BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 14.08.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI CRP(PD)(MD)No.624 of 2014 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2014 Claretian Mercy Home Azhagusirai Ponnamangalam Village Thirumangalam Taluk Madurai District Rep.
by its Director Fr.D.Makizchi Mannan : Revision Petitioner/ 1st Petitioner -versus 1.R.Vairavan Anandan 2.Mrs.V.Hemalatha : Respondents/ Petitioners 2 and 3 PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to set aside the order passed by the learned I Additional District Judge, Madurai, in J.J.O.P.No.25 of 2012, dated 06.02.2014.
!For petitioner : Mrs.D.Geetha ^For Respondents : Mr.D.Saravanan :ORDER
This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the interim order passed by the learned 1st Additional District Judge, Madurai, in J.J.O.P.No.25 of 2012, dated 06.02.2014.
2.The petitioner and the respondents herein filed Adoption petition in J.J.O.P.No.25 of 2012 before the learned 1st Additional District Judge, Madurai, under section 41(6) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Amendment Act, 2006 r/w rule 33(5) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007, to permit the petitioner's Institution to give the minor female child Jerina @ Swarnabairavi in permanent adoption to the respondents, who are the petitioners 2 and 3 in the said O.P.3.The petitioner and the respondents herein filed documents as contemplated under sections 41 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2000 and Rule 33 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules 2007 and they let in oral evidence also.
The learned 1st Additional District Judge issued notice to the Indian Council for Child Welfare (ICCW).Chennai-30 and the Indian Council for Social Welfare (ICSW) Chennai-8, seeking for report.
This special notice was issued in compliance of the Circular of this court, in R.O.C.No.1790(A)/2001/B5, dated 24.06.2003.
4.The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the Circular, dated 24.06.2003, applies only to the petitions filed under the Guardian Wards Act and the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act and it will not apply to the petitions filed under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act and Rules.
5.The learned counsel for the petitioner further argued that as per the Central Adoption Resource Authority of India, New Delhi in F.No.17-78/2013- State Govt.-CARA, dated 28.03.2013, addressed to the Government of Tamil Nadu stating that all the scrutiny related to the child done by the Child Welfare Committee constituted by the Government in every District is sufficient and is in compliance with Section 41(5) of the Act and no further scrutiny by the agencies referred to by this court in the circular, dated 24.06.2003, is necessary.
6.The issue relates to adoption of Orphans and abandoned children, The courts must be satisfied that the adoption of minor is in the paramount interest of minor and the adoptive parents are fit persons to adopt the minor.
7.The issue is as to whether after coming into force of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act and Rules and after the scrutiny report of the District Welfare Committee and letter from the Central Adoption Resource Authority of India, dated 28.03.2013, the report from Indian Council for Child Welfare or Indian Council for Social Welfare, Chennai, is necessary as per the circular of this Court, in ROC No.1790(A)/2001/B5, dated 24.06.2003.
8.Originally adoption of minor children were done as per the provisions of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act and the Guardians and Wards Act.
In these acts, there is no provision for obtaining report from the Agencies about the eligibility of minor to be given in adoption and the suitability of persons to adopt the minor children.
No material is placed before the Courts to satisfy itself as to whether it will be in the best interest of the minor child to be given in adoption.
In order to avoid malpractices, illegality and to safeguard the interest of minor, this Court issued Circular in ROC No.1790(A)/2001/B5, dated 24.06.2003.
By this Circular, this Court directed all the Subordinate Courts to issue notice to the Indian Council for Child Welfare (ICCW).Chennai - 30 and Indian Council for Social Welfare (ICSW).Chennai - 8, and obtain a report about the suitability of adoptive parents and whether it will be in the paramount interest of minor child.
9.The above circular was issued before coming into force of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000.
Section 41 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, deals with adoption and procedure to be followed by the District Judges/Subordinate Judges.
Similarly, Rule 33 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 provides an elaborate procedure to be followed by the Court while deciding the adoption of minor child.
The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007, provides for report by the specialised Agencies from the concerned District after investigation.
The State Government shall recognise one or more of its institutions or voluntary organisations in each District as specialised Adoption Agencies in such manner as may be prescribed for the placement of orphan, abandoned or surrendered children for adoption in accordance with the guidelines notified in Section 41(3) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000.
The District Judge must be satisfied himself regarding investigations having been carried on by the Agencies before ordering adoption of minor child.
10.In view of Section 41 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 and Rule 33 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007, the circular in ROC No.1790(A)/2001/B5, dated 24.06.2003, is not applicable to the petitions filed under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007.
11.In view of the above reasoning, the order dated 06.02.2014, passed by the learned I Additional District Judge, Madurai, in J.J.O.P.No.25 of 2012, is set aside and the learned Judge is directed to consider the J.J.O.P.on merits without insisting on a report from the Indian Council for Child Welfare (ICCW).Chennai-30 and the Indian Council for Social Welfare (ICSW).Chennai-8.
The learned Judge has to consider the District Welfare Committee recognised by the State Government after proper investigation.
The learned Judge after satisfying himself as to whether the petitioners in J.J.O.P.No.25 of 2012 have fully complied with the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007, pass final order without insisting on report from the Indian Council for Child Welfare (ICCW).Chennai-30 and the Indian Council for Social Welfare (ICSW).Chennai-8.
12.With the above direction, this civil revision petition is allowed.
No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
To The I Additional District Judge, Madurai.