Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Rajeev Yadav vs Govt. Of Nctd on 25 April, 2023
1 OA No. 287/2018
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench: New Delhi
OA No. 287/2018
Order reserved on: 23.03.2023
Order pronounced on: 25.04.2023
Hon'ble Mr. Tarun Shridhar, Member (A)
Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)
1. Rajeev Yadav
S/o Sh. Saty Prakash
R/o RZ -73, Phase-3, B- Block,
Prem Nagar Colony, Najafgarh,
New Delhi - 110043
Aged about 34 years
2. S. Kumar
S/o Sh. Chala Ram
R/o RZ 46A, Phase -III, Prem Nagar,
Najafgarh, New Delhi - 110043
Aged about 40 years
3. Arun Sangwan
S/o Sh. Krishan Kumar Sangwan
R/o H. No - 1636, Street No-1,
Ram Gopal Colony, Near Chotu Ram Stadium,
Rohtak, Haryana
Aged about 29 years
4. Sunil Kumar
S/o Sh. Hoshiar Singh
R/o Village - Patodi Khurd, Tehsil- Tosham,
Distt. - Bhiwani, Haryana - 127043
Aged about 33 years
5. Anil Kumar
S/o Sh. Hoshiar Singh
R/o G-27/162, FF, Sector-3, Rohini,
Delhi - 110085
Aged about 34 years
6. Yashu Yadav
W/o Sh. Mahesh Kumar
R/o H. No-145A, Y- Block, New Roshan Pura,
Najafgarh- 110043
Aged about 34 years
2 OA No. 287/2018
7. Pooja
W/o Sh. Rajat Thakur
R/o N- 76/B, Gurudwara Road, Mohan Garden
Uttam Nagar, New Delhi -110059
Aged about 30 years
8. Rani Kumari
W/o Sh. C.P Sah
R/o Flat No - 10, Type -II S/F, Block No -1,
Sector -3, Near D.P.S, New Delhi- 110078
Aged about 38 years
9. Savitri Kumari Pandey
D/o Sh. R.N Pandey
R/o H. No - B - 266, Shyam Enclave, Najafgarh,
Dindarpur, South West, Delhi - 110047
Aged about 31 years
10. Aarushi Yadav
W/o Sh. Naveen Yadav
R/o H. No -RZ 511/20, Street No -35,
Sadh Nagar -II, Palam, New Delhi -110043
Aged about 35 years
11. Suneela
W/o Sh. Ravinder Kumar
R/o L-25A, Shyam Park, Nawada,
Uttam Nagar, New Delhi 110059
Aged about 37 years
12. Renu Yadav
W/o Sh. Trivendra Singh
R/o C - 26, JVTS Gardens, Chhatterpur Extension,
New Delhi - 110074
Aged about 31 years
13. Anamika
W/o Sh. Naveen
R/o B 151, SFS, Triveni Apartment, Sheikh Sarai,
Phase -I, New Delhi
Aged about 39 years
14. Deepshikha Chhabra
D/o Sh. Jaswinder Singh
R/o 37/6 III- Floor, Left Portion, West Patel Nagar,
New Delhi - 110008
Aged about 30 years
3 OA No. 287/2018
15. Shaveta Sharma
D/o Sh. Jai Parkash Sharma
R/o H. No- 2915, Sec- 9A, Bahadurgarh - 124507
Aged about 31 years
16. Veena
D/o Sh. Rajinder Singh
R/o H. No- 1881, Village - Bond Kalan,
Tehsil -Dadri, Dist. - Bhiwani
Aged about 31 years
17. Rajani
W/o Sh. Sandeep
R/o V.P.0 Sampla, Dist. - Rohtak,
Haryana - 124501
Aged about 36 years
(Group 'B')
(Candidates to the post of Educational and Vocational
Guidance Counsellor)
....Applicants
(By Advocate: Mr. Ajesh Luthra)
Versus
1. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
Through its Chief Secretary,
A-Wing, 5th Floor,
Delhi Secretariat, I.P. Estate
New Delhi.
2. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB)
Through its Chairman,
FC-18, Karkardooma Institutional Area,
Delhi- 92
3. The Director
Directorate of Education,
Govt. of NCT of Delhi
Old Secretariat, Delhi-54
4. Lieutenant Governor of Delhi,
Raj Niwas, Rajpur Road,
Delhi.
... Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr. Anuj Kumar Sharma,
Ms. Shabnam Parween for
Mr. Saurabh Chadda)
4 OA No. 287/2018
ORDER
By Hon'ble Manish Garg, Member (J) The learned counsel for the applicant would highlight that in OA No.301/2020 and OA No.400/2020, this Tribunal was pleased to pass following Office Order dated 12.02.2020:-
"7. We are not inclined to entertain the O.As. They are accordingly dismissed. We, however, make it clear that in case the respondents do not receive the adequate number of applications for the post of EVGC, they shall consider the feasibility of taking necessary steps in such a way that the posts do not remain vacant for want of qualified candidates.‖
2. Brief facts arising out of the present OA are as under:-
2.1 The applicants possess the requisite qualification for the post of Educational and Vocational Guidance Counsellor (EVGC). An Advertisement dated 20.12.2017 was issued by the respondents inviting applications for various posts, including the post of EVGC (Male & Female) represented by Post Codes 148/17 & 149/17 respectively, in the Directorate of Education, Govt. of NCT of Delhi. It is stated that the applicants, who are duly qualified, could not apply for the post as no selection to these posts were made in the last 20 years, though contractual appointments were made earlier.
Since the Advertisement for making regular recruitment has been issued in the year 2017 only, the applicants have become over-age with the passage of time. They intend to apply for the post, however, it is not possible for them to 5 OA No. 287/2018 apply online on being over-aged. The applicants, particularly those who are female, are seeking relaxation in terms of the instructions dated 01.11.1980 and the male candidates are also seeking similar relaxation.
2.2 The posts are governed by the Recruitment Rules, namely, Educational and Vocational Guidance Counsellor Recruitment Rules, 2015 issued vide Notification dated 10.12.2015. Rule 5 thereof confers the power of relaxation upon the Government in consultation with the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC), and such power, inter alia, includes the power of relaxation of age.
2.3 In the above backdrop, the applicants seek following relief(s):-
"a) Direct the respondents to grant appropriate age relaxation to the applicants towards the post of Educational and Vocational Guidance Counsellor Male (148/17) and Female (149/17)
b) Direct the respondents to not to reject the candidatures of the applicants towards the post of Educational and Vocational Guidance Counsellor on the grounds of their being over age
c) Further consider and appoint the applicants in accordance with their merit positions.
d) Accord all consequential benefits
e) Award costs of the proceedings, and
f) Pass any other order/direction which this Hon'ble Tribunal deem fit and proper in favour of the applicants and against the respondent in the facts and circumstances of the case."6 OA No. 287/2018
2.4 The applicants have also prayed for the following interim relief:
"Pending decision in OA, this Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to direct the respondents to accept their offline applications and accept their candidature, provisionally, by way of an ex-parte ad-interim order."
2.5 This Tribunal vide Interim Order dated 23.01.2018, granted interim relief in favour of the applicant(s) to the following effect:
"In the meantime, it is directed that respondent No.2 will entertain the offline applications (hard copies) from the applicants and issue admit card and permit them to participate in the examination / selection process provisionally. The applicants would also make separate applications for seeking relaxation of rules. Such applications shall be considered by the competent authority in accordance with Rule 5 of Educational and Vocational Guidance Counsellor Recruitment Rules, 2015. Such participation shall not confer any right or equity in favour of the applicants and will remain subject to the order that may be passed by the Tribunal or the final outcome of this O.A. However, the result of the applicants shall not be declared without the leave of the Tribunal."
2.6 Out of 17 applicants, only 5 applicants found their names in merit list, namely Applicant No.1 - Rajeev Yadav, Applicant No.3 - Arun Sangwan, Applicant No.11 - Suneela, Applicant No.13 - Anamika and Applicant No.14 -
Deepshikha Chhabra.
3. Opposing the grant of relief(s), the respondents no. 1, 2 and 4 would contend that the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB), has been mandated to recommend suitable candidates for appointment in various departments 7 OA No. 287/2018 of GNCT of Delhi and local bodies/PSUs under the direct recruitment quota to Group 'B' & „C‟ categories of posts.
3.1 The process at DSSSB starts after receipt of requisition given by the Indenting Department specifying eligibility conditions including age criteria and relaxations, if any, to the specified castes and categories, etc. The DSSSB cannot change the eligibility conditions as given by the Indenting Department after advertisement, as by doing so, it will make few applicants eligible/ineligible, which would be contrary to the decision given by the Apex Court in Tej Prakash Pathak and others vs. Rajasthan High Court & others, Civil Appeal No.2634/2013 decided on 20.03.2013, whereby it has been observed that the "Rule of the Game" cannot be changed once the game has started, i.e., essential eligibility criteria of a post cannot be changed midway once the advertisement has been issued. It is submitted that in the instant case, the Indenting Department, i.e., Directorate of Education, the Respondent No.3 submitted the requisition for various teaching posts on 18.12.2017 (Annexure-A) in compliance of the Order of Hon'ble High Court in the matter of Social Jurist A Lawyers Group Vs. Dharmender Sharma & Ors., [Cont. Case(C).
