JUDGMENT Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice (Oral) : Petitioner, being the sister of the mother of Master Ramesh, who is alleged to be minor, has filed the present writ petition before this Court and has prayed that necessary directions be passed enabling the said minor child-ward to have education and enjoy all the fundamental rights to which the minor child is entitled to in terms of the Constitution of India and also to draw action against respondents No. 3 to 5, as the law warrants, for violation of the fundamental rights of the minor child. 2. Notices were issued on 5th June, 2014; petitioner was allowed to retain the custody of the minor child-ward till the next date of hearing, i.e. 3rd July, 2014 and respondent No. 2- Deputy Commissioner, Shimla, was asked to provide aid to the said child-ward as per the Rules occupying the field and also to explore the possibility of providing education to the said child-ward in a school. 3. All the respondents have filed reply. 4. The minor child-ward is present in Court. We have an interaction with him and are of the considered view that he is old enough to form an intelligent preference in terms of Section 17 (3) of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). He has made a statement that he wants to settle with his parents. 5. The father of the minor ward, i.e., respondent No. 3, is also present in Court. He has stated that he is a poor labourer; was not in a position to maintain the minor-ward and that was the reason the minor ward left the home. 6. After examining the pleadings of the parties, we are of the considered view that the mother has the first right to retain the custody of the child-ward and the child-ward has also made preference to settle with his parents. 7. In the given circumstances, we hand over the custody of the minor child-ward to his parents. The father-respondent No. 3 is directed to execute a bond/undertaking to the effect that he will maintain the child-ward and take all steps to save his rights. 8. Prima facie, it appears that the father-respondent No. 3 is poor. 7. In the given circumstances, we hand over the custody of the minor child-ward to his parents. The father-respondent No. 3 is directed to execute a bond/undertaking to the effect that he will maintain the child-ward and take all steps to save his rights. 8. Prima facie, it appears that the father-respondent No. 3 is poor. Keeping in view the poverty of the father-respondent No. 3 read with order, dated 5th June, 2014, we direct respondent No. 2- Deputy Commissioner, Shimla, to provide monthly aid to the minor- ward, as per the Rules occupying the field; also to bear the expenses of his admission as well as schooling and further to get admission of the minor child-ward done in a nearby school where his parents are living. Respondent No. 2-Deputy Commissioner, Shimla, is directed to submit the report within two weeks. 9. The child-ward present in Court is allowed to move to his father's home alongwith his father-respondent No. 3, who is present in Court. 10. The writ petition is disposed of alongwith all pending applications, as indicated hereinabove.