Disposed

U.R.Kudil @ Sivasakthi v. the District Collector

Madras HC14 Jun 2023WP(MD)/15902/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought the return of five children removed from an orphanage without prior permission under the Juvenile Justice Act. After government pleaders reported the children were living in foster homes in comfortable conditions, the Court closed the petition without restoring the children to the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Petition closed; liberty granted to visit children in foster homes and follow their welfare; no restoration of children to petitioner.

U.R.Kudil @ Sivasakthi Vs the District… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.15902 of 2014

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 14.06.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.15902 of 2014

¶7

U.R.Kudil @ Sivasakthi Ashramam, Rep. by its Founder and Managing Trustee, S.Jothi Loganathan, S/o.Subramanian, Maruthanallur, Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District.

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

versus

¶10

The District Collector, Thanjavur, Thanjavur District.

¶11

The District Social Welfare Officer, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.

¶12

The District Child Protection Officer, District Child Protection Unit, Government Child Home Campus, V.O.C.Nagar, Thanjavur – 7.

¶13

... Respondents

¶14

1/6

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

W.P.(MD)No.15902 of 2014

¶17

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for the issuance of Writ of Certioarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the order passed by the 2^nd respondent in No. 1150/2014 dated 16.09.2014 insofar as the illegal custody of five children, quash the same and consequently, direct the 2^nd respondent to return the 5 children to the petitioner.

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Karthikeyan

¶19

For Respondents : Mr.S.Shaji Bino, Special Government Pleader

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The petitioner is running an Orphanage Home at Maruthanallur Village, Kumbakonam Taluk, Thanjavur District. On 22.07.2014, the second and third respondents have forcibly taken five children from his home on the ground that he has not obtained necessary permission

¶22

under Juvenile Justice Act.

¶23

2/6

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

W.P.(MD)No.15902 of 2014

¶26

Now, the petitioner claims that he has obtained necessary permission under Juvenile Justice Act and he is willing to take those five children stating that he is having a close attachment with those children.

¶27

The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that since the petitioner has not obtained necessary permission under the Act, those children were taken away from the petitioner Home and those children have been placed in different foster homes, which were recognized under the Act and now, they are living in a comfortable position.

¶28

Considering the rival submissions, this Court, by earlier order dated 13.03.2023, requested Mr.S.Shaji Bino, learned Special Government Pleader, Mr.G.V.Vairam Santhosh, learned Additional Government Pleader, Ms.K.Christy Theboral, learned Additional Government Pleader, Mr.J.K.Jayaseelan, learned Government

¶29

3/6

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

W.P.(MD)No.15902 of 2014

¶32

Advocate and Mr.P.Kottaichamy, learned Government Advocate, to visit the place of children and ascertain as to whether they are living in

¶33

a comfortable position or not and also ascertain as to whether they are willing to go with the petitioner.

¶34

Pursuant to the direction of this Court, the learned Government Pleaders, who have taken enormous efforts to visit all those children living in different places, submitted that they have verified with four children and they are in a comfortable position and one Divya Dharshini, who is living at Virudhunagar, alone is yet to be verified.

¶35

Considering the representation made by the learned Government pleaders that the children are in a comfortable position, this Court is not inclined to disturb their present living status. Therefore, this writ petition is closed by giving liberty to the petitioner to visit those Homes and to follow up the welfare of those children.

¶36

4/6

¶37

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶38

W.P.(MD)No.15902 of 2014

¶39

This Court places its appreciation to the learned Government

¶40

Pleaders, who have spent their own money and valuable time to visit all those places for the purpose of ascertaining the status of the children. No costs.

¶41

14.06.2023

¶42

ogy NCC : Yes / No. Index : Yes / No. Internet : Yes / No.

¶43

¶44

The District Collector, Thanjavur, Thanjavur District.

¶45

The District Social Welfare Officer, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.

¶46

The District Child Protection Officer, District Child Protection Unit, Government Child Home Campus, V.O.C.Nagar, Thanjavur – 7.

¶47

5/6

¶48

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶49

W.P.(MD)No.15902 of 2014

¶50

B.PUGALENDHI, J.

¶51

ogy

¶52

W.P.(MD)No.15902 of 2014

¶53

14.06.2023

¶54

6/6

¶55

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

U.R.Kudil @ Sivasakthi v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

U.R.Kudil @ Sivasakthi v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G. Manuel Ayyadurai Vs v. Thirupathy

R. Rajamani, Vs Kakarla Usha I.A.S.

Ponniyah Ramajayam College of Vs the Chairman

K.Pandi Vs The Intelligence Officer

Subbiah Pandian, Vs the Superintending Engineer

V.Balakrishnan, Vs the District Collector