No.1133 of 2016], Delhi.
3.2 The said vacancies were notified by the DSSSB (Resp.
No.3) vide Advertisement no.04/2017 dated 20.12.2017 8 OA No. 287/2018 allotting post code-148/17, 149/17. The date of opening and closing for the registration of application was 05.01.2018 and 31.01.2018 respectively. The eligibility criteria such as upper age limit, educational qualifications, experience etc. are advertised by the Board (Resp. No.2) as prescribed in the requisition/RRs received for the post provided by the Indenting/User Department (Resp. No.3), and hence, the Resp. No.2 is not empowered to give any relaxation in CTET, upper age limit, etc. beyond what is prescribed in the requisition/RRs of Resp. No.3 because the Resp. No.2 has been mandated to make recruitment as per statutory RRs.
Further, grant of any age relaxation either by the Indenting Department or by the Court would not only amount to change of eligibility conditions in violation of Apex Court judgments on "Rule of Game" but would also be in violation of "Fundamental Right to Equality" of those willing candidates who did not apply for the post against the said advertisement in view of the prescribed age criteria and have not approached the Courts on the issue. Separately, under the given circumstances, there is every possibility that there would be series of litigations in the matter leading to non-
completion of the recruitment process in a time bound manner as sought by the Hon'ble High Court in the matter of Social Jurist A Lawyers Group (supra). It is submitted that as the subject matter of the OA is related to requisition based 9 OA No. 287/2018 RRs or policy decision to be taken by the Resp. No.3 the matter may be defended by them for which the above respondents had already been requested separately by Resp.
No.2 vide letter dated 23.03.2018 and 21.05.2018 (Annexure-
B).
3.3 The Resp. No.3/Directorate of Education would contend that the instant OA is an attempt by the applicants to usurp illegal benefits which they otherwise are not entitled to get clearly in light of the Rule position. The answering respondents have to abide by the rules and that is even within the peripherals of knowledge of the applicants and perhaps they are deliberately overlooking the same. Present application is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed for want of any cause of action, as such, no legally enforceable right of the applicants has been violated by any action/inaction of the answering respondent(s).
3.4 In the present OA, applicants, who are candidates of the post of EVGC (bearing Post Code; Male (148/17) and Female (149/17), advertised under Advertisement No. 04/17, dated 20.12.2017, are seeking relaxation in upper age limit, as being overage, as per the said Advertisement and also as per the newly amended Recruitment Rules dated 10.12.2015.
While seeking the said relief applicant(s) are heavily relying on the notification dated 01.11.1980 issued by Hon‟ble Lt.
10 OA No. 287/2018Governor under Rule 43 of Delhi School Education Act and Rules, 1973 (DSEAR, 1973).
3.4 The present OA is not maintainable, in view of the Hon'ble High Court's observation in the case of Sachin Gupta & Ors. Vs. DSSSB & Ors., W.P. (C) No. 7279 of 2009 decided on 28.08.2008, which are extracted below:
"To my mind, like any other employer it is the prerogative of the Respondents to decide the age limit and academic suitability of candidates which they wish to employ and so long as the same are not contradictory to the academic eligibility as prescribed by the NCTE Act any challenge to the same, merely because it renders some candidates ineligible, ought to be rejected. For several posts minimum and maximum limits of age are prescribed by different authorities along with the required academic qualifications. It may be possible for the candidates to attain the requisite academic qualifications even at lesser or higher ages but that does not imply that the authorities are duty bound to consider all of them for employment at any age is eligible for appointment to the said posts. In our view, the mere completion of an eligibility course gives no vested right or right of consideration to a candidate enforceable against the State.
Moreover, as rightly pointed out by Mrs. Ahlawat prescribing of any age for a given post is a matter of policy and as held by the Apex Court in Shivbachan Rai (supra) is open to the Government while framing rules under the proviso to Article 309 to prescribe such age limits as it may deem necessary and the same cannot be termed as arbitrary or un- reasonable. In the present case we also find that the new age limit has been fixed in accordance with the Office Memorandums issued by the Government of India and Government of NCT of Delhi, whereby the age limit for group C & D posts has been fixed between 18 to 25 years. In facts, by the impugned RRs the respondents have actually rectified their mistake and brought their RRs in conformity with the Government's policy. The Supreme Court in Yogesh Kumar (supra) has held that merely because in the past there was some deviation and departure, the courts cannot allow a patent illegality to continue.
We also agree with Mrs. Ahlawat that the teachers appointed by the Respondents are government employees and are to be governed by the terms and conditions applicable to other government employees in the same category/group as laid down by the Department of Personnel and Training, Government of India from time to time. Consequently, the age limit stipulated in the notification under Rule 43 of Delhi 11 OA No. 287/2018 School Education Act, 1973 would not govern the recruitment to the post of government teachers. In any event, as the impugned RRs have been approved by the Lt. Governor of Delhi who had issued the notification dated lst November, 1980, it would mean that the said notification stands impliedly repealed.
As far as the under-aged candidates far as the under-aged candidates are concerned, we are of the view that it is open to State Government to stipulate a cut off age as it may like to recruit only candidates having sufficient maturity. In any event the under-aged candidates suffer no prejudice as they would be eligible to apply for the post of Assistant Teacher (Primary) in the future.
In our opinion, a cut off limit has to be prescribed along with eligibility conditions to select the best and the most suitable from amongst the available talent and so long as a uniform yardstick is applied for all it cannot per se be claimed to be arbitrary or discriminatory. According to us far from being absurd or preposterous, fixing of age limit between 20-27 years would only encourage young motivated, committed professionals to take up the challenge of teaching the small children."
3.5 A number of similar cases have been pronounced in favour of the answering respondents recently, on the above observation. Present OA is thus not maintainable, in view of the Hon'ble High Court's common Judgment dated 23.08.2017 in the case of WP (C) No. 7240/2017 titled as Raj Bala & Anr vs. GNCTD & Ors., WP (C) No.7244/ 2017 titled as Poonam vs. GNCTD & Ors., WP (C) No. 7250/2017 titled as Geeta Rani & Anr vs. GNCTD & Ors. and WP (C) No. 7288/2017 titled as Monika Yadav vs. GNCTD & Ors., in which it was held as follows:-
"18. The relaxation granted to women candidates by the Hon'ble Lt. Governor vide notification dated 01.11.1980 in exercise of powers under Rules 43 of the Delhi School Education Rules was granted when the pre - existing rules were in force. With the enforcement of the amended Rules of 2011 in respect of recruitment of PET's, in our view, it could not be said that the said relaxation continued when the 12 OA No. 287/2018 amended Recruitment Rules, in no uncertain terms place an upper age limit of "not exceeding 30 years" and neither the Rules of 2011, nor the DoPT instructions/ guidelines provide any age relaxation to Women candidates.
19. In view of the aforesaid, we find no merit in the petition and dismiss the same leaving the parties to bear their respective costs."
3.6 It is also submitted on behalf of respondents that RRs notified earlier expressly contained age relaxation to women candidates, wherever applicable. However, as per the guidelines of DOPT contained in OM dated 31.12.2010, upper age limit for the posts having Grade pay of Rs.4200, 4600 & 4800 has been prescribed as 30 years. Therefore, in all the RRs amended after 31.12.2010, the upper age limit has been fixed as 30 years and no age relaxation has been provided to the female candidates.
4. ANALYSIS:
4.1 Juvenile Law in India, its History and Codification -
Abstract from Social Defence Volume: 16 Issue:
64 Dated: (April 1981) (Pages: 5-13) by M.Najmi highlight the features and need of juvenile Court law.
"The fundamental idea of juvenile court law is that the State must step in and exercise guardianship over a child found under social or personal conditions that promote criminality. This reflects the realization that children are unable to manage their own affairs and that delinquent acts affect the whole social structure adversely. The juvenile justice reform movement in the Western world created some ferment in 19th century India, but recommendations of the 1920-21 Indian Jail Commission were the real impetus for separate 13 OA No. 287/2018 juvenile legislation. Most States have enacted legislation based on Great Britain's 1960 Children Act providing for separate juvenile court and treatment systems. Many States still do not have separate juvenile courts but appoint especially empowered magistrates to handle these cases. The half-hearted manner in which some States have implemented their juvenile legislation is clearly a breach of faith with India's humanitarian Constitution. The 1973 Code of Criminal Procedure confines the juvenile court's jurisdiction to youths under 16 years old who have committed offenses not punishable by death or life imprisonment. The Central Children Act of 1960 has a broader definition of delinquency and extends the age to 18 for girls. Age limits also vary among States. Juveniles apprehended by the police can be released on bail to parents or guardians or must be produced before the court within 24 hours. The court requests a background report from the probation officer before making a decision. Juvenile court judges must have special knowledge of child psychology and child welfare. The juvenile court has established a good reputation, although its achievements as a crime prevention agency are meager. Over 20 references are included.‖ 4.2 International Concerns for Juvenile The General Assembly of the United Nations adopted the Convention on the Rights of the Child on 20th November, 1989, which prescribes a set of standard to be adhered to by all the States parties in securing the best interest of the child. The International instruments and conventions have contributed considerably to the issue of child rights and prevention of child abuse. The International bodies like United Nations and UNICEF have always paid more emphasis on the development of Child.
