Dismissed

Society for Human Advancement and Promotion of Employment(Shape) v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Gauhati HC13 Jun 2022WP(C)/2212/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, an NGO challenged an order cancelling its child care home registration due to allegations against the former superintendent. The Gauhati High Court directed authorities to review and re-examine the cancellation order after ensuring the NGO receives notice and an opportunity of being heard.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent nos. 2 and 3 to re-examine the cancellation order after giving the petitioner notice and an opportunity of being heard within one month.

Society for Human Advancement and… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010071432019

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/2212/2019

¶5

SOCIETY FOR HUMAN ADVANCEMENT AND PROMOTION OF EMPLOYMENT(SHAPE)

¶6

AN NGO REGISTERED AS A SOCIETY UNDER THE SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 1860, HAVING ITS REGISTERED ADDRESS AT BG ROAD, SIVASAGAR TOWN UNDER PO AND PS SIVASAGAR, DIST.SIVASAGAR, ASSAM, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY I/C SRI ANANTA SAIKIA.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS. REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, DEPTT. OF SOCIAL WELFARE GUWAHATI-5, ASSAM

¶9

2:THE DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE UZANBAZAR GUWAHATI-1 ASSAM

¶10

3:THE STATE CHILD PROTECTION SOCIETY ASSAM REP. BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY BELTOLA GUWAHATI-28 ASSAM

¶11

4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CUM CHAIRMAN DISTRICT CHILD PROTECTION COMMITTEE SIBASAGAR ASSAM

¶12

5:DISTRICT CHILD PROTECTION OFFICER SIBASAGAR

¶13

Page No.# 2/4

¶14

ASSAM

¶15

6:THE CHILD WELFARE COMMITTEE (CWC)

¶16

HAVING ITS OFFICE AT DISTRICT CHILD PROTECTION UNIT SIVASAGAR NEW COLONY WEST JAMUNA ROAD WARD NO.2 SIVASAGR ASSA

¶17

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR G CHOUDHURY

¶18

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶19

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Date : 13/06/2022

¶22

Heard Mr. G. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. R.B. Bora, learned Government Advocate, Assam, appearing on behalf of the respondent nos. 1 to 5.

¶23

The petitioner herein, is an NGO, which was apparently running a Child Care Home by the name of ‘Sapnalaya’, situated at Sivasagar town in the district of Sivasagar. Aggrieved by the order dated 20/03/2019 issued by the respondent no.3, cancelling the registration of ‘Sapnalaya’ earlier granted under Section 41 of the J.J. Act, 2015 to function as a Child Care Home (Children Home and Special Adoption Agency), the instant writ petition has been filed.

¶24

It appears that there was an allegation against the Superintendent of the Child Care Home of molestation and sexual harassment of a minor child, an inmate in the Child Care Home. Such allegation not only led to registration of Police case but had also promoted the aforesaid action by the authorities.

¶25

Mr. Choudhury submits that the Superintendent of the Child Care Home is no longer associated with the petitioner NGO and in the meantime, he has also been acquitted by the learned trial Court. Moreover, submits Mr. Choudhury, even if the allegations are taken on the face value, even then, it

¶26

Page No.# 3/4

¶27

would at best relate to the conduct of the person concerned but not the NGO. Therefore, there is no justifiable ground to prevent the NGO from functioning, more so, since such a measure would adversely affect the interest of a number of children who are in need of such facilities. It is also the submission of Mr. Choudhury that the petitioner society is also supporting an Old Age Home and Adoption Centre, the functioning of which have also come to a standstill due to the impugned order, thereby causing serious inconvenience to the inmates of the houses. Therefore, a prayer has been made to set aside the impugned order dated 20/03/2019 passed by the respondents.

¶28

Responding to the above, Ms. Bora, learned State Counsel submits that although the concerned Superintendent of the Child Care Home has been acquitted by the learned trial Court, yet, the State is contemplating to file appeal against the order of acquittal and, therefore, the matter is still open. In so far as the grievance of the NGO is concerned, the learned Government Advocate has apprised this Court that notice was issued to the petitioner society but they had failed to respond to the same.

¶29

Mr. Choudhury has, however, categorically denied the receipt of any notice by his client and submits that this is a fit case where the authorities should be directed to take note of the ground realities and review their earlier decision.

¶30

From the submission of the learned counsel for both the sides, it appears that the respondent no. 3 is the Nodal Agency for granting registration to such Child Care Homes such as the one run by the writ petitioner. It appears that such Child Care Homes are also required to operate under the general supervision of the State Government, more particularly, the respondent no. 2 i.e. the Director of Social Welfare, Assam.

¶31

Since the order dated 20/03/2019 pertains to a specific instance of alleged wrongful conduct by the then Superintendent of the Child Care Home, who is reportedly no longer associated with the Institution and considering the fact that there is no allegation against any other functionary of the NGO and also taking note of the fact that functioning of the Child Care Home/Old Age Home/Adoption

¶32

Page No.# 4/4

¶33

Centre, are in the best interest of beneficiaries who are the inmates, this Court is of the view that instead of keeping the writ petition pending, the proper course of action would be to direct the concerned authorities to review/re-examine the matter and take a fresh decision as to whether or not the petitioner society should be allowed to restart the functioning of the Child Care Home/Old Age Home/Adoption Centre, by revoking the order of cancellation of its registration.

¶34

Therefore, without commenting on the merit of the claims and counter claims of the parties or on the question of legality and validity of the impugned order dated 20/03/2019, I dispose of the writ petition by directing the respondent nos. 2 and 3 to re-examine the matter and suitably review the order dated 20/03/2019, on the basis of ground realities existing as on date, by recording proper justification.

¶35

Facilitating the above, the writ petitioner to furnish a certified copy of this order before the respondent nos. 2 and 3 within a week from today.

¶36

Within one month thereafter, the respondent nos.2 and 3 to re-examine the entire matter after issuing prior notice to the petitioner NGO and also after giving it an opportunity of being heard and pass appropriate order thereon.

¶37

If the writ petitioner continues to remain aggrieved even thereafter, it would be open for it to approach this Court again by filing appropriate proceeding.

¶38

With the above observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶39

JUDGE

¶40

sukhamay

¶41

Comparing Assistant

Society for Human Advancement and Promotion of Employment(Shape) v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Society for Human Advancement and Promotion of Employment(Shape) v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Assam and 3 Ors. Vs Md. Abdul Jalil and 62 Ors.

Ajit Kumar Doley Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Sri Ram Chandra Dutta and 13 Ors. Vs Smti Jyotshna Das and 7 Ors.

Piplu Paul Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

On the Death of Pradip Das His Legal Heris Smti Ilu Das and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

On the Death of Sayed Moinuddin Ahmed His Legal Heirs Syed Abu Sayeed and Anr. Vs the Govt. of Assam