Allowed

H C Raghavendra v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC4 Jun 2024WA/100064/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court allowed a writ appeal challenging a Single Judge's order rejecting an appointment application for Chairperson of the District Child Welfare Committee. The Court held that while members cannot serve more than two terms, there is no such restriction on chairpersons. Consequently, the petitioner was entitled to consideration for the post.

What did the court decide?

Writ appeal allowed; impugned order set aside; writ of mandamus issued to consider the petitioner's representation and interview him if qualified.

H C Raghavendra Vs the State of Karnataka — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7374-DB WA No. 100064 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S G PANDIT

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA WRIT APPEAL NO.100064 OF 2024 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

H.C. RAGHAVENDRA AGE. 45 YEARS, OCC. CHILD RIGHTS ACTIVIST TRAINER), R/O. S/O. H.CHANDRASHEKAHAR, 2^ND WARD, RAMASAGARA POST, KAMPLI TALUK, BELLARI DISTRICT-583132.

¶9

APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI VISHWANATH S.BICHAGATTI, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN AND CHILD WELFARE BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, VIDHAN SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001.

¶13

Digitally signed by VINAYAKA B V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

THE PRESIDENT, DIRECTORATE OF CHILD PROTECTION AND MEMBER SECRETARY, STATE LEVEL SELECTION COMMITTEE, 3^RD FLOOR, VISHWESHWARAIAH MINI TOWER, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001.

¶15

RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI MADANMOHAN M.KHANNUR, AGA FOR R1 AND R2)

¶17

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 13.02.2024 MADE IN W.P. NO. 100656/2024 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE, TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO INTERVIEW THE APPELLANT TO THE POST OF CHAIRPERSON FOR CHILD WELFARE COMMITTEE, BALLARI AND ETC.,

¶18

THIS WRIT APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, S G PANDIT, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7374-DB WA No. 100064 of 2024

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

This intra Court appeal under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, is directed against the order dated 13.02.2024 in W.P. No. 100656/2024 wherein the appellant/ writ petitioner prayed for a writ of mandamus to consider his representation dated 20.10.2023 (Annexure-E) and to direct the respondent no.2 to consider his application for appointment as Chairperson, District Child Welfare Committee, Ballari, is rejected.

¶22

Heard Sri Vishwanath S. Bichagatti, learned counsel for appellant and Sri Madanmohan M. Khannur, learned HCGP for respondents no.1 and 2 and perused writ appeal papers.

¶23

Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner being qualified to become Member and Chairperson, District Child Welfare Committee, applied in pursuance to notifications dated 14.07.2022 and 17.11.2022, to the post of Chairperson, District Child Welfare Committee, Ballari. It is pertinent to note that under Section 27 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, (for short ‘2015 Act’) every State Government is required to constitute for each District, a Child Welfare Committee, for implementation of the provisions

¶24

- 3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7374-DB WA No. 100064 of 2024

¶25

of the 2015 Act. The appellant/petitioner’s application was received, but the petitioner was not called for interview, at that stage the petitioner filed writ petition before this Court praying for a writ of mandamus directing the first and second respondent to interview the petitioner for the post of Chairman of District Child Welfare Committee, Ballari. Learned Single Judge under the impugned order held that the appellant/ petitioner could not have applied to be appointed as a Chairperson having already completed a term as Chairperson, and declined to issue mandamus to consider the appellant’s representation. Aggrieved by the same, appellant/ petitioner is before this Court in this appeal.

¶26

Learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner contended

¶27

that the order of the learned Single Judge is erroneous and is the result of non appreciation of Rule 15 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2016 (2 of 2016). Learned counsel taking through Rule 15 of 2016 Rules would submit that Sub Rule (4) of Rule 15 would state that a Member of the Committee shall be eligible for appointment for a maximum of two terms but not continuously and he further

¶28

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7374-DB WA No. 100064 of 2024

¶29

submits that there is no such prohibition to become Chairperson of the Committee.

¶30

Learned counsel would further submit that a Member of the Committee could be appointed as a Chairperson or a person could directly be appointed as a Chairperson. It is submitted that appellant had functioned as Member for one term and as a Chairperson for another term. Further, the appellant would be entitled to be appointed as Chairman as well as Member to the District Child Welfare Committee as he has not completed two terms as Member. Thus he prays for allowing appeal by setting aside the impugned order of the learned Single Judge.

¶31

Learned HCGP on the other hand would support the order passed by the learned Single Judge and would submit that the appellant has served for two terms, once as a member and once as a Chairman. As he has completed two terms in the Committee, he would not be entitled for appointment. He further submitted that proviso to Rule 15(4) was inserted in the year 2022 wherein it is stated that nothing contained in Sub Rule (4) shall be a bar in case a Member is appointed as a Chairman. Thus he submits that the Rule existing as on the date of calling application would be applicable and in terms of

¶32

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7374-DB WA No. 100064 of 2024

¶33

unamended Rules, the Selection shall have to be proceeded since the notification issued calling application for appointment as a member and Chairperson is dated 14.07.2022, prior to the coming into force of amended proviso to Sub Rule (4) of Rule 15. Thus, learned HCGP would pray for dismissal of the appeal.