4.3 Following are the International Instruments and Conventions that are signed by all the States of UN in order to protect the rights of Children:
1. UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (Beijing Rules)
2. UN Guidelines for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency (Riyadh Guidelines)
3. UN Rules for the Protection of Juvenile Deprived of their Liberty (Havana Conventions) 14 OA No. 287/2018
4. Guidelines for the Action on Children in Criminal Juvenile System (Vienna Guidelines) 4.4 Juvenile Justice and Constitution of India The Constitution of India is to consider the fundamental law of India. Constitution provides rights and duties of citizens. It also provides provision for the working of the government functionaries. Constitution in Part III has provided Fundamental Rights for its citizens. In the same manner, in its Part IV it has provided Directive Principles of State Policies (DPSP) which acts as general guidelines in framing government policies. Constitution has provided some basic rights and provisions especially for the welfare of children. Like: -
The main object of the Juvenile Justice is Rehabilitation and protection of their CIVIL RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS.
"IV. CIVIL RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS
95. The Indian Constitution presents an impressive list of civil and political rights for children.
96. While the right of equality before the law and equal protection of the law is available to any person including children, article 15 (3) empowers the State to have special laws for children, solely intended to enable them to enjoy the fruits of the guarantee of equality. Examples of such laws include the Child Labour Prohibition laws and the Juvenile Justice Act. Class legislation is thus not only constitutionally permissible but also constitutionally mandated.
(...)
99. Besides, all the seven sets of Fundamental Rights in the Constitution are available to children with as much authority and accessibility as to adult citizens.
100. There is a large body of case law which has not only developed the application of these rights to children but has also expanded their scope in order to make them meaningful. This was accomplished by the judiciary through harmonious construction of Part III (Fundamental Rights) and Part IV (Directive Principles of State Policy) of the Constitution side by side with India's treaty obligations and obligations under the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Thereby, the Indian judiciary has made a singular contribution for the universal development of human rights generally, and of child rights in particular.
101. It may be concluded that in the matter of civil rights and freedoms, the laws of the country stand very 15 OA No. 287/2018 much in line with the global human rights movement and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. India's ratification of the Convention in 1992 has generated, renewed concern regarding the policies and priorities, obligations and commitments vis-a-vis children. In order to translate this concern into concrete action, the provision of trained personnel and greater accountability vis-a-vis legal obligations are being attempted. The courts have begun to take child rights and principles governing them seriously and have gone to the farthest limits to give every child, particularly the neglected and the delinquent, an opportunity to enjoy the minimum guarantees of law.
102. India is a union of states, and under the scheme of governance envisaged by the Indian Constitution, all legislative powers are organized under three lists given in the Seventh Schedule. List I (Union List) contains matters in which the Union Parliament has exclusive power to make laws. Similarly, in respect of items in List II (State List), the State Assemblies have exclusive power to make laws. List III (Concurrent List) contains matters in which both Parliament and State Assemblies have power to legislate. On matters not enumerated in List II or III, Parliament has residuary powers of legislation (Articles 246 and 248).
103. While public order, police, prisons, reformatories, borstal institutions, relief and the disabled, etc., are subjects of List II, a number of related matters like criminal law and procedure, family law, civil procedure, vagrancy, economic and social planning, social security, welfare of labour, education, etc., many of which relate to the rights of children, are items in List III. As such the status of legislative protection available to children and the extent of enforcement of laws affecting their entitlements are dependent upon state governments.
104. There have been some positive developments in the period following the ratification of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Following an international conference on the subject in March 1994, an "Alliance for the Child" has been formed at the national level with the Chief Justice of India as its chairperson. This body has inspired an active interest in the problems of children viewed in the perspective of their rights. Senior judicial officers, lawyers and police personnel have attempted to address the problems of children, particularly in the context of the implementation of the Juvenile Justice Act.
105. The National Human Rights Commission set up in 1993 has been taking an active interest in the implementation of children's rights in the country. The Commission has been examining issues like child labour and related issues such as compulsory primary education, child marriages, child prostitution, female 16 OA No. 287/2018 foeticide and infanticide in depth and is supportive of efforts by the non-governmental organizations and activists to further children's rights.
(...) D. Right to personal liberty, bodily integrity and privacy (...)
113. The conditions in custodial institutions for delinquent and destitute children have been improved in a series of cases taken to court.
114. Humane approaches towards children in conflict with the law have been adopted under strict directions of the court.
(...)
117. The right to privacy implies that there should be in camera trials of all cases involving juveniles. The present system provides this protection, and in the reporting of cases involving juveniles or rape victims the name or address of the victim is not mentioned. However, this protection has not been extended to include law journals or the publication of photographs of the victim.
(...)
119. Any generalization on the status of children's rights in the whole of India is risky, unfair and contrary to realities on the ground, despite instances of relative neglect of children's welfare and uneven enforcement of laws in some parts of the country. Moreover, the performance of the higher judiciary has been particularly noteworthy in the context of enforcing legislation beneficial to children. It is through the high courts and the Supreme Court that judicial remedies and procedural standards have been evolved and accountability established on issues of human rights. The public interest litigation which is a unique feature of the Indian judicial system has been successfully used in guarding the rights of children.
120. Priorities given for follow-up action under civil rights and freedoms are:
1. Review and revision of laws, particularly those relating to children to enable and facilitate affirmative actions by the State and to address existing lacunae;
2. Strengthening enforcement machinery to ensure translation of rights into reality;
3. Making the existing constitutional right to education a reality for all children;17 OA No. 287/2018
4. Comprehensive review of the Juvenile Justice Act to make it more effective and child friendly;
5. Sensitization of the judiciary and the law enforcement machinery to the special needs of children;
6. Promoting affirmative action by the State, communities and all concerned sections of society.‖ 4.5 Rehabilitation ―278. Rehabilitation has been made an integral part of the institutional programmes. Every neglected and delinquent juvenile has not only to be provided accommodation, maintenance and facilities for education, vocational training and rehabilitation but also the facilities for development of his character and necessary training for protecting himself against exploitation. The importance of after-care has been recognized as essential for rehabilitation of the juvenile in the community. The Act provides for the setting up of after-care organizations for juveniles after they leave the juvenile homes or special homes, to help their readjustment, resettlement and rehabilitation as self-reliant, socially useful citizens. Many state governments have established comprehensive after-care schemes, the objectives of which are the following:
1. To extend help, counselling, guidance, support and protection to all released juveniles whenever necessary;
2. To help a released juvenile to overcome his mental, social and economic difficulties;
3. To impress upon the juvenile the need to adjust his habits, attitudes, approaches and value schemes on a rational appreciation of social responsibilities and obligation and the requirements of community living;
4. To help the juvenile to make a smooth adjustment to his post-release environment;
5. To encourage the juvenile in making satisfactory readjustment with his family, neighbourhood and community;
6. To assist the juvenile in functioning as a self-reliant, socially useful citizen;
7. To assist in the process of the juvenile's physical, mental, vocational, economic, social and attitudinal post- release readjustment and ultimate rehabilitation;
8. To complete in all respects the process of the juvenile's final readjustment, resettlement and rehabilitation.
279. As a follow-up measure contemplated under the Juvenile Justice Act, the Scheme for Prevention and Control of Juvenile Social Maladjustment has been implemented by the Ministry of Welfare since 1986-87 to provide financial support to states/Union territories for setting up or upgrading observation homes/juvenile homes/specialhomes/after-care organizations and for the training of functionaries.
280. As a result of these efforts, juvenile crime in India has declined over the years and during 1992 accounted for 0.7 per cent of all crimes under the Indian Penal Code. An 18 OA No. 287/2018 analysis of sex and age distribution of juveniles apprehended during 1991 indicates that the age group 12-16 years is comparatively more susceptible to criminal activities.‖ (Source: Initial reports of States parties due in 1995: India, UN Doc. CRC/C/28/Add.10, paras. 65-69, 95-96, 99-105, 113-114, 117, 119-120, 269-280 (7 July 1997).
4.6 The Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 -
The Juvenile Justice Act of 2015 replaced the Juvenile Justice Act of 2000 because there was a need for a more robust and effective justice system that focused on deterrent as well as reformative approaches. The approach towards Juveniles should be different from that of adults, there were contentions made in the Parliament that the Juveniles should be given more space for transformation or reformation or improvement and that is only possible when there's a special justice system. Thus, the new act i.e. the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 focused on a Juvenile friendly approach of adjudication and disposition of matters, which itself is clear from the Preamble of the Act that is to say ―An Act to consolidate and amend the law relating to children alleged and found to be in conflict with law and children in need of care and protection by catering to their basic needs through proper care, protection, development, treatment, social re-integration, by adopting a child-friendly approach in the adjudication and disposal of matters in the best interest of children and for their rehabilitation through processes provided, and institutions and bodies established, herein-under and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.
