Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, Feb 23: High Court today sought compliance report from the Government with regard to constitution of Juvenile Justice Board in the State and asked Chief Secretary to remain present before the court on next date in case compliance report is not filed.
Court on last date had rejected the compliance report of Commissioner Secretary Social Welfare Department with the observation that the same is not in tune with Court directions and had sought fresh report within three weeks.
Today Court at the request of Government counsel N H Shah (AAG) granted more time for filing of compliance report with the rider that in case the same is not filed then Chief Secretary shall remain present before the court on next date of hearing. Division Bench of Justice MH Attar and Justice B S Walia directed the listing of the matter for further consideration in the 3rd week of March.
Commissioner Secretary in its compliance (which has been turned down by the court) states that as per section 3(a) of the Act, the nomination of Judicial Magistrate which is the principal member besides other two member of board, is not within his competence and in this view Law Department has been requested to approach the High Court for this purpose.
With regard to complying with other provisions of the Act, the official says that the scheme has already been formulated and draft scheme sent to GAD for seeking their advice with regard to certain features of scheme relating to the staff and man power.
The court in its previous direction had clearly directed the Government to comply with the provisions of the Juvenile Act and provide support to the Juveniles under this act who are lodged in juvenile homes as also to comply with other provisions of the said act.
Court was dealing with a PIL filed by one Tanvi Ahuja who besides other directions is seeking implementation of the Jammu and Kashmir Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act enacted in 2013 and rules there under. She had approached the Supreme Court earlier for seeking directions upon the State Government but the Supreme Court asked her to approach the State High Court in this regard.