GEETHA K. Vs. KERALA HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed challenging the proceedings initiated by the Kerala State Human Rights Commission against the writ petitioner as per Exts.P4(a) and P5(a) complaints filed filed by respondents 2 to 5, who are all Lower Primary School Assistants of VCM LP School, and the 6th respondent, mother of a differently abled child, Vallappuzha, Palakkad District. The paramount contention advanced is that the Kerala State Human Rights Commission is not having power to entertain the complaints as there is no violation of human right defined under section 2(d) and section 36(2) of Protection of Human Rights Act and regulation 17 of the Kerala State Human Rights Commission (Procedure) Regulations, 2001.

(2.) In order to buttress the said contention, judgments of the Apex Court as well as this Court are relied upon. The subject issue of the complaint filed by the party respondents before the State Human Rights Commission are in respect of documents detained by the petitioner, who was the Headmistress of the school, and the consequences faced by the said respondents, which according to them, is a clear violation of their rights in the human rights angle. So far as the 6th respondent is concerned, she has filed a complaint basically stating that the amounts due to her child towards incentive to differently abled children, and her birth certificate was not being paid / returned by the petitioner.

(3.) In fact the Human Rights Commission has issued notice to the petitioner but instead of appearing before the Commission and raising all the contentions with respect to the maintainability of the complaint, petitioner has approached this court by filing the writ petition also contending that in respect of the subject issues raised before the State Human Rights Commission, a writ petition is filed by respondents 2 to 4 i.e., P.K.Abdul Nazar, Jayakumar.K., Rajalakshmi.C., and therefore, by virtue of Regulations 2001, the complaint is liable to be dismissed. Other contentions are also raised, including the ground of limitation in the matter of filing Ext.P5(a) complaint by the 6 th respondent.