WHEREAS, the provisions of the Constitution confer powers and impose duties, under clause (3) of article 15, clauses (e) and (f) of article 39, article 45 and article 47, on the State to ensure that all the needs of children are met and that their basic human rights are fully protected;
AND WHEREAS, the Government of India has acceded on the 11th December, 1992 to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, adopted by the General Assembly of United Nations, which has prescribed a set of standards to be adhered to by all State parties in securing the best interest of the child;
AND WHEREAS, it is expedient to re-enact the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 to make comprehensive provisions for children alleged and found to be in conflict with law and children in need of care and protection, taking into consideration the standards prescribed in the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice, 1985 (the Beijing Rules), the United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty (1990), the Hague Convention on Protection of Children and 19 OA No. 287/2018 Co-operation in Respect of Inter- country Adoption (1993), and other related international instruments.‖ 4.6.1 CHAPTER II GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CARE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN
3. General principles to be followed in administration of Act.--The Central Government, the State Governments, the Board, and other agencies, as the case may be, while implementing the provisions of this Act shall be guided by the following fundamental principles, namely:--
(i) Principle of presumption of innocence: Any child shall be presumed to be an innocent of any mala fide or criminal intent up to the age of eighteen years.
(ii) Principle of dignity and worth: All human beings shall be treated with equal dignity and rights.
(iii) Principle of participation: Every child shall have a right to be heard and to participate in all processes and decisions affecting his interest and the child's views shall be taken into consideration with due regard to the age and maturity of the child.
(iv) Principle of best interest: All decisions regarding the child shall be based on the primary consideration that they are in the best interest of the child and to help the child to develop full potential.
(v) Principle of family responsibility: The primary responsibility of care, nurture and protection of the child shall be that of the biological family or adoptive or foster parents, as the case may be.
(vi) Principle of safety: All measures shall be taken to ensure that the child is safe and is not subjected to any harm, abuse or maltreatment while in contact with the care and protection system, and thereafter.
(vii) Positive measures: All resources are to be mobilised including those of family and community, for promoting the well-being, facilitating development of identity and providing an inclusive and enabling environment, to reduce vulnerabilities of children and the need for intervention under this Act.
(viii) Principle of non-stigmatising semantics: Adversarial or accusatory words are not to be used in the processes pertaining to a child.
(ix) Principle of non-waiver of rights: No waiver of any of the right of the child is permissible or valid, whether sought by 20 OA No. 287/2018 the child or person acting on behalf of the child, or a Board or a Committee and any non-exercise of a fundamental right shall not amount to waiver.
(x) Principle of equality and non-discrimination: There shall be no discrimination against a child on any grounds including sex, caste, ethnicity, place of birth, disability and equality of access, opportunity and treatment shall be provided to every child.
(xi) Principle of right to privacy and confidentiality: Every child shall have a right to protection of his privacy and confidentiality, by all means and throughout the judicial process.
(xii) Principle of institutionalisation as a measure of last resort: A child shall be placed in institutional care as a step of last resort after making a reasonable inquiry.
(xiii) Principle of repatriation and restoration: Every child in the juvenile justice system shall have the right to be re-united with his family at the earliest and to be restored to the same socio- economic and cultural status that he was in, before coming under the purview of this Act, unless such restoration and repatriation is not in his best interest.
(xiv) Principle of fresh start: All past records of any child under the Juvenile Justice system should be erased except in special circumstances.
(xv) Principle of diversion: Measures for dealing with children in conflict with law without resorting to judicial proceedings shall be promoted unless it is in the best interest of the child or the society as a whole.
(xvi) Principles of natural justice: Basic procedural standards of fairness shall be adhered to, including the right to a fair hearing, rule against bias and the right to review, by all persons or bodies, acting in a judicial capacity under this Act.
4.6.2 Section 18. Orders regarding child found to be in conflict with law.--
(1) Where a Board is satisfied on inquiry that a child irrespective of age has committed a petty offence, or a serious offence, or a child below the age of sixteen years has committed a heinous offence, then, notwithstanding anything contrary contained in any other law for the time being in force, and based on the nature of offence, specific need for supervision or intervention, circumstances as brought out in the social investigation report and past conduct of the child, the Board may, if it so thinks fit,--21 OA No. 287/2018
(a) allow the child to go home after advice or admonition by following appropriate inquiry and counselling to such child and to his parents or the guardian;
(b) direct the child to participate in group counselling and similar activities;
(c) order the child to perform community service under the supervision of an organisation or institution, or a specified person, persons or group of persons identified by the Board;
(d) order the child or parents or the guardian of the child to pay fine:
Provided that, in case the child is working, it may be ensured that the provisions of any labour law for the time being in force are not violated;
(e) direct the child to be released on probation of good conduct and placed under the care of any parent, guardian or fit person, on such parent, guardian or fit person executing a bond, with or without surety, as the Board may require, for the good behaviour and child's well-being for any period not exceeding three years;
(f) direct the child to be released on probation of good conduct and placed under the care and supervision of any fit facility for ensuring the good behaviour and child's well-being for any period not exceeding three years;
(g) direct the child to be sent to a special home, for such period, not exceeding three years, as it thinks fit, for providing reformative services including education, skill development, counselling, behaviour modification therapy, and psychiatric support during the period of stay in the special home:
Provided that if the conduct and behaviour of the child has been such that, it would not be in the child's interest, or in the interest of other children housed in a special home, the Board may send such child to the place of safety.
(2) If an order is passed under clauses (a) to (g) of sub-section (1), the Board may, in addition pass orders to--
(i) attend school; or
(ii) attend a vocational training centre; or
(iii) attend a therapeutic centre; or
(iv) prohibit the child from visiting, frequenting or appearing at a specified place; or (v) undergo a de-addiction programme.22 OA No. 287/2018
(3) Where the Board after preliminary assessment under section 15 pass an order that there is a need for trial of the said child as an adult, then the Board may order transfer of the trial of the case to the Children's Court having jurisdiction to try such offences.
4.6.3 Section 35. Surrender of children.--
(1) A parent or guardian, who for physical, emotional and social factors beyond their control, wishes to surrender a child, shall produce the child before the Committee.
(2) If, after prescribed process of inquiry and counselling, the Committee is satisfied, a surrender deed shall be executed by the parent or guardian, as the case may be, before the Committee.
(3) The parents or guardian who surrendered the child, shall be given two months time to reconsider their decision and in the intervening period the Committee shall either allow, after due inquiry, the child to be with the parents or guardian under supervision, or place the child in a Specialised Adoption Agency, if he or she is below six years of age, or a children's home if he is above six years.
4.6.4 Section 37. Orders passed regarding a child in need of care and protection.--
(1) The Committee on being satisfied through the inquiry that the child before the Committee is a child in need of care and protection, may, on consideration of Social Investigation Report submitted by Child Welfare Officer and taking into account the child's wishes in case the child is sufficiently mature to take a view, pass one or more of the following orders, namely:--
(a) declaration that a child is in need of care and protection;
(b) restoration of the child to parents or guardian or family with or without supervision of Child Welfare Officer or designated social worker;
(c) placement of the child in Children's Home or fit facility or Specialised Adoption Agency for the purpose of adoption for long term or temporary care, keeping in mind the capacity of the institution for housing such children, either after reaching the conclusion that the family of the child cannot be traced or even if traced, restoration of the child to the family is not in the best interest of the child;
(d) placement of the child with fit person for long term or temporary care; 23 23 OA No. 287/2018
(e) foster care orders under section 44;
(f) sponsorship orders under section 45;
(g) directions to persons or institutions or facilities in whose care the child is placed, regarding care, protection and rehabilitation of the child, including directions relating to immediate shelter and services such as medical attention, psychiatric and psychological support including need-based counselling, occupational therapy or behaviour modification therapy, skill training, legal aid, educational services, and other developmental activities, as required, as well as follow-up and coordination with the District Child Protection Unit or State Government and other agencies;
(h) declaration that the child is legally free for adoption under section 38. (2) The Committee may also pass orders for--
(i) declaration of fit persons for foster care;
(ii) getting after care support under section 46 of the Act; or
(iii) any other order related to any other function as may be prescribed.
4.6.5 Section 53. Rehabilitation and re-integration services in institutions registered under this Act and management thereof.--
(1) The services that shall be provided, by the institutions registered under this Act in the process of rehabilitation and re-integration of children, shall be in such manner as may be prescribed, which may include--
(i) basic requirements such as food, shelter, clothing and medical attention as per the prescribed standards;
(ii) equipment such as wheel-chairs, prosthetic devices, hearing aids, braille kits, or any other suitable aids and appliances as required, for children with special needs;
(iii) appropriate education, including supplementary education, special education, and appropriate education for children with special needs:
Provided that for children between the age of six to fourteen years, the provisions of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (35 of 2009) shall apply;
(iv) skill development;
(v) occupational therapy and life skill education;
(vi) mental health interventions, including counselling specific to the need of the child;24 OA No. 287/2018
(vii) recreational activities including sports and cultural activities;
(viii) legal aid where required;
(ix) referral services for education, vocational training, de-
addiction, treatment of diseases where required;
(x) case management including preparation and follow up of individual care plan; (xi) birth registration;
(xii) assistance for obtaining the proof of identity, where required; and
(xiii) any other service that may reasonably be provided in order to ensure the well-being of the child, either directly by the State Government, registered or fit individuals or institutions or through referral services.
(2) Every institution shall have a Management Committee, to be set up in a manner as may be prescribed, to manage the institution and monitor the progress of every child.
