IMPORTANT POINT
Guidelines lacking statutory force cannot retroactively invalidate prior appointments, and undue delay in seeking relief can bar claims.

JUDGMENT :

Jay Sengupta, J.

1. These are applications praying for direction upon the respondent authorities, inter alia, to issue necessary appointment and allotment of foodgrains for distributors amongst beneficiaries under the mid-day-meal scheme in the district of Birbhum.

2. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted as follows. In 1995, the Central Government introduced a benevolent scheme for the students in the age group between 6 to 14 years to provide mid-day-meals to reduce the rate of drop out students in schools. Like the other States, the Government of West Bengal also started to implement the said scheme. For its implementation, the State Government also formed a scheme, only allowing the distributor/carrying contractor of the Food & Supplies Department to transport the Mid-Day-Meal rice from the FCI Godown to the respective schools. In 2006 last such scheme was framed by the State Government in the year 2006. Clause 5.3 of the said scheme dealt with the provisions of lifting of food grains, which suggested that the food grains allocated to District would be lifted by the Distributors/carrying contractors of the Food & Supplies Department for transportation of the nearest FCI Godown to every school. The petitioner was an M.R. Distributor of F & S Department of Nalhati – II Development Block under Bolpur Sub-Division in the District of Birbhum. There were 34 M.R. distributors in Birbhum District. Out of them, 16 M.R. distributors were engaged as carrying contractors of Mid-Day-Meal rice. On 04.10.2005 in a meeting, it was proposed that the remaining 18 M.R. Distributors of Birbhum District should also be engaged as carrying contractors of Mid-Day-Meal rice. On 06.10.2005 the District Magistrate, Birbhum approved such proposal. On 09.01.2006 the District Controller (F & S) Birbhum) prepared the said list to the concerned B.D.O.s. On 06.02.2006 after obtaining approval from the District Magistrate and the Sabhadhipati, Birbhum Zilla Parishad, all the B.D.O.’s were directed to take necessary steps, allowing those listed M.R. Distributor to lift food grains under Mid-Day-Meal Scheme of their concerned blocks. On 30.03.2006 the Additional District Magistrate (Dev), Birbhum instructed the SDO, Bolpur to take necessary action for issuance of appointment letters. On 05.07.2006 since remaining M.R. Distributors of the District had not been appointed as carrying contractor despite such instructions, the Additional District Magistrate, Birbhum wrote letter to the SDO’s to submit report. On 15.11.2006, since the BDOs did not issue appointment letters to the remaining Distributors, out of total 18 Distributors, 17 Distributors including the petitioner jointly moved a writ petition being AST No.2549 of 2006 (Pralhad Agarwala – Vs – State of West Bengal & Ors.), impleading all the existing carrying contractors, including the private respondent herein and by an order dated 15.11.2006, this Court was pleased to pass an order directing the State respondents to issue respective appointment letters in favour of the petitioner and once such appointments were made, the writ petitioners would be entitled to receive the monthly allocation of the food grains. On 07.02.2007 the private respondents of the said writ petition including the private respondents herein, filed an mandamus appeal against the said order dated 15.11.2006 and the Division Bench by an order dated 07.02.2007 declined to interfere with the said order. In terms of the said order of the Single Judge dated 15.11.2006, affirmed by the Division Bench, out of total 17 writ petitioners, 14 were granted licence as carrying contractor of Mid-Day-Meal rice, excepting the writ petitioner herein and one Basirul Hassan and M/s. Madan Mohan Dutta & Sons. At present out of total 34 M.R. Distributors of Birbhum District, 31 had been functioning as carrying contractors under Mid-Day-Meal Scheme and in place of the writ petitioner and the two others, three outsiders including the p