it should be treated as an integral part of the religious and cultural rights of its followers. As there is no concrete historical written document regarding the establishment or beginning of the custom of Kumari, the life style, food habits, daily routine and the matters of discipline to be observed by Kumaris do not seem to be regulated by any historical document, custom or beliefs. Because those things seems to have evolved in accordance with some unwritten tradition, custom or beliefs, there could not be found any legal source for them. Custom may be a source of law but custom cannot take the form of law. Historical documents may also be treated as a source of law in regard to the religious and cultural rights. But because there is no such written document in respect of the custom of Kumari, this custom seems to exist in practice only in the form of a tradition. If any custom or tradition has caused any infringement to the fundamental rights granted by the Convention on the Child Rights or any other Convention on Human Rights or the Interim Constitution of Nepal, this Court is competent to enforce the enjoyment of rights thus infringed by exercising its extraordinary jurisdiction under Art.107(2) of the Constitution and by issuing a directive order to act in accordance with the law or to take other necessary action. This court may also issue an order prohibiting such custom or tradition by law. In case of conflict between religion and custom, tradition and practice, religion must yield to provide space for social reforms. Religious practices cannot be an impediment to social reforms. Social reform is virtually an eradication of traditional practices and dogmas. The State may prohibit such practices and dogmas if they tend to create impediments to any human rights. The custom of Kamlari can be taken as an example. This custom is prevalent in the Western region of Nepal. Under this custom, poor parents send their children aged 5 or 6 years to the house of the landlords who use them in their household work. The minors used as ‘Kamlari’ are supposed to work as lifelong domestic servants at the house of the masters who have purchased them. Under the custom of Kamlari, the rights granted to children by the Convention on the Child Rights and also the rights granted to them by the Constitution, such as, the educational and cultural rights (Art. 17), the rights relating to women (Art. 20), the right to social justice (Art. 29), etc., are infringed. Kumaris don’t have to do any work for anyone. Since the custom of Kumari seems to have been developed for the purpose of offering ‘puja’ (worship) treating girls as a living godesses, and since the Kumaris are seen to only accept the ‘puja’ and devotion of the devotees the custom of Kumari does not seem to have infringed any rights of children. Kumaris cannot be compared with priests of temples. The priests are required to perform daily worship and prayers in the morning and the evening being present in temples. But the Kumaris are required to be present only on special occasions and at festivals to accept the ‘puja’ of the devotees in their capacity as living Goddesses. And during the rest of the time, there seems to be no restriction imposed on them in regard to the activities such as spending time with the family according to their desire, going to school for study, engaging in recreation, moving about freely, etc. There is an obvious difference between a priest and a Kumari. A priest is appointed by a Trust or the director of a temple. In this sense, there exists a master and servant relationship between 130