1 wp7263-11 jpc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 7263 OF 2011 Shrihari Gokhale and another .. Petitioners Versus The State of Maharashtra ... Respondents Mr. Divya Chavan for the petitioners Mr. S.D.Rayrikar, AGP for respondent No.1 CORAM : R. Y. GANOO, J. DATED : 10rd October, 2011 P.C. 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. 2. Mr. Rayrikar, the learned AGP waives service for respondent no. 1. By consent, the petition is taken up for hearing. 3. The petitioners applied to the District Court for adoption of the child by name Guru. The said Miscellaneous Application No. 804/2010 was allowed by the learned District Judge-11, Pune by order dated 29th April, 2011. The Petitioners, who are husband and wife, were declared as adoptive parents of the said minor and other necessary orders were 2 wp7263-11 passed. The petitioners are aggrieved by the portion of the observations in the impugned order dated 29th April, 2011 which reads as follows: "Applicant no.2 is doing service in American Company and is residing at America. Applicant No.3 is residing with her adoptive daughters at India. There is possibility of shifting applicant no.2 at American with whole family, but permission to take minor Guru renamed as Rahulguru Shrihari Gokhale to abroad is not granted." 4. Perusal of the operative part of the order passed on 29th April, 2011 shows that the condition as not to take the minor out of India is not forming part of the operative order. If this is so, even if there are some observation in the body of the order, this observation will not be binding upon the petitioners. In any case, petitioner nos.1 and 2 are husband and wife. Petitioner No.1 is presently at USA for the purpose of his job and it is quite possible that at some stage the petitioners may like to settle at America, if appropriate Visa is secured by the petitioners. The learned judge has granted the request of adoptive parents as per the Miscellaneous Application No. 804 of 2010. In such a case, to impose condition that the minor child shall not be taken abroad is something which is contrary to the very purpose of the adoption done by the petitioners. It is also required to be mentioned that for putting a 3 wp7263-11 condition as aforesaid, no reasons are mentioned in the said order. In my view the observation made by the learned District Judge-11 Pune which is quoted aforesaid are required to be set aside. Accordingly, the following order is passed to dispose of the petition. i. Observations made in the impugned order dated 29th April, 2011 which are reproduced in para 3 of this order is set aside. ii. Operative part of the order dated 29th April, 2004 need not be interfered with. iii. There shall be no order as to costs. (R. Y. GANOO, J.)