Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Smt Rukhsana Begum vs State Of U P And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|19 August, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 40
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 18821 of 2021 Petitioner :- Smt. Rukhsana Begum Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 8 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohammad Khalid Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J. Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos.1, 3 and 4.
The petitioner has sought quashing of the notification dated 8th February, 2021 declaring a list of candidates selected for membership of a Child Welfare Committee.
The claim of the petitioner is that the respondents 5 to 9, who have been declared selected are not eligible for such selection in view of the provisions of Section 27(4)(5) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 as they do not possess the minimum experience prescribed with regard to the active involvement in health, education or welfare activities pertaining to children.
The learned Standing Counsel has invited our attention to sub- Section (4) of Section 27 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 which provides, no person shall be appointed as a member of the Committee unless such person has been actively involved in health, education or welfare activities pertaining to children for at least 7 years or is a practising professional with a degree in child psychology of psychiatry or law or social work or sociology or human development.
By placing reliance on the aforesaid provision, the learned Standing Counsel has submitted that there is no specific averment in the writ petition that the selected candidates do not even possess the alternative qualifications mentioned above.
We have perused the record.
From the averments made in the writ petition, though the petitioner has questioned the appointment of the selected candidates on the ground of not holding the prescribed experience but there is no specific averment in the writ petition that the selected candidates do not even possess the alternative qualifications prescribed by sub-Section (4) of Section 27 of the 2015 Act.
As it has not been specifically averred in the petition that the selected candidates do not even possess the other prescribed alternative qualifications mentioned in the advertisement, we decline to entertain this petition.
The petition is accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 19.8.2021 Bhaskar
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

Smt Rukhsana Begum vs State Of U P And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
19 August, 2021
Judges
  • Manoj Misra
Advocates
  • Mohammad Khalid