RIVA GIAMPIETRO Vs. STATE OF A. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed 'to declare the action of the respondents in unreasonably delaying and not disposing of the petitioners' case to adopt the minor child 'Yesu Babu' within the time-limits prescribed in the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (for short 'the Act') and the Adoption Regulations, 2017 (for short 'Regulations 2017'), as illegal and arbitrary and a consequential direction to the 5th respondent to expeditiously number, process and dispose of the petitioners' Adoption OP filed/received on 26/2/2021 along with all related applications, petitions etc.'

(2.) Case of the petitioners is that, they are the citizens of Italy and are husband and wife; as they could not conceive a child naturally, they have adopted a female child from India in April, 2016 when the child was seven years old; as they wanted to adopt one more child, they have submitted an application to the Italian authorities along with reports and other documents, such as Home Study report (HSR), their psychological evaluation and personological evaluation, commitment for adoption, third party opinions/affidavits etc. and thereafter, they have filed an application before the Juvenile Court of Milan, Italy with No.227/2018 A1; the said Italian Court was pleased to pass a decree dtd. 15/5/2019 declaring that the petitioners are suitable to adopt a single foreign minor child and that the adoption process must be initiated within a period of one year from the date of decree; pursuant to the said decree, the "Association Mehala-Child and Family', which is the authorised foreign adoption agency (AFAA) has registered them in the Child Adoption Resource Information and Guidance System (CARINGS) portal with Registration No.EITA201993067 and further recommended the petitioners to the Indian Authorities for the purpose of adopting a child; the 2nd respondent-CARA has found the petitioners eligible under Sec. 57 of the Act and Regulation 5 of the Regulations, 2017 and the said AFAA has recommended a child by name 'Yesu Babu' through CARINGS portal for adoption; petitioners accepted the recommendation by signing and returning the Child Study Report and the child's medical examination report on 26/6/2020 sent by the Indian Authorities; the said child is an abandoned child, deserted in infancy by his biological parents and referred to the Child Welfare Committee in the year 2015; the child was admitted to the 4th respondent, vide order dtd. 13/10/2015 under Sec. 38 of the Act; the child is a child with special needs and his psycho diagnostic report dtd. 11/6/2019 states that he was 'not able to understand instructions', 'not able to sit at one place' and 'not able to speak age appropriately'; recommendation was made to the speech therapy and for behaviour therapy; the District Child Protection Unit and the Child Care Institution have submitted a declaration to the effect that they have made restoration efforts, to find the biological parents as required under Sec. 40(1) of the Act, but nobody approached them claiming to be biological parents; consequently, the Child Welfare Committee has issued a certificate dtd. 26/4/2019 declaring that the child 'Yesu Babu' is legally free for adoption and he was registered in the CARINGS portal with No.AP40SAA-0115 for adoption under Sec. 56(1) of the Act; the 2nd respondent-CARA has given no objection certificate No.ITA/2019/659-CARA dtd. 5/8/2020 under the Adoption Regulations, 2017 in favour of the proposed adoption.

(3.) As the petitioners who are prospective adoptive parents have satisfied all the conditions under Sec. 59 of the Act and other Indian laws and regulations, the 4th respondent, who is the recognised specialised adoption agency under Sec. 65 of the Act and the 3rd respondent, have together filed an adoption OP before the Judge, Family Court, Vijayawada and the same was stamped on 26/2/2021; petitioners were joined as the 'prospective adoptive parents' in the said AOP; the 2nd respondent and the CCI have also filed several other petitions/applications, such as an affidavit under Sec. 26(2) of the CPC by the 3rd respondent, petition under Order V Rule 3 CPC requesting for issuance of summons to the petitioners so as to enable them to apply for an Indian visa etc. and all the applications were stamped by the 5th respondent's Superintendent as 'received'; but the Superintendent has been repeatedly returning the documents filed by respondents 3 and 4 with unreasonable objections; in the month of April, 2020, it was returned with an objection that 'no physical appearance till 1/5/2021 due to COVID-19 pandemic'; but as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 'Laxmi Kant Pandey vs. Union of India 1985 Supp SCC 701 ' insistence on the physical appearance of the parents is unnecessary; petitioners again arrived in India on 21/10/2021 and planned to stay here until mid-November with the hope that the Family Court may process their application, which is pending since February, 2021; petitioners were informed that the Judge of the Family Court was on leave till 3/11/2021 and that the Superintendent of the 5th respondent Court again took an objection on 23/10/2021 stating that 'document No.13 has to be filed, whereas , petitioners have filed the same in the month of February itself and the 5th respondent has stamped it as 'received' on 26/2/2021; the prospective adoptive parents have been put to lot of inconvenience and agony and the prospective adoptee child is also being subjected to confusion and uncertainty. Hence the writ petition.