(3) The officer in-charge of every institution, housing children above six years of age, shall facilitate setting up of children's committees for participating in such activities as may be prescribed, for the safety and well-being of children in the institution.
4.6.6 The above cited provisions lay emphasis on counseling, which is abundantly clear from the words "rehabilitation and reintegration". Therefore, the law makers while drafting the Juvenile Act, 2015 has to consider all the necessary provisions laid down by the Constitution so that child‟s rights are protected in all the possible ways.
4.6.7 This is for the same reason that Chapter IV of the Act lays down the provisions for betterment of the juveniles and has focused on the Reformation and Rehabilitation of Juveniles in all the possible circumstances. In exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 25 OA No. 287/2018 110 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (2 of 2016), the Central Government hereby made model rules w.e.f 21.09.2016.
5. JUDICIAL INTERVENTION 5.1 In the Chief Justices‟ Conference held on 9th and 10th March, 2006 in the Supreme Court of India, vide Item No. 22 of the Agenda under the heading "The plight of Juvenile Delinquents" the following resolution was passed:-
"That High Courts will impress upon the State Governments to set up Juvenile Justice Boards, wherever not set-up. The Chief Justices may nominate a High Court Judge to oversee the condition and functioning of the remand/observation homes established under Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000".
5.2 Pursuant to the aforesaid resolution passed in the Chief Justices‟ Conference held on 9th and 10th March, 2006, on 25.04.2006, the then Hon‟ble the Acting Chief Justice, Delhi High Court, New Delhi, was pleased to constitute the Committee to oversee the condition and functioning of the remand/observation homes established under Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000.
Thereafter, several Hon‟ble Judges have been the Members of the "Juvenile Justice Committee".
26 OA No. 287/20185.3 With the result, under the monitoring and guidance of Delhi High Court Juvenile Justice Committee, several steps are being taken by the stakeholders including survey of substance abuse; mobilization of school drop outs;
sensitization programs for teachers/ students; launch of audio/visual information to generate awareness about the ill effects of drugs/substance abuse to create community awareness and the helpline for assistance for the sufferers; to engage sufficient number of counselors; referral of the children identified, exposed to drug/ substance abuse.
5.4 Landmark Judgments:
i. Sheela Barse & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors. [1986 AIR 1773] ii. Sheela Barse & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. [1986 SCALE (2) 230] iii. Hari Ram v. State of Rajasthan & Anr. [2009 SCC 13 211] iv. Jitendra Singh @ Babboo Singh & Anr. v. State of U.P. [Criminal Appeal No. 763 of 2003] v. Salil Bali v. Union of India & Anr. [Writ Petition (C) No. 10 of 2013] vi. Shabnam Hashmi vs. Union of India & Ors. [Writ Petition (Civil) No. 470 of 2005] vii. Parag Bhati (Juvenile) through Legal Guardian -
Smt. Rajni Bhati versus State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. (Criminal Appeal No. 486 of 2016) viii. Sampurna Behura vs. Union of India (Supreme Court of India), (2018) 4 SCC 433 27 OA No. 287/2018 ix. In RE Contagion of COVID 19 Virus IN Children Protection Homes x. Nipun Saxena and ors. vs. Union of India (Supreme Court of India), 2019 (2) SCC 703 xi. Subramanian Swamy and Ors. vs. Raju through Member, Juvenile Justice Board & another (Supreme Court of India), (2014) 8 SCC 390 xii. Jiva Kumar Harijan vs. State of Maharashtra & another (Bombay High Court), 2016 SCC Online Bom 6928 xiii. Praveen Kumar Maurya vs. State of U.P. (Allahabad High Court), 2011 Cri LJ (All) 200 xiv. Akshay Chadha vs. State (NCT of Delhi) (Delhi High Court) 5.5 We may also highlight that in case of Syed Mehedi vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors. decided on 2nd July, 2019, W.P.(C) 1200/2016, the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi has held as under :-
―16. Before we deal with the rival contentions of the parties, we may refer to Rule 5 of the Recruitment Rules, which empowers the respondents to relax the provisions of the rules in appropriate circumstances. The same reads as under:
"5. Power to relax - Where the Government is of the opinion that it is necessary or expedient so to do, it may by order and for reasons to be recorded in writing, relax any of the provisions of these rules with respect in any class or category of persons."
(emphasis supplied)
17. Thus, the aspect whether, or not, to grant relaxation of any rule- like all other decisions of the executive, has to be governed by good reason and rationality. It is not a whimsical or arbitrary power that the executive is vested with. The reasons should exist and should be disclosed by recording the same in writing. Reasons should exist, and be recorded, not only when the power of relaxation is exercised, but also when the executive declines the relaxation. It may also be appropriate to refer to Section 3 of the Right of 28 OA No. 287/2018 Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 ("Right to Education Act" for short) which reads as under:
"3(1) Every child of the age of six to fourteen years, including a child referred to in clause (d) or clause (e) of section 2, shall have the right to free and compulsory education in a neighbourhood school till the completion of his or her elementary education.‖ 5.6 The same is a duty cast upon the respondents, which is clear from the minutes of Juvenile Justice Committee held on 10.02.2017 at Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi. Relevant part thereof reads as under:
Agenda of the meeting Minutes
5. To consider the following issues Ms. Punya Salila Srivastava,
regarding provision of filling up of Secretary, (Education), GNCT of
posts of Counsellors on contract Delhi informed the Committee that
basis as well as creation of the status of EVGCs is as under:
permanent posts of Counsellors
and filling them up in the schools of
Total Sanctioned Posts 500
Delhi. Regular Filled Up Posts 58
Contractual/Guest Teachers 203
- Status of progress made with Vacant Posts 239
regard to recruitment of EVGCs.
- Status of creation and She further stated that online
engagement for the post of applications to fill up these posts by Counsellor by the Education guest EVGCs will be published Department, GNCTD, South shortly in the leading news papers DMC, North DMC & East EMC. as soon as the enhanced rates of
- Steps taken regarding imparting remuneration of guest teachers is training to Counsellors by the notified to attract quality SCERT. counselors. At present guest EVGCs are drawing salary @ Rs22500/-
and orders for increase of this remuneration to Rs 34120/- is under consideration of Finance Department, GNCT of Delhi. A requisition for filling up of 170+262 (432) posts of EVGC regular basis has been sent to DSSSB on 21/04/2016 and 25/05/2016 respectively, however, till date no response has been received from DSSSB.
She further stated that a study was conducted by United Nation Population Fund on qualitative aspects of counseling in schools of 29 OA No. 287/2018 Directorate of Education. On the basis of the same, a proposal for creation of 13 supervisory posts of Counselors In-charge and 1 additional post at HQ level was put up to Administrative Reforms Department who has agreed to the proposal.
As per the report of Education Department, South DMC at present 15, Counselors (Pry) are working on contract basis and creation of 72 new posts of Counselors (Pry.) is in process. In the meanwhile 486 teachers (Pry.) have been trained under the expert guidance of the DHO, SHS for early detection, prevention and counseling of drug substance abuse students and they have also engaged a number of NGO's to assist South DMC for this purpose.
As per the report of Education Department, North DMC online application were invited for engagement of 26 EVGCs (Counselors), after completing the necessary formalities 17 candidates were appointed on contract basis out of which only 9 candidates have joined so far.
As per the report of Health Department, East DMC they have advertised for a total of 10 numbers of vacancies of EVGCs and 7 candidates were shortlisted out of which 4 candidates have already Joined and 3 are vet to join. It is further stated in the report that East DMC have 20 Public Health Nurses and 10 Doctors and their skills in identification and counseling of Drug/ Substance abuse children have been enhanced by hands-on workshop at IHBAS.
At this, the Committee observed that there should be at least one counselor in each school whether primary or secondary and asked all the Commissioners of Municipal Corporations to put a proposal in this regard before their respective Standing Committees.
Action Taken Report may be 30 OA No. 287/2018 submitted by Secretary, Education, GNCT of Delhi and all the Commissioners, Municipal Corporations of Delhi before the next date of meeting.
The Committee took note of the various training and sensitization programmes conducted for guest EVGS and Principals by various agencies.
Ms. Puniya Salila Srivastava, Secretary (Education), GNCT of Delhi stated that Delhi Government had recently sent 90 Principals to Cambridge University for training.
The Committee was of the opinion that only those Principals and teachers with sufficient service tenure left should be sent for such trainings to yield the results.
Progress report in this regard may be submitted by the Secretary, (Education), GNCT of Delhi, to the Committee before the next date.
Xxx xxx xxx Xxx xxx xxx
10. To discuss the issue regarding Dr. Dilraj Kaur, Secretary, appointment, posting and training SW/WCD, GNCT of Delhi stated of Probation Officers by Department that there are total 35 sanctioned of Social Welfare, GNCT of Delhi in posts of Probation Officers, out of the light of judicial pronouncement which 12 are lying vacant and the made in Criminal Appeal Department has requested DSSSB 249/2011, dated 21.09.2015 titled to fill up the vacant posts. as Mithlesh Kumar Kushwaha vs. State. She further informed that a number of trainings were conducted for Probationary Officers by the Department and they have also developed a training calendar for the first quarter of 2017 for training of all stakeholders working directly or indirectly with JCLs and CNCP.
