HC to state: Give timeline for filling up vacant posts on Child Rights Commission

The court noted that the selection committee constituted for the purpose of selection of chairperson had given its recommendation however the final decision of the state government on appointment was yet to see the light of day

Mumbai: The Bombay high court (HC) has pulled up the state for not appointing regular chairman of the Maharashtra State Commission for Protection of Child Rights (MSCPCR) and instead handing over the ad-hoc charge to an IAS officer who is already handling another department, as a result of which even the six member posts are lying vacant.

The PIL sought directions to the state to fill up the vacant posts as well as constitute child right tribunals across all districts where grievances could be heard and decided. (Getty Images/iStockphoto)

The court has directed the principal secretary of the State Women and Child Welfare (SWCW) department to fill up the posts in a time bound manner and to file an affidavit by April 4, specifying details of the timeline for appointment of chairperson and members of MSCPCR. The division bench of chief justice Dipankar Datta and justice Makarand Karnik while hearing the public interest litigation filed by some parents of children studying in private schools was informed that due to absence of the requisite panel of officials, issues faced by their children could not be redressed. The PIL sought directions to the state to fill up the vacant posts as well as constitute child right tribunals across all districts where grievances could be heard and decided.

The bench was further informed that an earlier petition seeking similar reliefs had been disposed of in 2020 with directions to the state to fill up the posts that had fallen vacant earlier in that year as soon as possible, however 14 months had passed and nothing had been done to comply with the order. On its part, the state submitted an affidavit in compliance with a February 20 order of the court to respond to the concerns raised in the PIL. After perusing the affidavit, the court observed, “We see a complete lack of seriousness on part of the state for the constitution of commission.”

The court noted that the selection committee constituted for the purpose of selection of chairperson had given its recommendation however the final decision of the state government on appointment was yet to see the light of day. In view of this the court agreed with the contentions of the petitioner’s advocate that the state had to put a timeline for the appointment of the chairperson and other members and for that it was adjourning hearing of the petition to April 4 and directed the principal secretary of SWCW to file an affidavit with the timeline failing which it would entail consequences. “We hope and trust that adequate care is taken to address the concern expressed by petitioners in this PIL which has been instituted to secure the best interest of children of the state,” the HC noted.