WORLD VIEW ADOPTION ASSOCIATION  Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

W.P.(C) 13615/2018 Page 1 of 3$~20
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 22ndJanuary, 2021
+ W.P.(C) 13615/2018 & CM APPL. 53050/2018
WORLD VIEW ADOPTION ASSOCIATION ….. Petitioner
Through: Ms. Neela Gokhale, Ms. Harshal
Gupta, Ms. Shruti Dixit & Mr. Kushal
Choudhary, Advs. (M:9810166391)
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. ….. Respondents
Through: Mr. Gaurang Kanth, Standing
Counsel with Ms. Biji Rajesh,
Advocate for R-2.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
1. This hearing has been done through video conferencing.
2. The Petitioner – World View Adoption Association is a Canadian
organisation, duly recognised as an authorised foreign adoption agency by
the Ontario Ministry of Children and Youth Services, in Canada. The
Petitioner is stated to have a licence as an adoption agency for inter-country
adoption services since 2003. The Petitioner’s licence was renewed under
Regulation 31(3) of the Adoption Regulations, 2017, under Section 68(c)
read with Section 2(3) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter, ‘Juvenile Justice Act’) . The said
recognition was granted on 19thJune, 2013, which remained in force for a
period of five years and expired in June, 2018.
3. According to the Petitioner, during the period of authorization, it had
complied with all the formalities and requirements as prescribed in terms of
the statute and the guidelines for facilitating adoption from India to Canada.
2021:DHC:261W.P.(C) 13615/2018 Page 2 of 3However, when it applied for a renewal of the said licence, the same was not
granted by the Respondent No.2 to the Petitioner. Hence, the Petitioner has
filed the present writ petition before this Court seeking an appropriate
direction to the Respondent Authority, to renew its license.
4. Ms. Gokhle, ld. counsel for the Petitioner submits that prior to the
decision of non-renewal, no hearing was given to the Petitioner and in fact
the Petitioner was not aware of any of the reasons as to why its licence was
not renewed.
5. In the reply affidavit, there are certain pleas which have been taken by
the Respondent No.2 – Central Adoption Resource Authority ( hereinafter,
“CARA ”) that there were alleged irregularities in the adoptions which were
facilitated by the Petitioner, and certain non-compliances in submission of
documents such as annual reports etc. which were required to be submitted
in compliance of Regulation 30 and 31(2) of the Adoption Regulations,
2017.
6. Ms. Biji Rajesh, ld. counsel appearing for the Respondent No.2-
CARA, accordingly submits that there is adequate material available to
justify the non-renewal of the licence of the Petitioner.
7. The Petitioner submits that these reasons have come to light for the
first time through the reply affidavit, but however, it takes the position that it
has fully complied with all the requirements mentioned in the said
Regulations.
8. Considering the fact that the Petitioner has had a licence since 2003
and is a recognised adoption agency in Canada, this Court is of the opinion
that the said non-renewal cannot result in permanent disbarment of the
Petitioner from operating as a recognised adoption agency, under the
2021:DHC:261W.P.(C) 13615/2018 Page 3 of 3relevant regulations and statutes.
9. Even if the earlier licence is not renewed, the Petitioner ought to have
an opportunity to apply afresh to Respondent No. 2- CARA, so that its case
can be considered again on merits.
10. Accordingly, the Petitioner is permitted to file a fresh application
seeking a licence under the Adoption Regulations, 2017 framed under the
scheme of the Juvenile Justice Act. The said application, if filed, shall be
considered afresh in accordance with law. As a part of the consideration for
a fresh licence, the submission of the Petitioner to the effect that there was
complete compliance of the said Adoption Regulations by the Petitioner
even on the previous occasion, shall also be considered. If the Petitioner
seeks a hearing, the said request shall be considered.
11. If the said application is made within a period of eight weeks from
today, a hearing shall be awarded to the Petitioner and a decision shall be
taken on a fresh license, within four months thereafter.
12. This petition and all pending applications are disposed of in the above
terms.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUDGE
JANUARY 22, 2021
dj/Ak
(Corrected & released on 27thJanuary, 2021 )
2021:DHC:261