Dismissed

Court on Its Own Motion v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC5 Feb 2018WPC/3929/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This PIL concerning the regulation of play schools in Jharkhand was dismissed after the State Government framed necessary rules under the Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005 and notified District level officers as competent authorities.

What did the court decide?

All pending incidental applications closed; Writ Petition disposed of as the State has complied by framing rules and notifying authorities.

Court on Its Own Motion Vs the State of Jharkhand — Education and Admissions | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (PIL) No. 3929 of 2015

¶2

Court on its Own Motion -----Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand & others ----- Respondents

¶3

¶4

CORAM: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ratnaker Bhengra

¶5

For the Petitioner: Mr. Rahul Saboo, Advocate For the Resp - State: Mr. Rajeev Ranjan Mishra, GP-II

¶6

¶7

22/ 05.02.2018 Heard counsel for the parties. 2. This Court on the basis of the newspaper report published in the daily newspaper ‘Prabhat Khabar’ dated 28.08.2015, took up the matter relating to regulation of play schools in the State of Jharkhand in larger public interest as it related to the future of thousands of children being admitted in play schools in the city of Ranchi, many of which were reportedly running in basement with little hygiene, infrastructure or desired teaching faculty. During the proceedings of this case, Government of Jharkhand framed the Jharkhand State Play Schools (Recognition and Control) Rules, 2017 in exercise of powers conferred under section 36(1) of Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005, as per the Notification dated 12.07.2017 issued by the Department of Women, Child Development & Social Security, Government of Jharkhand.

¶8

State informed this Court that it intends to implement the provisions of the Act in right earnest. Various provisions of the Rules were taken note of by this Court earlier and it was observed that statutory authorities such as ‘Competent Authority’ are to be constituted in terms of the Rules. As per Rule 2(d), mechanism for monitoring and redressal of grievances, constitution of the Appellate Authority, registration of such play schools as per the form and procedure prescribed, creation of Parent Teachers Association, etc. have to be put in place. By the affidavit dated 09.11.2017 and 18.12.2017, the Responded State has brought on record the decision to notify the District level Nodal Officer who would be the Competent Authority responsible for implementation of ICDS under the Department of Women, Child Development & Social Security, Government of Jharkhand. The District Social Welfare Officer of each district are working in that capacity. They are empowered to implement the provisions of the Rules in its true spirit and terms at the district level. They are working under the overall control of Deputy Commissioner of each district. Vide Memo No. 4088 dated 20.10.2017, Deputy Commissioner of all the districts have been

¶9

¶10

directed to take appropriate steps for implementation of the provisions of rules in their respective districts (Annexure-B). As per the rules, every existing play schools require to take recognition and for that, six months time has been given under Rule 3(a) from the date of Gazette Notification 12.07.2017. They are expecting that before the start of next session, provisions of the Rules will be fully implemented within the Jharkhand State and the procedure for recognition of existing play schools will be completed by the Competent Authority of the District. It has been further stated through supplementary counter affidavit filed on 18.12.2017 that the Deputy Commissioner of each district has been notified as the Appellate Authority under the Rules vide Notification bearing Memo No. 4276 dated 14.11.2017.

¶11

Learned counsel for the State Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Mishra submits that not only have the statutory framework been laid down, but the authority under the Rules have also been notified. Necessary instructions have been issued to the District level Authorities for proper implementation of the Rules. It is expected that from the ensuing session, all such play schools operating within the State will have to register compulsorily and make compliances of the criteria laid down under the Rules. The writ petition can therefore be disposed of.

¶12

Learned Amicus Curiae Mr. Rahul Saboo has appreciated the efforts taken by the State Government towards care and protection of infant and small children going to such play schools within the State. He however has reservation about proper implementation of the Rules at the District level.

¶13

At this stage, we do not find any reason to doubt the intention of the State Government to implement the Rules in its letter and spirit. The public interest litigation therefore seems to have served its purpose. It is accordingly disposed of. In case of any violation or non-compliance being noticed, it is open for the learned Amicus Curiae to bring it to the notice of the Competent Authority / Appellate Authority of the concerned district and / or to approach this Court thereafter. All pending I.As are closed.

¶14

Before parting, we record our appreciation for the sincere efforts taken by the learned Amicus Curiae in pursing such a noble cause for protection of the rights and interest of the children of the State.

¶15

( Aparesh Kumar Singh, J )

¶16

( Ratnaker Bhengra, J)

¶17

Ranjeet/

Court on Its Own Motion v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Court on Its Own Motion v. the State of Jharkhand

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

Ms Sharma and Company Hp Dealer Represented by Partner Shri Ghanshyam Lal Sharma Vs the State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Ram Subhag Singh Vs Personnel And Adminis Reform

Prafull Kumar Roy Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary and Ors.

Rekha Devi Vs Bikram Chouhan

Rakesh Kumar Vs Mines And Geological Survey

Dhirendra Kumar Vs The State Of Jharkhand Through The Chief Secretary And Ors.