The Supreme Court today imposed costs on several states for not filling up vacancies in State Commissions for Protection of Child Rights (SCPCR) and directed them to comply with its earlier order.
A bench of Justices M B Lokur and Deepak Gupta imposed Rs 50,000 cost each on Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Delhi, Chandigarh, Maharashtra and Telangana and asked them to file affidavits in two weeks stating compliance of the order.
The apex court expressed its displeasure over non- compliance of its order saying more than three months have passed but the states have not yet filed compliance reports.
The apex court, which posted the matter for hearing on August 9, had on April 5 pulled up the states for not filling up the vacancies in the commission and directed them to do so within four weeks.
It had observed that despite a law enacted by Parliament, there were states which did not have fully operational SCPCR for the protection and welfare of children and there were vacancies as well.
The court had said that some states had not even given the names of the chairperson or members of the SCPS to the Centre rendering it to draw an inference that they do not have an operational commission.
Centre had earlier said that various states were in the process of appointing or re-appointing the chairperson and members of the commission while in states like Maharashtra, the process of appointment was at the "final stage".
It was said that Goa, Sikkim and Lakshadweep had not yet given the details to the Centre while Arunachal Pradesh has informed that all the members of the commission were there.
It had earlier asked the Centre to ensure that the state commission for protection of child rights was in place in every state and union territory.
It had noted that several issues, including constitution of SCPCR, were required to be considered.
The court had also pointed out issues like establishment of juvenile justice board (JJBs) in every district and establishment of child welfare committees, for deliberation.
The bench, which was hearing a PIL seeking implementation of the Juvenile Justice Act and its rules, had earlier questioned the functioning of the JJBs and sought details about the pendency of cases, frequency of sittings, vacancy of posts and other related issues.
The court's directions had come on a plea which was filed in 2005 by petitioner Sampurna Behrua about the governments' apathy in implementing the welfare legislation.
(This story has not been edited by Business Standard staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)