Progress Report may be submitted by Secretary, SW/WCD to the Committee before the next date of meeting.
5.7 The Hon‟ble Court in Syed Mehedi (supra), further repelling similar contention(s) urged by the respondents, observed as follows:-
31 OA No. 287/2018―21. In our view, the question which the respondents ought to have addressed while considering the petitioner's request, was: Whether, in the light of the fact that the posts of SET are not being filled despite the respondents‟ repeated attempts to do so, should the power to grant age relaxation not have been invoked by the respondents in the present case? A further question which ought to have been addressed by the respondents was: Whether, while considering the case for grant of age relaxation, the rights and interests of differently-abled children who are being deprived of qualified teachers, should also have been considered?
22. The respondents, while dealing with the petitioner's prayer, ought to have taken into account the fact that, even though it is the employer's prerogative to prescribe the recruitment norms, including the age criteria, the employer has a simultaneous duty to ensure that vacant posts are substantially filled by qualified persons, even if that implies the grant of age relaxation to a certain extent.
23. There is no taboo against age relaxation. This is evident from the fact that the respondents have granted age relaxation to all female candidates - in respect of all subjects/posts, irrespective of availability of qualified candidates even without age relaxation to fill the advertised posts. The power of age relaxation has been vested in the competent authority by the legislature, being mindful of the fact that situations may arise when, in the interest of ensuring availability of sufficient number of candidates, age relaxation may be necessary. The said duty of the government to grant age relaxation is even more onerous when it comes to the posts of SET, keeping in view the fact that these teachers play a very important role in the development, growth and assimilation into society of differently-abled children.
24. Here we may observe that the differently abled children belonging to poor and middle - class families are the worst sufferers. So far as the affluent families are concerned, they can make private arrangements to teach/train such children, as they have the necessary resources. It is the poor and middle class families, who send their children to schools funded by and run by the respondents, who are wholly dependent on the State to tackle the difficult situation they find themselves in. The parents of such children are not trained to impart education and skill to such children, and they cannot afford to admit their children - who need special care, to private institutions.
25. The issue of age relaxation had to be considered by the respondents in a wholesome manner; with the right sensitivities, and; not with a narrow straight jacket perspective, as they have done in the present case. In fact, a perusal of both the rejection orders shows that the respondents have merely reproduced the past history of the post of SET and the orders passed by this Court in the 32 OA No. 287/2018 present petition, without applying their mind to the factors repeatedly highlighted by this Court. Their only reason is that the petitioner was already overage in 2009 when he acquired the qualification required for the post of SET, and that he could not be granted age relaxation individually. We cannot appreciate how such objections can come in the way of grant of age relaxation! It is clear to us that the germane aspects - we have referred to above, have been completely omitted from consideration by the respondents. The lack of concern and sensitivity towards their own constitutional and statutory obligations - to ensure that the right to education of the differently enabled children is not violated, and that they are imparted knowledge and skill effectively through specially trained and qualified SET, can be gauged from the fact that they do not consider the huge gap in the number of vacant posts and the number of application received as significant.
26. We, thus, have no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that the respondents, despite being vested with the power -
which is coupled with the duty to act reasonably and with responsibility, to grant relaxation in appropriate cases, have failed to consider the relevant factors and misdirected themselves by examining the issue in a myopic manner, without taking into consideration the constitutionally and statutorily recognised and protected rights of children with disabilities. The respondents' rejection of the petitioner's request by way of the orders dated 17.09.2014 and 19.02.2019 is, therefore, not sustainable and liable to be set aside. We, accordingly, quash these orders.
27. In these circumstances, the next question before this Court is that once we have come to conclusion that the decision of the respondents not to grant the age relaxation is erroneous, whether we should once again remit the matter back to the respondents, or whether we should take it upon ourselves to consider the petitioner's request for grant of age relaxation. We have given our thoughtful consideration to this issue. We are conscious that, ordinarily, it is for the competent authority to decide on administrative and policy matters, such as, whether to grant relaxation of criteria for recruitment in terms of the powers prescribed to it under the recruitment rules; but in the present matter, in view of the respondents' refusal to consider the said aspect by due application of mind to the relevant consideration - despite the same being repeatedly highlighted by this Court, we have no doubt in mind that yet another remand to the respondents would only cause further delay and hardship, not only to the petitioner but also to the beneficiaries, who are young and innocent children with special needs studying in schools run by the respondents GNCTD.
28. The plea of the respondents that in the absence of regularly appointed SET, education is currently being imparted to these children by guest teachers needs only to be noted, to be rejected. The guest teachers, who evidently do not fulfil the eligibility criteria prescribed in the 33 OA No. 287/2018 recruitment rules, cannot be considered an appropriate substitute for Special Education Teachers possessing the requisite qualifications. Once we find that the respondents are acting in a patently arbitrary, stubborn and mindless manner, and now that all the relevant material in the present case has been placed before us, we will be failing in our duty if we do not consider the aspect of age relaxation on merits, not as much for the benefit of the petitioner, who has no vested right to demand age relaxation as a matter of right, but keeping in view the constitutional and statutory obligation of the respondents and corresponding rights of the differently - abled children. In this regard, reference may be made to the decision in B.C. Chaturvedi (supra) which has been relied upon by the petitioner and states as under:
"25. No doubt, while exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution, the High Courts have to bear in mind the restraints inherent in exercising power of judicial review. It is because of this that substitution of the High Court's view regarding appropriate punishment is not permissible. But for this constraint, I would have thought that the law-makers do desire application of judicial mind to the question of even proportionality of punishment/penalty. I have said so because the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was amended to insert Section 11-A in it to confer this power even on a labour court/industrial tribunal. It may be that this power was conferred on these adjudicating authorities because of the prevalence of unfair labour practice or victimisation by the management. Even so, the power under Section 11-A is available to be exercised, even if there be no victimisation or taking recourse to unfair labour practice. In this background, I do not think if we would be justified in giving much weight to the decision of the employer on the question of appropriate punishment in service matters relating to government employees or employees of public corporations. I have said so because if need for maintenance of office discipline be the reason of our adopting a strict attitude qua the public servants, discipline has to be maintained in the industrial sector also. The availability of appeal etc. to public servants does not make a real difference, as the appellate/revisional authority is known to have taken a different view on the question of sentence only rarely. I would, therefore, think that but for the self- imposed limitation while exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution, there is no inherent reason to disallow application of judicial mind to the question of proportionality of punishment/penalty. But then, while seized with this question as a writ court interference is permissible only when the punishment/penalty is shockingly disproportionate." (emphasis supplied) Further, reference may be made to the decision in Sangita Srivastava (supra), which was also relied upon by the petitioner and the relevant paragraphs therein read as under:34 OA No. 287/2018
"33. Ordinarily suitability is to be judged by the executive Council and not by this Court. But what are we to do when the Executive Council acts in a patently unfair manner, as it has done in this case? This Court is a Court of Justice. No doubt it has to do justice based on law, but the Court will interpret law in a way that leads to justice and not injustice.
34. On the facts of this case, and in view of the fact that the Executive Council has acted on irrelevant considerations and has misdirected itself, and since a remand to it would lead to further delay and harassment of the petitioner, we ourselves have judged the petitioner's suitability and we find her suitable to be appointed as regular lecturer, and we hold that she fulfils all the requirements of Section 31(3)(c) of the Act, In the circumstances a mandamus is issued to the respondents to regularise the petitioner as lecturer in Home science forthwith and pay her salary of regular lecturer. The petition is allowed. No order as to costs." (emphasis supplied)
29. In the light of the aforesaid decisions, we are of the considered opinion that remanding the matter back to the respondents for consideration of the petitioner‟s request for age relaxation would lead to failure of justice. We are of the view that in a case like this, where there is a dearth of suitably qualified candidates for SET, it is qualification and merit which should be given due precedence.
Relaxation of age ought to have been granted for appointment to the post of SET to all, who were otherwise eligible. While directing so, we are also mindful of the fact that women candidates selected for the same post have been granted a blanket relaxation of 10 years and, therefore, we see no reason as to why, in the light of the admitted shortage of SETs, the same relaxation was not granted to the male candidates as well. At this stage, we may also note that during the course of hearing, the result of the petitioner was produced before us, and having perused the same, we find that he possesses the requisite merit for selection.
30. So far as the submission of the respondents that the power of relaxation cannot be exercised in respect of an individual candidate is concerned, we are of the view that it is open to the respondents to grant such relaxation not only to the petitioner, but also to others, who may have similarly applied against the advertisement in question and whose candidature may not have been considered on account of the age bar. Moreover, that cannot be a reason to deny age relaxation to the petitioner, since the petitioner has been single- handedly pursuing this cause before the Court for a long time now.
31. To be fair to those candidates, who may not have applied in response to the advertisement in question on account of being age barred, we direct that the respondents undertake 35 OA No. 287/2018 a further process of recruitment to fill up the vacant posts of SET without any delay, and to incorporate the clause of grant of age relaxation to all candidates applying for the said posts to the extent required.
