Delayed implementation of food law challenged in SC

Administrative orders have delayed rollout of the law, says PUCL

A petition challenging alleged illegal delay in implementation of many benefits under the National Food Security Act by the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government has been filed by the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) before the Supreme Court. The petitioners have pleaded for immediate implementation of the law by the Centre and the state governments.

The law, passed by the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government, required that its provisions be implemented within 365 days of the passage of the legislation. But the government has delayed implementation of law through administrative orders. PUCL has challenged the legality of delaying the application of the law and the provisions through executive orders when the main law provided otherwise. They have said any delay in implementation required a legislative amendment by Parliament.

PUCL is the petitioner is the on-going case in the Supreme Court in which the judiciary had passed several orders over years, expanding the food security benefits. The court had suggested the PIL(public-interest suit) on implementation of the Act could be filed separately before it.

The petitioners have said the law was to be implemented by July 5, 2014, but administrative orders passed by the government in June 2014, October 2014 and March 2015 delayed the law from coming into force.

The law provided for a minimum Rs 6,000 cash benefit to pregnant and lactating women universally. But the government has instead proposed to do so in a phased manner, making the scheme that would channel the cash transfer conditional on its decision to provide funds or not.

Similarly the ICDS(integrated child development services) scheme and the mid-day meal, scheme which too fall under the law, now have not been fully implemented, the petitioners have pointed out.

They have pleaded that the list of beneficiaries according to the Socio Economic Caste Census for subsidised grain be finalised immediately and the grains be distributed as in law, based on objective criteria to identify the beneficiaries.

It has asked that the maternity benefit scheme be universalised as required by law and not be subject to conditions put by the government through executive orders. It has asked that the government provide adequate funds and grain to make it possible to implement the provisions of the law. This is expected to challenge the decision of the Union government to cut on funds for centrally sponsored schemes under the 2015-16 Budget even before it rejigs the financing responsibility between the Centre and the states.

While asking for full implementation of the ICDS scheme as well, the petitioners have pleaded that as provided by law all children between the age of six months to six years and all pregnant and lactating women should be provided appropriate nutrition at the anganwadis. Similarly, as per the law, they have asked children between the ages of six and 14 years approaching a school should be provided mid-day meals.