¶34

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the writ appeal papers, the only point which falls for consideration is as to:

¶35

Whether the appellant/petitioner would be entitled for a writ of mandamus?

¶36

Our answer to the above point is ‘in the affirmative’ for the following reasons.

¶37

A writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India could be issued if a person establishes his legal right and if he further establishes the failure of the authority to perform its legal duty. In the instant case we are of the opinion that the petitioner has established his right to consider his case for appointment as Chairperson, District Child Welfare Committee, Ballari and because of failure on the part of respondent authorities to consider his representation, he would

¶38

¶39

NC: 2024:KHC-D:7374-DB WA No. 100064 of 2024

¶40

be entitled for a writ of mandamus. To appreciate the case of the appellant/petitioner it would be necessary to go through Rule 15 of the 2016 Rules.

¶41

“15. Composition and Qualifications of Members of the Committee – (1) There shall be one or more Committees in each district to be constituted by the State Government through a notification in the Official Gazette.

¶42

(2) The Chairperson and members of the Committee shall be appointed by the State Government on the recommendation of the Selection Committee under rule 87 of these rules.

¶43

(3) The Chairperson and the members shall be above the age of thirty-five years and shall have a minimum of seven years of experience of working with children in the field of education, health, or welfare activities, or should be a practicing professional with a degree in child psychology or psychiatry or social work or sociology or human development or in the field of law or a retired judicial officer.

¶44

(4) A member of the Committee shall be eligible for appointment of maximum of two terms, which shall not be continuous.

¶45

(5) All persons, on selection shall mandatorily be given training under rule 89 within a period of sixty days from the date of appointment.

¶46

(6) The Chairperson and the members may resign at any time by giving one month’s notice in writing to the State Government.”

¶47

Following is inserted as proviso to Sub Rule (4) of Rule 15

¶48

under Notification dated 01.09.2022 of the Ministry of Women & Child Development, Government of India.

¶49

7 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7374-DB WA No. 100064 of 2024

¶50

“Provided that nothing contained in this sub-rule shall be a bar in case of a member being appointed as Chairperson.”

¶51

A reading of Rule 15 along with inserted proviso it is clear

¶52

that Sub Rule (4) restricts or prohibits a person to become a Member of the Child Welfare Committee of a District for more than two terms that too the term shall not be continuous. The proviso would further makes it abundantly clear that nothing contained in Sub Rule (4) shall be a bar in case a Member being appointed as a Chairperson. The Rule would not state that only a Member of the Child Welfare Committee to be appointed as a Chairperson. Any person other than the Member also could be appointed as Chairperson of a District Welfare Committee.

¶53

Admittedly, appellant/petitioner functioned as Member of District Child Welfare Committee, Ballari District for one term, i.e., from 2007 to 2010 and subsequently as Chairperson for the period from 2014 to 2017. Therefore, learned Single Judge was not right in observing that the petitioner could not have once again applied to be appointed as Chairperson having already completed the term as a Chairperson. There is no bar for a person to become Chairperson any number of terms. But

¶54

8 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7374-DB WA No. 100064 of 2024

¶55

a person cannot be appointed as Member for more than two terms. For appointment as a Chairperson, there is no such restriction. Therefore, in terms of Rule 15 of 2016 Model Rules, the appellant/petitioner has a right for consideration of his case for appointment as a Chairperson, District Child Welfare Committee, Ballari.

¶56

It is settled position of law that selection process shall proceed in accordance with the Rules existing as on the date of the notification. The amended proviso, which has come into force subsequent to the issuance of notifications in question, would have no application to the facts of the present case. The selection shall have to be proceeded in terms of the Notifications dated 14.07.2022 and 17.11.2022. Hence, we pass the following order.

¶57

ORDER

¶58

(i) Writ appeal is allowed;

¶59

(ii) Order dated 13.02.2024 in W.P. No. 100656/2024 by the learned Single Judge is set aside;

¶60

(iii) A writ of mandamus is issued to respondents no.1 and 2 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 20.10.2023 (Annexure-E) and if

¶61

9 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7374-DB WA No. 100064 of 2024

¶62

the petitioner is otherwise eligible and qualified to be appointed as Chairperson, District Child Welfare Committee, Ballari, consider his application for the said post along with applications of other persons and interview him, if he falls within the zone of consideration;

¶63

(iv) In view of disposal of appeal on merit, pending IAs stand disposed off.

Sd/JUDGE

Sd/JUDGE

BVV

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9

H C Raghavendra v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

H C Raghavendra v. the State of Karnataka

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

Manjappa S/O Ujjappa Mudiyappanavar Vs the State of Karnataka

B.v.Peethas Sri Jeenasenacharayya Vidyamandal Terdal Vs Sri Bharatesh S/O Mallappa Biradar Patil

The University of Agricultural Science Vs Arjun Siddappa Santabanavar

Sri.Daya S/O Fakirappa Gamangatti Vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited

Belgaum Urban Development Authority Vs Devappa Hanamappa Ronad

Smt Mamata P Jain Vs the City Muncipal Council