IMPORTANT POINT
Terms of the impugned tender run contrary to PUCL as well as the policy framed by the Government of India.

JUDGMENT :

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellants/petitioners have questioned the judgment and order dated 11.7.2016 passed by the High Court of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad and order dated 15.03.2016 of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Nagpur. The petitioners in the writ petition filed before the High Court i.e. W.P. No. 3359/2016 questioned the tender notice dated 08.03.2016 issued by the State of Maharashtra inviting tender for multilevel contract and for supply of ready to cook food to Anganwadi Centres as supplementary nutritional food for children, pregnant women and lactating mothers, adolescents girls under Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS Scheme). The conditions were questioned by the appellants/petitioners being arbitrary, unreasonable against the spirit of the decision of this Court in W.P. (C) No. 196/2001.

3. The question as stated in the appeal is that the local self- help groups are sought to be ousted by the money power of large corporate houses with the help of the State, the decision by this Court in PUCL vs. Union of India, W.P. (C) No. 196/2001 is being violated and that of Shagun Mahila Udyogik Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, passed in Civil Appeal No. 7104/2011. It is urged that the local organization of women (Mahila Mandals) and self-help groups are best suited to give local food and other necessary efforts to provide supplementary nutritional food for children. The so-called Mahila Mandals who have applied under the tender that has been floated is, in fact, large industrial units and nothing to do with the Mahila Mandals and self-help groups. They are close to certain political personalities in the State of Maharashtra. Industrialists are not supplying good food as compared to these Mahila Mandals in different parts of the country, as accepted by the Union of India in its Report. The imposition of the unrealistic conditions made it impossible for the Mahila Mandals to compete. Thus, the State is entertaining fake business units and is acting contrary to the various decisions of this Court and the spirit of the Scheme.

4. The principal issue raised is whether contracts for the supply of such food for Anganwadis should be given to local Mahila Mandals run along democratic lines with local women participating or whether such contracts ought to be given by the State to large corporates/contractors under the guise of the conditions of the tender. In PUCL vs. Union of India and Others, W.P. (C) No. 196 of 2001, this Court has passed the order, on 07.10.2004, inter-alia to the following effect:-

"The contractors shall not be used for the supply of nutrition in Anganwadis and preferably ICDS funds shall be spent by making use of village communities, self-help groups and Mahila Mandals for buying of grains and preparation of meals."

5. On 13.12.2006, in PUCL (supra), the Court inter alia passed the following order:-

“......Chief Secretaries of all State Governments/UTs are directed to submit affidavits giving details of the steps that have been taken with regard to the order of this Court of October 7th, 2004 directing that "contractors shall not be used for supply of nutrition in Anganwadis and preferably ICDS funds shall be spent by making use of village communities, self-help groups and Mahila Mandals for buying of grains and preparation of meals." Chief Secretaries of all State Governments/UTs. must indicate a time-frame within which the decentralization of the supply of SNP through local community shall be made.”

6. Thereafter, Food Safety Ordinance, 2013 was promulgated on 5.7.2013 in which provision has been made for the benefit of children in the age group of 6 months to 14 years. The Ordinance which has taken the shape of the Act i.e. National Food Security Act, 2013 (for short ‘the Act of 2013’) aims at to reform the public distribution system and brin