No immediate changes needed in Arya: HC panel
A Delhi High Court-appointed panel that probed the alleged child abuse at Arya Anathalaya and irregularities in the functioning has said there is no need to take immediate administrative measures as an adequate structure of management hierarchy is in place.delhi Updated: Jun 16, 2012 00:07 IST
A Delhi High Court-appointed panel that probed the alleged child abuse at Arya Anathalaya and irregularities in the functioning has said there is no need to take immediate administrative measures as an adequate structure of management hierarchy is in place.
In its 11-page report submitted to the HC last month, the committee comprising Delhi Judicial Academy director Santosh Snehi Mann, Salam Balak Trust executive director Kiran Jyoti and Human Rights Law Network’s Afsar Ahmed Khan, however, said certain measures were needed in due course to reinforce the well-being of the children.
“We are of the opinion that no immediate administrative measures are required to be put into place in the functioning of the institutions, namely Arya Bal Griha and Arya Kanya Sadan,” it said.
However, the committee took exception to male wardens sleeping in the dormitories of younger boys of fifth to seventh standard in Arya Bal Griha, saying it was “not conducive”.
“Male wardens must not sleep in the dormitories of boys in Arya Bal Griha,” the committee recommended.
The high court — which converted an email from HAQ Foundation, an NGO, into a PIL — will consider the report on July 11. The NGO had sought intervention to ensure urgent corrective steps in the running of the institutions. The court had set up the committee on March 30.
After interacting with the children lodged at the institutions, the committee observed “children spoke naturally and looked happy during interactions”. Personal hygiene of the children was “satisfactory”, it added.
In some dormitories, the beds were less in number than the number of children lodged, which indicated that some children shared beds. On its own continuance, the committee reasoned that on account of multiplicity of authorities, “there is no desirability of the committee continuing to function.”