Apex Court refuses to pass directions for implementation of Community Kitchen in light of existence of National Food Security Act as well as other schemes for providing food & nutritional security
Justices Bela M. Trivedi & Pankaj Mithal [22-02-2024]

Read Order: ANUN DHAWAN& ORS v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS [SC-WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.1103 OF 2019]

Tulip Kanth

New Delhi, February 23, 2024:While observing that the National Food Security Act, 2013and other welfare schemes are in force to ensure access to adequate quantity of quality food at affordable prices, the Supreme Court has refused to direct the States/UTs to implement the concept of Community Kitchens.

The Division Bench of Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Pankaj Mithalwas considering a petition filed by the petitioners claiming to be the social activists, seeking various directions against the States and Union Territories to formulate a scheme to implement the concept of Community Kitchens to combat hunger, malnutrition and starvation and the deaths resulting thereof. The petitioners had also sought direction against the National Legal Services Authority to formulate a scheme in order to further the provisions of Article 50(1)A of the Constitution, as also against the Central Government to create a National Food Grid beyond the scope of the Public Distribution Scheme.

By an earlier order, the Top Court had directed the Union of India to interact with the concerned stakeholders for consideration of the Community Kitchens Scheme or any other similar schemes relating to Community Kitchens which are already in operation in different states. Various orders were also passed by the Court directing the States to attend the meetings managed by the Union of India for exploring the possibility of framing up of the Community Kitchens Scheme.

The States/Union Territories had filed their counter affidavits/ responses stating in detail about the schemes adopted and enforced in their respective states like Poshan Abhiyan, Take Home Ration, Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Anna Yojana, Mid-Day Meal, Open Market Sales Scheme, One Nation One Ration Card Scheme, Annapurna Scheme, Antyodaya Anna Yojana etc. also stating that some of the schemes are monitored by the Integrated Child Development Services and Integrated Tribal Development Program.

The Union of India had also submitted that the Government is committed to focus on combating hunger and malnutrition by implementing various schemes through the State Governments to enhance the food security. As per the submission, the Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Anna Yojana was launched to address economic disruptions and is extended to free grain provision to Antyodaya Anna Yojana and Priority Households to alleviate poverty burdens; Atma Nirbhar Bharat Package allocated additional food grain for migrants during the Covid-19 crisis; Pradhan Mantri Poshan Shakti Nirman Scheme aims to improve nutrition among school students and accordingly allocates food grains; Scheme for Adolescent Girls focuses to improve the health and nutrition of adolescent girls aged 11 to 18 years; Annapurna Scheme provides indigent senior citizens with free food grains.

It was the case of the petitioners that the Union of India and the States had taken the steps to combat hunger, malnutrition and starvation by implementing various Central and State Government Schemes, however according to them even if the hunger, malnutrition or starvation may not necessarily result in death, the Centre and States have the constitutional duty to ensure basic sustainability of human life.

ASG R. Bala submitted that this being not an adversarial litigation, the details of schemes, programmes, policies and other measures taken by the Central Government and the State Governments had been submitted to satisfy the conscience of the court that they had successfully implemented the schemes for protecting the fundamental rights of the citizens.

“It is significant to note that though the Constitution of India does not explicitly provide for Right to food, the fundamental Right to life enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution does include Right to live with human dignity and right to food and other basic necessities. The Article 47 of the Constitution also provides that the State shall regard the raising of level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of public health as among its primary duties”, the Bench said.

The Top Court noticed that keeping in view the goal of eradicating extreme poverty and hunger as one of the goals of United Nations, and keeping in view the constitutional guarantees for ensuring food security of the people as also for improving the nutritional status of the population, especially of women and children, the Parliament has enacted the National Food Security Act, 2013 (NFSA). The said Act has been implemented in all States/ UTs. One of the guiding principles of the Act is its “life cycle approach, wherein special provisions have been made for pregnant women and lactating mothers and children in the age group of 6 months to 14 years, by entitling them to receive nutritious meals free of cost, through a widespread network of Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) centers, called Anganwadi centers under the ICDS schemes, and also through the schools under Mid-day Meal (MDM) scheme.

Noting that there is a systematic legal framework provided under the NFSA for the implementation of the schemes and programmes like Targeted Public Distribution System, Mid-day Meal Scheme, Integrated Child Development Services and Maternity Cash Entitlement along with a Monitoring Mechanism and a Grievance Redressal Mechanism, and the States/UTs having also implemented various other schemes and programmes under the said Act, the Bench was not inclinedto propose to direct the States/UTs to implement the concept of Community Kitchens as prayed for by the petitioners in the instant petition.

Referring to the judgment in Directorate of Film Festivals and Others vs. Gaurav Ashwin Jain and Others) [LQ/SC/2007/485],the Bench opined that legality of the policy, and not the wisdom or soundness of the policy, would be the subject of judicial review.

“As elaborated earlier, when the NFSA with a ‘right based approach’ for providing food and nutritional security, is in force and when other welfare schemes under the said Act have also been framed and implemented by the Union of India and the States, to ensure access to adequate quantity of quality food at affordable prices to people to live a life with dignity, we do not propose to give any further direction in that regard”, the Bench held.

Having not examined whether the concept of Community Kitchens is a better or wiser alternative available to the States to achieve the object of NFSA, the Bench left this matter open forthe States/UTs to explore alternative welfare schemes as may be permissible under the NFSA. With such observations, the petition was disposed of.