Read Time: 10 minutes

The Madras High Court has directed the Tamil Nadu Commission of Child Rights to issue fresh summons to the Isha Yoga Centre in Velliangiri to conduct inquiry on "Vedic education being imparted to children as per the Guru-Shishya parampara."

The Single Bench of Justice SM Subramaniam noted that the Court cannot interfere at the present stage and the inquiry must go on,

“At the enquiry stage itself, the petitioner approached this Court, which cannot be appreciated as they are expected to avail the opportunities to be provided by the competent authorities for the purpose of establishing their case and to defend the allegations against them.”

The Bench further stated that, the suo-moto powers conferred on the Commission are to ensure that the educational institutions function under the recognized scheme of education pattern.

'Isha Foundation' is a Trust which was founded by 'Sadhguru' Jaggi Vasudev in 1992, inter alia, it runs 9 schools in rural areas, mostly in Tsunami affected areas, and has adopted about 31 government schools under its 'School Adoption Programme'.

It has been stated by the Administrator of the Trust, the Petitioner in the present case, that the children who are all undergoing training in the Foundation are taught basic elements of English and elementary Mathematics, required for living living imparts that the Gurukula imparts Vedic knowledge following the gurukula system of education, where students lived and learned in proximity of their guru, under the Guru-Shishya Parampara.

The Commission had issued suo motu notice to the Centre to inquire whether there has been any deprivation or violation of child rights there.

Questioning the validity of the summons issued by the Tamil Nadu Commission for Protection of Child Rights under Section 14 (1) of the Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005, Isha Yog Centre, run under the banner of Isha Foundation, had approached the Court challenging the same.

The Counsel for the petitioner stated that on receipt of the impugned summons issued in the year 2016, the Administrator had approached the Respondent on the day and time mentioned along with the files.

“However, the respondents have not heard the matter on the particular day and there was a delay and therefore, the Administrator returned back. The petitioner states that the authorities had pre-determined their mind during the relevant point of time and they were not ready to hear the case of the petitioner with an open mind. Thus, the petitioner has chosen to file the present writ petition.”

The Government Advocate reiterated that the actions were taken in accordance with provisions of law and therefore, the petitioner is bound to respond to the summons and submit their defense in the manner known to law.

“In the present case, the summons were issued under Section 14(1) of the Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005. In the matter of Deprivation and Violation of Child Rights, Suo-Moto complaint was taken by Tamil Nadu Commission for Protection of Child Rights under Section 13 (1) (j) (k) of the Act.”

Taking into account the factual matrix of the present case, the Bench opined that,

“No writ petition needs to be entertained for challenging the summons issued under the statute in a routine manner. However, such writ petition is entertainable, if the summons are issued by an incompetent authority having no jurisdiction or an allegation of malafides are raised.”

The Bench further noted that,

“Even in case of raising an allegation of malafides, the authority against whom, such an allegation has been raised, must be implemented as a party respondent in the writ proceedings. Thus, the petitioner has to submit their explanation / objections along with the relevant documents to establish that they have not violated any of the provisions of the Statutes or infringing any of the rights of the children under the Act.”

While disposing of the writ the Bench passed the following order –

(1) The respondent is directed to issue fresh summons to the petitioner, fixing date and time, enabling the writ petitioner to appear and submit their explanations / objections along with documents, if any, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005.

(2) The petitioner is directed to submit their explanations / objections along with relevant documents, if any, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the summons to be issued by the respondent.

(3) The respondent is directed to conduct an enquiry by 7/9 W.P.No.35102 of 2016 affording opportunity to the writ petitioner and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of issuance of summons by the respondent.

Cause Title – Administrator, Isha Yoga Centre vs TN Commission for Protection of Child Rights