: Two months after the Madras High Court warned of judicial intervention into the appointment of Kalyani Mathivanan, former Vice-Chancellor of Madurai Kamaraj University, as the Chairperson of the Tamil Nadu Commission for Protection of Child Rights (TNCPCR), the State government has decided to recall the appointment.
The Advocate-General of Tamil Nadu made a submission in this regard to the First Bench of Chief Justice S.K. Kaul and Justice M. Sundar. “The government has taken a considered decision to recall the order appointing the Chairperson of TNCPCR and to issue a proper advertisement calling for applications, whereafter the fresh applications would be processed,” Advocate-General R. Muthukumaraswamy said.
Assuring that an appropriate Government Order would be issued within seven days, the Advocate-General said that urgent steps would be taken to fill vacancies in the district-level Child Welfare Committees and Juvenile Justice Boards.
Recording the submission, the Bench posted the PIL moved by activist A. Narayanan seeking to streamline and strengthen the working of the TNCPCR to March 10 for hearing.
Mired in controversy
On September 1, 2016, the State government appointed Ms. Kalyani Mathivanan as Chairperson of the TNCPCR. Opposing the move, the petitioner approached the High Court alleging that the appointment was made in violation of the procedure as planned under the Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005.
Concurring with the submission, the Bench had directed the government to produce the records in respect of the recruitment process and noted that the court would examine the records as to whether suo motu proceedings should be initiated questioning the appointment.
Subsequently, the State government submitted that a few applications were received from prospective candidates and the appointment was made after scrutinising them.
However, the Bench refused to accept the contention and said: “It is obvious that the process has not been followed. We put [the question to] the Advocate-General whether he would like to review the issue himself and advise the government appropriately or would it be necessary for judicial intervention.”