Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Rakesh Kumar Sharma vs State Of U P And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|29 May, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 34
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13032 of 2018 Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Sharma Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Raj Kumar Khanna,Amber Khanna Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Ifaqat Ali Khan,J.
1. Petitioner was appointed as Member of Juvenile Board under Section 4 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 2015”). The Act nowhere contemplates that the vacancy of Member shall be advertised and, thereafter, applications shall be invited and appointment shall be made, but it only gives a discretionary power to make appointment of two Social Workers who are selected in the manner prescribed to form the Board which is presided by Metropolitan Magistrate or a Judicial Magistrate of First Class. Statute further requires that out of two Social Workers, at least one should be woman.
2. It appears that in the present case, Board did not have any Woman Member and, therefore, petitioner has been substituted by one Smt. Renu Agarwal, respondent-4, and she has been made member. Learned counsel for petitioner contended that this amounts to termination which could not have been made without holding any inquiry as provided in Section 4(7) of Act, 2015.
3. We find that Section 4(7) has application in limited cases where a Member is found guilty of misuse of power vested under the Act; or fails to attend the proceedings of Board consecutively for three months without any valid reason; or fails to attend less than three-fourths of the sittings in a year; or becomes ineligible under sub-section (4) during his term as a member. None of the aforesaid conditions are applicable for the reason that in the present case Section 4(2) requires one member at least should be Woman and since in the Board in question no Woman Member was nominated and appointed, hence impugned order has been passed. Hence, we find no manifest error in the impugned order warranting interference.
3. The writ petition lacks merits. Dismissed.
Order Date :- 29.5.2018 PS
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Rakesh Kumar Sharma vs State Of U P And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
29 May, 2018
Judges
  • Sudhir Agarwal
Advocates
  • Raj Kumar Khanna Amber Khanna