Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.
1. Notice for opposite party Nos.1, to 3 has been accepted by learned Standing Counsel. For the order proposed, no need to issue notice to opposite party Nos.4 to 8. Notice to opposite party Nos.4 to 8 is dispensed with.
2. This writ petition has been filed seeking following reliefs:-
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certioirari quashing the final list of impugned notification dated 23.07.2021 Chair Person & Member at Child Welfare Committee, Hardoi as contained in Annexure No.1 to this writ petition.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby commanding the Opp. Parties to allow the petitioners to work on their posts.
(iii) Any other order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deemed just fit and proper may also be passed.
(iv) Allow the petition with cost."
3. The petitioners are outgoing members of Child Welfare Committee, Hardoi. They have not been granted extension of tenure as members of the Committee.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Rule 21 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Rules, 2007 (for short 'Rules, 2007') clearly provides that tenure of the Committee shall be three years. Sub-rule 2 of Rule 21 of Rules, 2007 provides that Chairperson and members of the Committee shall be eligible for a maximum of two consecutive terms. It also provides that under Sub-Rule 3 of Rule 21 of Rules, 2007 extension of the tenure of members of the Committee shall be on the basis of their performance appraisal by the District Child Protection Unit or the State Government and on the recommendation of the Selection Committee. It is submitted that although these provisions have been repealed but in the Savings Clause of the Repealing of Amendment Act, 2016, the Rule 21 of Rules, 2007 would be same. The submission is that in view of the Rule 21 of Rules, 2007, the opposite parties should have consider the case of the petitioners for extension of tenure for next three years, which has not been done, in most arbitrary and illegal manner.
5. We have considered the submissions and gone through the record.
6. Rule 21 Sub-Rule 2 of the Rules, 2007 provides that chairperson and members of the Committee shall be eligible for maximum of two consecutive terms. It does not talk about entitlement of the chairman and members of the Committee. The eligibility is something different than the entitlement. The petitioners may be eligible for second consecutive term but it is the discretion of the competent authority whether to grant or not the extension of the tenure. We do not find any force in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners.
7. The writ petition is accordingly, dismissed.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.) (Ritu Raj Awasthi, J.) Order Date :- 29.7.2021 prateek