The Dharamsala-based Tibetan Children’s Village (TCV) — started by Dalai lama’s elder sister Tsering Dolma Takla in 1960 — has come under the judicial scanner.
The TCV, catering to 15,000 Tibetan children (mostly orphans) up to 14 years of age through 30 institutions across five States in the country, neither has a valid guardianship order under the Guardian and Wards Act nor is registered as a children’s home as mandated by the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act 2000.
This has come to light after the foreign sponsor of a six-year-old, Master Tenzin Tsering, dragged the TCV to court charging it with ignoring the wish and interest of the child and trying to force the foster parents to hand over the child to another sponsor. As late as on February 7, 2013, even the Supreme Court had ordered mandatory registration of all children homes in the country.
The children at TCV are up for foreign sponsorship worth US$40 per month (US$480 annually). Registered as an autonomous society under the Societies Registration Act, TCV caters to Tibetan refugees in India besides imparting education and maintaining children under its care and protection.
Having taken a grim view of the Himachal Pradesh Government’s inaction to enquire into the affairs at TCV, the Himachal High Court, on August 16, gave one final opportunity to the State to come clean on the allegations against the institution, particularly with regard to mandatory registration of children homes under the Juvenile Justice Act.
At stake is TCV’s `50-crore budget that sponsorships bring annually. One child can even have multiple sponsorships. In a document submitted by TCV in the Himachal High Court, it admitted, “The child sponsorship programme forms the financial lifeline for the operating expenses.”
Master Tsering was brought to the TCV as an abandoned child when he was less than two years of age. His sponsor was a Tibetan composer Karma lama, who along with his wife of Italian origin Paola Pivi, decided to adopt the boy and even paid the sponsorship fee in August 2012. To adopt the child, they had to wait till the boy turned 14. But the rules at TCV permit the sponsor to keep the child within India during the two-month winter vacation from December-February.
It was the first vacation for Tsering, a student at TCV, with his foster parents. But mid-way through a terse email in January this year, the TCV demanded the couple to return the child. The couple approached the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) in Delhi, which ordered an investigation by the Himachal Pradesh Government into their complaint. It was never done.
Meanwhile, the couple approached the Family Court at Kangra in Dharamsala fearing that the child may be illegally taken back by the institution. TCV president Tsewang Yeshi in his mail had threatened to lodge kidnapping and illegal detention case against them for not returning the child. Though the Kangra court initially allowed custody of the child to the couple, however, by a detailed order passed on August 1 the foster parents were directed to return the child to TCV latest before September 1.
Faced with a court order, the couple then knocked the doors of the Himachal High Court, which stayed the Kangra court's order and gave the State one last time to enquire into TCV's affairs.
Upset over the State's lack of response, the NCPCR too shot another reminder on August 13 seeking compliance of its order.
The couple, through their lawyers Anil and Ranjit Malhotra, questioned the TCV's sponsorship programme where the wish and interest of children is not accounted.
Speaking to The Pioneer, Anil Malhotra said, "The courts in these matters go by the paramount interest of the child. The child is currently provided education and care by his foster parents."
In their complaint to the NCPCR, the couple alleged that the TCV was interested to hand over the child to one Tashi Choedon, a resident of France.
The TCV, on the other hand, is awaiting the final verdict of the court. TCV general secretary Thupten Dorji, when contacted by The Pioneer, said, "The lower court order is in our favour. There is no need to publicise since the matter is pending judgement."
When asked about the allegation by the couple alleging the institution was not conforming to norms under the JJ Act and Guardians and Wards Act, he added, "They are foreigners. How long can they do thisIJ We will go up to the High Court and Supreme Court."