :-

a) Th e su bm ission s m ade by t h e lear n ed cou n sel appear in g on beh alf of t h e pet it ion er an d t h e lear n ed Gov er n m en t Pleader for W om en an d Ch ild W elfar e t h at t h e Dist r ict Ch ild Pr ot ect ion Officer , Mah abu babad h as n o in v olv em en t in t h e su bj ect issu e or in an y r elevan t pr oceedin gs.

b) Th e w r it t en in st r u ct ion s br ou gh t on r ecor d by t h e lear n ed Gover n m en t Pleader for W om en an d Ch ild W elfar e appear in g on beh alf of t h e 6 t h r espon den t .

Th e w r it pet it ion is disposed of dir ect in g t h e pet it ion er t o appr oach t h e 4 t h r espon den t / Th e Su b- Regist r ar , SRO, Mah abu babad, Mah abu babad Dist r ict for r egist r at ion of t h e Adopt ion Deed of t h e pet it ion er ’s son Bu k y a San t osh as per r u les in for ce. Accor din gly , t h e w r it pet it ion is disposed of. How ever , t h er e sh all be n o or der as t o cost s.

The miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top