Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K High Court Illicit Affair Alone Cannot Make a Man Guilty of Abetting Suicide: Supreme Court Quashes Charge Under Section 306 IPC Landlord Cannot Be Punished for Slowness of Courts: Supreme Court on Bonafide Need in Eviction Suits Expect States To Enact Laws Regulating Unlicensed Money Lenders Charging Exorbitant Interest Contrary To 'Damdupat': Supreme Court Accused Who Skips Lok Adalat After Seeking It, Then Cries 'Prejudice', Cannot Claim Apprehension of Denial of Justice: Madras High Court Refuse To Transfer Case IO Cannot Act Without Prior Sanction: Gujarat High Court Grants Bail, Flags Procedural Lapse in Religious Conversion Case Electricity Board Strictly Liable For Unprotected Transformer, 7-Year-Old Cannot Be Guilty Of Contributory Negligence: Allahabad High Court POCSO Conviction Can't Stand For Offence Not Charged: Delhi High Court Member of Unlawful Assembly Cannot Escape Conviction By Claiming He Only Carried a Lathi and Struck No One: Allahabad High Court Jurisdiction Cannot Be Founded On Casual Or Incidental Facts If Not Have A Direct Nexus With The Lis: : Delhi High Court Clause Stating Disputes "Can" Be Settled By Arbitration Is Not A Binding Arbitration Agreement: Supreme Court State Cannot Plead Helplessness Against Sand Mafia; Supreme Court Warns Of Paramilitary Deployment, Complete Mining Ban In MP & Rajasthan Authority Cannot Withdraw Subsidy Citing Non-Compliance When It Ignored Repeated Requests For Inspection: Supreme Court Out-of-State SC/ST/OBC Candidates Cannot Claim Rajasthan's Reservation Benefits in NEET PG Counselling: Rajasthan High Court Supreme Court Upholds Haryana's Regularisation Of Qualified Ad Hoc Staff As 'One-Time Measure', Strikes Down Futuristic Cut-Offs

Policy Ensures More Special Needs Children Get Adopted: Delhi High Court Upholds CARA’s Decision on Retrospective Application of Adoption Regulations, 2022

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The High Court of Delhi today dismissed a batch of writ petitions challenging the retrospective application of the Adoption Regulations, 2022, pertaining to the eligibility of Prospective Adoptive Parents (PAPs) with two or more biological children. The court held that the Central Adoption Resource Authority’s (CARA) decision to apply the 2022 Regulations retroactively is valid and not arbitrary.

Legal Point of the Judgment: The core issue adjudicated was the validity of CARA’s decision to retrospectively apply Adoption Regulations, 2022, to pending adoption applications of registered PAPs, altering the eligibility criteria.

Facts and Issues: Petitioners, registered under CARA as PAPs under the 2017 Regulations, contended that the retrospective application of the 2022 Regulations, disqualifying them from adopting a ‘normal’ child due to having two biological children, was arbitrary and violated Article 14 of the Constitution. The 2022 Regulations only allow such couples to adopt special needs or hard-to-place children.

Court’s Assessment: Justice Subramonium Prasad, in his detailed judgment, held that the retrospective application of the 2022 Regulations does not amount to a retrospective enactment of subordinate legislation. It was clarified that registration as PAPs does not guarantee the right to adopt a specific category of children. The court observed, “The policy has been brought in only to ensure that more and more children with special needs get adopted.”

Further, the court distinguished the Petitioners’ reliance on various precedents, emphasizing that the rights of childless couples or those with one child in adopting normal children should be balanced against those of PAPs with two or more children. The judgment noted, “A balanced approach ought to be welcomed which attempts to reduce the wait for parents with a single child or devoid of even that, in anticipation of adoption.”

Decision: Dismissing the writ petitions, the court affirmed the procedural and retroactive nature of Regulation 5(7) of the 2022 Regulations. It held that no vested right to adopt a ‘normal’ child had accrued to the Petitioners at the pre-referral stage, thereby validating CARA’s decision.

Date of Decision: 16th February 2024

DEBARATI NANDEE VS MS. TRIPTI GURHA & ANR

Latest Legal News