32. We allow this petition in the aforesaid terms and direct the respondents to ensure compliance qua the petitioner within the next four weeks, by granting him relaxation with regard to his age and considering his appointment to the post of SET on the basis of his merit position in the selection process already concluded. He will, however, be entitled to all benefits resulting from the said appointment, only from the date of his actual appointment to the said post. The respondents will also initiate the process for fresh recruitment to the post of SET, as directed hereinabove, within the same period of four weeks.‖ 5.8 To what has been narrated herein above, the following case laws which were relied upon by the respondents are not only misplaced and misconceived but are clearly distinguishable and not applicable in the facts of the present case:
(1) Rajbala and another vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and others, WP (C) No.7240/2017 decided on 23.08.2017 by Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi (2) Asha and another vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and others, OA No.3167/2017 decided on 19.03.2019 decided by Principal Bench of this Tribunal.
(3) Kumari Meena Sinha. vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and others, OA No.2912/2019 decided on 03.10.2019 decided by Principal Bench of this Tribunal.
(4) Mrs. Anju vs. vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and others, OA No.1046/2021 decided on 22.06.2021 decided by Principal Bench of this Tribunal.
inasmuch as in those decisions, there was amendment to the Rules for the post of Guest Teachers which did not deal with the ramification of the decision taken in the Juvenile Justice 36 OA No. 287/2018 Committee and the Act of Juvenile Justice. Furthermore, it was to be seen that the decision of Raj Bala (supra) pertained to recruitment of Physical Education Teacher (PET). In the present case, nothing has been brought on record to establish that the Hon‟ble Lt. Governor has no power to relax and/or grant age relaxation. It is also noticeable in the given facts of the case and also observed that there is shortage of teachers inasmuch as 17 candidates were appointed on contract basis out of which only 9 candidates have joined so far. It is also pertinent to mention that the issue with regard to age relaxation, if any, could have also been brought to the notice of Juvenile Justice Act while dealing with the issue of the post of EVGC on contract basis as well as creation of permanent post so that appropriate decision could have been passed. It is also noticeable that following issues were considered regarding the post of Welfare Officers:
Agenda of the Meeting Minutes
7. To consider the following issues Dr. Dilraj Kaur, Secretary,
regarding Welfare Officers SW/WCD, GNCT of Delhi while
referring to the report dated
- Filling up the vacant posts 08.02.2017 of DWCD, stated that
- Proposal regarding out of 140 posts in different
regularisation of contractual categories 12 were filled on regular staff basis, 106 were filled on contractual basis and 5 were filled from NGOs. She further stated that a policy decision dated 19.10.2015 was taken by the Delhi Govt.
allowing age relaxation to contractual staff and a proposal to consider them for the purpose of filling up vacancies is under consideration with the Government in the light of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court titled Secretary, 37 OA No. 287/2018 State of Karnataka and Others Vs. Uma Devi and others, (2006) 4 SCC
1), and for this purpose Recruitment Rules are also required to be amended. She further stated that Department of Social Welfare has placed its requisition to DSSSB for filling up of vacant posts of WOs through its letters dated 30.04.2015 and 08.07.2016 and have also requested to expedite the process vide its letters dated 04.10.2016 and 10.11.2016.
The Committee suggested the Secretary, SW/WCD, to immediately Send a consolidated requirement of posts to be filled up by DSSSB.
Therefore no discrimination can be meted out to the post of EVGC.
5.10 As can be seen that notification dated 21.07.1980, issued by Delhi Administration, is still in existence, ―No. F2(10)/59-R&S - In exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution read with the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs Notification No. F.27/59-Him.(i), dated the l3th July, 1959, the Chief Commissioner, Delhi is pleased to make rules in the Schedule hereto annexed regarding the method of recruitment and qualifications necessary for appointment to the post of Educational and Vocational Guidance Counsellor (Class III) under the Directorate of Education, Delhi.
Serial Name of post Classification Scale of Whether Age limit
No. pay selection for direct
post or recruits
non-
selection
post
1 2 3 4 5 6
1 Educational Class III Rs.200- Selection Below 30
and (Non- 10-250- years
Vocational gazetted - 15-325-
Guidance Non- EB-15-
Counsellor ministerial) 400
38 OA No. 287/2018
N.B. - (i) The age limit for direct recruitment will be relaxable in the case of Scheduled Castes/Tribes candidates, displaced by the Government of India.‖ 5.10 Vide notification dated 25.03.1980, following has been notified:
―NOTIFICATION No. F. 2(33)/78-S.II - In exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to article 309 of the Constitution read with the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs notification No. F. 27/59-Him (i), dated the 13th July, 1959, the Administrator is pleased to make the following Amendments in the Schedule, annexed to his notification No.F.2(10)/59- R&S dated the 21st July, 1960, published at pages 381 to 389 of the Delhi Gazette, Part-IV, dated the 25th August, 1960 containing the rules regarding the method of recruitment and qualifications necessary for appointment to the post of Educational and Vocational Guidance Counsellor under the Directorate of Education ------ (sic.) AMENDMENT In the said Schedule;
i) for the existing entries under columns 3 (Classification:) (Scale of pay) and 6 (Age limit for direct recruits), the following shall be substituted-
Column 3 Group C
Non-Gazetted
Column 4 Non-Ministerial".
Column 6 "Below 36 years of widows (deserted
wives/Govt. servants and those teaching Universities upto 45 years)".
(ii) under N.B. (ii) the following shall be added :-
(iii) Nothing in these rules shall affect reservations and other concessions required to be provided for Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes and other special categories of 39 OA No. 287/2018 persons in accordance with the orders issued by the Central Government from time to time in this regard.
(iv) Where the Administrator is of the opinion that it is necessary or expedient to do so, he may, by order for reasons to be recorded in writing relax any of the provisions of the rules with respect to a class or category of persons/posts.
(v) The crucial date for determining the age limit mentioned in the column 6 of the recruitment rules will in each case, be the closing date for receipt of applications from candidates in India other than Andaman & Nicobar Islands and Lakshadweep. In respect of posts, the appointments to which are made through the employment Exchange, the crucial date for determining the age limit will, in each case, be the last date upto which the Employment Exchanges are asked to submit the names.‖ 5.11 The Directorate of Education vide notification dated 10.12.2015, provided as under:
―F.DE 89/EVGCB/14/1618 - In exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to article 309 of the Constitution read with the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affair's Notification No. F.27J59-Him (I) dated the 13th July; 1959 and in supersession of recruitment rules for the post of Educational and Vocational Guidance' Counsellor notified vide notification No. F. 2 (33)/78-S. 11dated the 25th March, 1980 except as respects things done or omitted to be done before such supersession, the LL Governor of the National Capital Territory of Delhi after prior consultation with the Union Public Service Commission, is pleased to make following recruitment rules for the post of Educational and Vocational Guidance Counsellor in the Directorate of Education, Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi, namely:-
1. Short title and commencement - (i) These rules may be called Educational and Vocational Guidance Counsellor Recruitment Rules, 2015.
(ii) They shall come into force 011 the dare of their publication in the Delhi Gazette.
2. Number of posts, classification and pay band and grade pay/scale of pay -The number of the said posts, their classification and pay band and grade pay / scale of pay attached thereto shall be as specified in columns 2 to 4 of the Schedule annexed to these rules.
3. Method of recruitment, age-limit, qualification etc. - The method of recruitment to the said posts, age limit, 40 OA No. 287/2018 qualification and other mailer connected therewith, shall be as specified in columns 5 to 13 of the said Schedule.
4. Disqualifications-No person-
(a) Who has entered into or contracted a marriage with a person having a spouse living, or
(b) Who having a spouse living, has entered into or contracted a marriage with a person, shall be eligible for appointment to the said posts:
Provided that the Government may, if satisfied that such marriage is permissible under the personal law applicable to such person and the other party to the marriage and that there are other grounds for so doing, exempt any person from the operation of this rule.
5. Power to relax. - Where the Government is of the opinion that it is necessary or expedient so to do, it may by order and for reasons to be recorded in writing, relax in consultation with Union Public Service Commission for any of the provisions of these rules with respect in any class or category of persons.
6. Saving - Nothing in these rules shall effect reservations, relaxation of age-limit and other concessions required to be provided for the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes, and other special categories of persons in accordance with the order issued by the Government from time to time in this regard.
SCHEDULE
Name of Number of posts Classification Pay Band and Whether
the post Grade Pay / Selection or
Pay scale Non-Selection
post
1 2 3 4 5
Educational 137* (2015)* subject General Central PB-2, Rs.9300- Non applicable
and to variation Service Group 34800/- plus
Vocational dependent on ‗B' - Non- Grade Pay Rs.
