Bombay High Court directs Maharashtra to appoint chairperson to Commission for Protection of Child Rights

The Bombay High Court on Friday directed the Maharashtra government to submit an affidavit giving a timeline for appointing chairperson to the Maharashtra State Commission for Protection of Child Rights (SCPCR). [Nitin Dalvi & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.].A Bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice MS Karnik had earlier sought the Maharashtra government's response on the steps taken to appoint members.Accordingly, the State had filed an affidavit but the Court noted though that a selection committee had been constituted by the Maharashtra government for the purpose of selection of chairperson, yet the final decision on appointment was yet to be made.The High Court remarked that there seemed to be a complete lack of seriousness on the part of State for constitution of the SCPCR.The Bench noted that the State had merely appointed an IAS officer as acting chairperson.“The priority is promoting welfare of children. You have picked up IAS officer but has he done something for the welfare of children? Why can you not appoint someone independent?” CJ Datta said when the case was heard on Friday..The Court was informed by Additional Government Pleader Jyoti Chavan that the committee had been formed in December 2020, but there had been a delay in coming to a conclusion.“We are in April 2022, now and your government could not appoint one chairperson in the last 14 months? How long will you take to complete the procedure?” CJ Datta demanded. The Bench sought to know why no member had been appointed so far.Justice Karnik too weighed in asking why the government was not taking the issue seriously.“Why don’t you take all this seriously? Don’t you feel this matter is important? You just appoint someone who already has a heavy portfolio, with no members to assist,” he said.“We are not concerned with the present petitioners only, we are concerned with children in the State”, CJ Datta added.“We appreciate that you are not treating this as adversarial litigation, hence you have to make a statement about the timeline. If you are not able to, we will not take a dim view of the same. Make sure a competent officer has to file affidavit, giving timelines,” Justice Karnik emphasised..With these observations, the Bench adjourned the matter to April 4, 2022, and directed the principal secretary of the State Women and Child Welfare (SWCW) department to file an appropriate affidavit including the timeline which will be adhered to for making the appointment.