Mithilesh Kumar Yadav vs State of Bihar

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(Pat) 543

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH and SHAILENDRA SINGH, JJ.
(11.10.2022)
CWJC No.8807, 6489, 7281, 8177, 8595, 8875, 8942, 8945, 8976, 9202, 9650, 9704, 9921, 9972 of 2022
Mithilesh Kumar Yadav & Ors. (in 8807)
Sanjiv Kumar Suman & Ors. (in 6489)
Birendra Singh Yadav & Ors. (in 7281)
Harendra Prasad Singh @ Harendra Pd. Singh (in 8177)
Premchand Chaudhary & Ors. (in 8595)
Vineet Kumar Upadhya & Ors. (in 8875)
Avinash Kumar (in 8942)
Arun Kumar & Anr. (in 8945)
Sumant Kumar (in 8976)
Mithilesh Kumar Singh @ Mithlesh Kumar Singh (in 9202)
Prakash Singh (in 9650)
Kamlesh Singh & Ors. (in 9704)
Amresh Kumar Singh & Anr. (in 9921)
Navin Nishchal (in 9972)
Vs.
State of Bihar & Ors. : Respondents
(in all)

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: M/s Y.V. Giri, Sr. Adv., Pranav Kumar, Shrishti Singh, Sumit Kumar (in 8807, 6489, 9650); Ajay Kr. Singh, Subhash Kr. Tiwari (in 7281, 9203); Md. Helal Ahmad (in 8177, 8595); Shashi Bhushan Kumar, Arti Kumari(in 8875); Prakritita Sharma, Krishna Chandra (in 8942, 8976); Sudhir Kumar Sinha (in 8945); Ram Kumar Singh (in 9704); Amit Kumar Anand (in 9921); Jitendra Prasad Singh (in 9972).
For the State : M/s Vikash Kumar, Madanjeet Kumar (in 8807, 6489); Kameshwar Kumar, Arbind Kumar (in 8942)
For the Respondents: M/s Girijish Kumar (in 8807, 6489, 7281); Shilpa Singh(in 8177, 9704); Prabhakar Jha(in 8595, 8976); Subhash Chandra Mishra(in 8875); Jitendra Kr. Roy(in 8945); Madhaw Pd. Yadaw (in 9203); Smt. Binita Singh (in 9650, 9972); Kameshwar Kumar(in 9921).

Headnote:
National Food Security Act, 2013–Section 24–National Program of Nutritional Support to Primary Education, 2006–Clause 3.8–Lifting and distribution of food grain under P.M. Poshan Yojna [Erstwhile National Program of Mid-Day Meal in Schools]–Petitioners admit that vehicles being used by them for lifting and transporting grains under the scheme were not equipped with GPS system–Petitioners themselves have violated terms of agreement–If respondents have taken decision to protect public interest and use vehicles being used by B.S.F.C. in which monitoring system has already been installed, it would not be proper for this Court to invoke its power of judicial review to protect the private interest–As per agreement entered into between parties that there was no guarantee in terms of agreement to take work from them–It cannot be said that by entering into agreement, contractors had earned any vested right to transport or distribute grains to respective schools–Even if agreement would not have been cancelled, respondents were free to award work of lifting and distribution of food grains to any other agency–Despite there being a provision in agreement for installing GPS system, petitioners did not install GPS system in vehicles being used by them for transportation work–Procedural irregularities of non-issuance of show cause in this regard would be inconsequential–Impugned decision would not only save public money but it would also ensure protection of pilferage of food grains. (Paras 21, 22, 23, 25 and 26)
Constitution of India–Art. 226–National Food Security Act, 2013–S. 24–National Program of Nutritional Support to Primary Education, 2006–Clause 3.8–Lifting and distribution of food grain under P.M. Poshan Yojna [Erstwhile National Program of Mid-Day Meal in Schools]–Doctrine of promissory estoppel or legitimate expectation cannot prevail over policy introduced by Government which does not suffer from any perversity, unfairness or unreasonableness or it does not violate any fundamental or enforceable right vested in petitioners–Interference with policy decision would not be warranted unless it is found that policy decision is palpably arbitrary, malafide, irrational or violative of statutory provisions–In instant case, decision to transport food grains by Door Step Delivery Agents of B.S.F.C. is a policy decision which is neither arbitrary nor malafide nor irrational–It is also not violative of any statutory provisions–Impugned decision has been taken by respondents to check pilferage of food grains under the scheme–It would not be proper to interfere with policy decision of State Government which is in larger public interest–Sufficient reason has been assigned by respondents for change in policy of transportation of food grains under the scheme–Change in policy by Government will have overriding effect over private agreement between concerned Government authorities and the respective petitioners–Impugned action on part of respondents cannot be held to be bad simply for reason that said policy is being implemented after 16 years–In instant case, decision taken by State Government to carry out transportation of food grains by Door Step Delivery Agents of B.S.F.C. was in public interest with sound reasoning–Petitioners cannot take plea of violation of principle of natural justice and guarantee under Article 14 of Constitution of India as they themselves have breached terms of agreement–Applications dismissed. (Paras 28, 29, 31, 32, 33 and 35)
Jagdish Mandal Vs. State of Orissa, (2007) 14 SCC 517; APM Terminals B.V. Vs. Union of India, (2011) 6 SCC 756; Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority etc. Vs. Shakuntla Education and Welfare Society, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 655–Relied.
Food Corporation of India Vs. Seil Ltd., (2008) 3 SCC 440; Popcorn Entertainment Vs. City Industrial Development Corporation, (2007) 9 SCC 593; UP Tower Transmission Corporation Ltd. Vs. CG Power & Industrial Solutions Ltd., (2021) 6 SCC 15–Distinguished.

ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH, J.:–Since common questions of law and facts are involved in these writ petitions, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common order.

2. In these writ petitions, the petitioners have sought for the following reliefs:—

(i) For quashing the impugned order dated 25.03.2022 issued under the signature of the Additional Chief Secretary-cum- Chairman, Bihar State Mid-Day Meal Committee by which it was decided that since the vehicles used by the Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation are installed with GPS and handling charges are relatively less and they have fair price shop situated in every village, therefore, the grain to be lifted/distributed under the Pradhanmantri Poshan Shakti Nirman Yojana (for short ‘P.M. Poshan Yojna’) would be executed through the Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation (for short ‘B.S.F.C.’) contractors, so that consistency would be maintained.

(ii) For quashing the order dated 28.03.2022 bearing memo no. 649 dated 06.04.2022 issued under the Chairmanship of the Chief Secretary, State of Bihar wherein it was decided that since the vehicles used by the B.S.F.C. are installed with GPS system and their handling charges are relatively less, therefore, the grain to be lifted/distributed under the P.M. Poshan Yojna would be executed through B.S.F.C. contractors and on the basis of direction of the Chief Secretary the last date is fixed for 30.06.2022 for commencement of lifting and distribution of food grain under the P.M. Poshan Yojna through B.S.F.C. contractors.

(iii) For quashing the letter no.926 dated 09.05.2022 issued under the signature of Additional Chief Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, wherein it has been decided that from 01.06.2022 the lifting and distribution of grain under P.M. Poshan Yojna would be done through the contractors of the B.S.F.C. and the agreements executed with the petitioners and similarly situated persons would be terminated by 30.05.2022.

(iv) For issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the individual orders whereby the agreements in relation to Mid Day Meal contractors including the petitioners have been terminated with effect from 30.05.2022.

(v) For issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent education department not to publish any fresh notice inviting tender for appointing contractor for distribution of grain under P.M. Poshan Yojna or getting the work done thorough the contractor of B.S.F.C.

(vi) For issuance of a direction in the nature of mandamus to the respondents to restore the agreement if any cancelled/terminated pursuant to letter no. 926 dated 21.05.2022 with consequential benefits and compensation and allow the petitioners to continue with the lifting/distribution of grain for a period of two years as stipulated in the respective agreements.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the P.M. Poshan Yojna was earlier known as National Program of Mid-Day Meal in Schools. It is one of the foremost rights based centrally sponsored scheme under the National Food Security Act, 2013 (for short ‘N.F.S. Act’). The primary objective of the scheme is to improve the nutritional status of children studying in classes I-VIII in eligible schools. The scheme addresses two of the pressing problems for majority of children in India, viz. hunger and education by improving the nutritional status of eligible children in Government and Government aided schools. It also encourages poor children belonging to disadvantaged sections to attend school more regularly and help them concentrate on classroom activities.

4. To further the objective of the P.M. Poshan Yojna, implementation of Mid-Day Meal Scheme is executed in every State. In the State of Bihar, implementation of this scheme comes under the Education Department and the Bihar State Mid-Day Meal Scheme Committee has been constituted for the said purpose. In this context, the State Government has issued a letter dated