Guidance workload Gazetted, Non- 4600/-
Counsellor Ministerial
Age Limit For Educational and other Whether age Period of
Direct Recruits Qualification required for and educational probation, if any
Direct Recruits qualification
prescribed for
direct recruit will
apply in the
case of
promotees
6 7 8 9
Not Exceeding 30 Essential (I) Masters degree Not applicable Two years for
Years. in Psychology from a direct recruits
(relaxable for recognized university or
government institution with (II) Diploma
servants up to in guidance front a
five years in recognised Institution.
accordance with Desirable and counselling
the instructions or university or One Year orders issued by Experience in Guidance and the Central Counselling in a Central or 41 OA No. 287/2018 Government). State or UT Government Note: The crucial Institution/Public Sector date for Undertaking. Note I:
determining the Qualifications are relaxable age-limit shall be at the discretion of the the closing date Competent Authority for for receipt of reasons to be recorded in applications from writing in case of Candidates in candidates otherwise well India, (and not qualified.
the closing date Note 2: The Qualification
prescribed for regarding Experience is
those in Assam, relaxable at the discretion of
Meghalaya, the Competent Authority, for
Arunachal reasons to be recorded in
Pradesh, writing, in case of
Mizoram, Candidates belonging to
Manipur, Scheduled Castes or
Nagaland, Scheduled Tribes, if at Any
Tripura, Sikkim, stage of selection the
Ladakh Division Competent Authority is of
of J & K State, the opinion that sufficient
Lahaul & Spiti number of candidates from
District and Pangi these communities
Sub Division of possessing the requisite
Chambo District experience arc not likely to
of Himachal be available to fill up the
Pradesh, posts Reserved for them.
Audaman &
Nicobar Islands
or Lakshadweep).
Method of recruitment: In case of recruitment If a Departmental Circumstance
whether by direct by Promotion Committee s in which
recruitment or by promotion/deputation Exists, what is its Union Public
Promotion or by /absorption, grades composition. Service
deputation/absorption from which Commission
and percentage of the promotion/deputation to be
vacancies to be filled by /absorption to be consulted in
various methods made. making
recruitment.
10 11 12 13
By Direct Recruitment. Not Applicable. Group ‗B' Consultation
Departmental with Union
Note: Vacancies caused Confirmation Public Service
by the incumbent being Committee Commission
away on deputation or consisting of : is not
long illness or study necessary.
leave or under other 1. Secretary,
circumstances for a (Education), Govt. of
duration of one year or National Capital
more may be filled on Territory of Delhi -
deputation basis from Chairman
officers of Central
Government and 2. Director of
possessing educational Education - Govt. of
qualification and National Capital
experience prescribed Territory of Delhi -
for direct recruits under Member
column 7.
3. Additional
Secretary (Planning),
Govt. of National
Capital Territory of
Delhi - Member
42 OA No. 287/2018
By Order and in the Name of Lt. Governor of National Capital Territory of Delhi, Manvinder Singh, Asstt. Director of Education (E-II)‖ 5.12 It is noticed that an addendum has been issued for Special Education Teacher vide notification dated 26.03.2013, which reads as under:
"ADDENDUM (Advertisement No.1/13) Post Code- 1/13 (ATTENTION: Candidates of Post Code 1/13, Special Education Teacher in Dte. of Edu.) It is for the information of candidates for the Post code 1/13 Special Education Teacher, that the Hon'ble Lt. Governor, Govt. of NCT of Delhi is pleased to relax the rules in the schedule annexed regarding recruitment of Special Education Teacher through examinations conducted by the DSSSB from time to time in Directorate of Education, Govt. of NCT of Delhi to facilitate their appointment as under:
1. All those applicants who are working in the SSA as Resource persons for the children with special needs be granted age relaxation to the extent of number of years they have worked in the SSA.
2. General age relaxation of 10 years in case of women candidates be also applied.
Accordingly, the Resource persons working in SSA for the children with special needs and also the women candidates who wish to avail the benefit of age relaxation, may apply against the post of Special Education Teacher in Dte. of Edu (Post Code 1/13) upto 01.04.2013.
5.13 In present facts of the case, it is also noticed that despite the representation(s) dated 09.01.2018 and 10.01.2018, the same have not been put for consideration to the Hon‟ble Lt. Governor for the unexplained reasons. As can be seen there is „Power to Relax‟ under Rule 5 read with various OMs of Government of India issued from time to time which are still in existence. Merely, because there is no 43 OA No. 287/2018 provision in the RRs, is no ground, as Rule 5 is a power given to the Hon‟ble Lt. Governor to relax any of the provisions of these rules with respect to any class or category of persons which has not been abridged nor superseded and cannot be taken away without following due procedure of law. It is also important to note that still there are large number of vacancies available despite being notified from time to time.
Non-filling of these vacancies is not only against the directive principles but also against the law laid down in various decisions referred to herein above. It is also seen that in-
action is contrary to letter and spirit of provisions of benevolent act defeating the very purpose for which the same was enacted but also against the decision directions of Juvenile Justice Committee.
5.14 We may add that technicalities (i.e. omission to mention Rule 5 - Power to Relax) must not be a hindrance and deterrent factor in exercising the discretion vested with the Competent Authority to sub-serve the provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. Furthermore, inaction on part of respondents is not only discriminatory but arbitrary qua the other post i.e. Post of Special Teacher, wherein such power has been exercised.44 OA No. 287/2018
5.15 Lastly, but not the least, in Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 121 of 2022 - Vinod Katara Versus State Of Uttar Pradesh, the Hon‟ble Apex Court observed as under :-
―51. The same is the story in the State of Uttar Pradesh which led the High Court of Allahabad to pass the order in Writ Petition Public Interest Litigation referred to above in para 6.
52. Awareness about the rights of the child and correlated duties remain low among the functionaries of the juvenile justice system.
Once a child is caught in the web of adult criminal justice system, it is difficult for the child to get out of it unscathed. The bitter truth is that even the legal aid programmes are mired in systemic bottlenecks and often it is only at a considerably belated stage of the proceeding that the person becomes aware of the rights, including the right to be differently treated on the ground of juvenility.
53. What needs to be kept in mind is the main object and purpose of the Juvenile Justice Act. The focus of this legislation is on the juvenile's reformation and rehabilitation so that he also may have an opportunity to enjoy as other children. In Pratap Singh (supra), this Court, elaborating on the objects and purpose of the Juvenile Justice Act, made the following observations: "...The said Act is not only a beneficent legislation, but also a remedial one. The Act aims at grant of care, protection and rehabilitation of a juvenile visàvis the adult criminals. Having regard to Rule 4 of the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice, it must also be borne in mind that the moral and psychological components of criminal responsibility were also one of the factors in defining a juvenile. The first objective, therefore, is the promotion of the wellbeing of the juvenile and the second objective to bring about the principle of proportionality whereby and whereunder the proportionality of the reaction to the circumstances of both the offender and the offence including the victim should be safeguarded..."
5.16 Before parting, we may highlight that the Hon‟ble Apex Court has put a word of caution in a recent judgment arising out of Criminal Appeal No. 1928 Of 2022 (Arising Out of S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 11220 of 2019) State Of J&K Vs. Shubam Sangra decided on 16.11.2022, wherein it is held as follows:
45 OA No. 287/2018―Before we close this matter, we would like to observe that the rising rate of juvenile delinquency in India is a matter of concern and requires immediate attention. There is a school of thought, existing in our country that firmly believes that howsoever heinous the crime may be, be it single rape, gangrape, drug peddling or murder but if the accused is a juvenile, he should be dealt with keeping in mind only one thing i.e., the goal of reformation. The school of thought, we are taking about believes that the goal of reformation is ideal. The manner, in which brutal and heinous crimes have been committed over a period of time by the juveniles and still continue to be committed, makes us wonder whether the Act, 2015 has subserved its object. We have started gathering an impression that the leniency with which the juveniles are dealt with in the name of goal of reformation is making them more and more emboldened in indulging in such heinous crimes. It is for the Government to consider whether its enactment of 2015 has proved to be effective or something still needs to be done in the matter before it is too late in the day. impugned order passed by the CJM, Kathua and the High Court is set aside. It is held that the respondent accused was not a juvenile at the time of commission of the offence and should be tried the way other co-accused were tried in accordance with the law. Law to take its own course.‖
6. CONCLUSION:
6.1 In the result, for the foregoing reasons, we allow this OA with a direction to the respondents to place the file of aforesaid five selected candidates on the basis of their merit position in the selection process already concluded before the Hon‟ble Lt. Governor, Delhi, who, in his wisdom, may pass appropriate order(s) for granting age relaxation under Rule 5, and thereafter, issue necessary order(s) for offer of appointment to the post of EVGC in terms of advertisement to which these applicants had applied, subject to fulfilling other eligibility conditions, within six weeks from date of receipt of certified copy of this Order. They shall, however, be entitled to all benefits from the date of joining the post only.46 OA No. 287/2018
6.2 To be fair to those candidates, who may not have applied in response to the advertisement in question, on account of being age barred, we direct that the respondents shall undertake further process of recruitment to fill up the vacant posts of EVGC without any delay, and to incorporate the clause of age relaxation to all candidates applying for the said posts to the extent required as one time relaxation. Since large number of posts are yet to be filled and lying vacant, the respondents will also initiate the process for fresh recruitment to the post of EVGC, as directed herein-above, within a period of twelve weeks, if not advertised for the year 2022-2023.
6.3 We also direct the respondent(s) that whenever there is rejection of a candidature due to over-age, in order to avoid unnecessary delay and unwarranted litigation, a Note be added by the respondents either in advertisement and/or in the rejection order, if any, highlighting the fact that "who is the appropriate/competent/appellate authority, who has the power to grant age relaxation under rules to enable the candidates to make an appeal/representation seeking such age relaxation by giving a reasonable time to them.
6.4 The OA is allowed in aforesaid terms. Cost(s) made easy.
(Manish Garg) (Tarun Shridhar) Member (J) Member (A) „SD‟