IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
BIVAS PATTANAYAK, J.
Setara Begam – Petitioner
Versus
State of West Bengal And Ors. - Respondents
W.P.A. 22281 of 2022, C.A.N. 3 of 2023, W.P.A. 1098 of 2024, W.P.A. 1101 of 2024, W.P.A. 1217 of 2024, W.P.A. 22283 of 2022, C.A.N. 2 of 2023, W.P.A. 23432 of 2023, W.P.A. 23435 of 2023, W.P.A. 23441 of 2023,W.P.A. 4615 of 2024,W.P.A. 6466 of 2024,W.P.A. 6470 of 2024
Decided On : 02-08-2024
JUDGMENT :
Bivas Pattanayak, J.
1. The sole issue raised in the present writ petitions is whether with the promulgation of National Food Security Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to in short as ‘NFSA, 2013’) and Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2015 (hereinafter referred to in short as ‘TPDS Control Order, 2015’) of the Central Government, the West Bengal Public Distribution System (Maintenance and Control) Order, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘State Control Order, 2013’) has become redundant.
2. Mr. Debabrata Saha Roy, learned advocate for the petitioners in W.P.A. 22281 of 2022, W.P.A. 1098 of 2024, W.P.A. 1101 of 2024, W.P.A. 1217 of 2024, W.P.A. 22283 of 2022, W.P.A. 4615 of 2024, W.P.A. 6466 of 2024 and WPA 6470 of 2024 submitted that Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1955’) empowers the Central Government to make rule/ order for maintaining, controlling, monitoring, licensing so far as essential commodities are concerned. Section 5 of the Act of 1955 empowers the Central Government to delegate power to the State Government to frame rule/order for exercising power under Section 3 of the Act of 1955 by issuing orders in relation to such matters. The Central Government in exercise of power under Section 3 of the Act of 1955 issued Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Central Control Order, 2001’) on 31st August, 2001 specifying the terms and conditions to be followed by the respective States in framing of rules for maintaining, controlling, monitoring, licensing of Public Distribution System. The State Government in exercise of power under Section 3 of the Act of 1955 read with Central Control Order, 2001 framed two Control Orders namely (i) West Bengal Public Distribution System (Maintenance and Control) Order, 2013 on 8th August 2013 applicable for rural areas throughout the State of West Bengal and (ii) West Bengal Urban Public Distribution System (Maintenance and Control) Order, 2013 on 12th August 2013 applicable for urban areas throughout the State of West Bengal. Needless to mention that the State Control Order, 2013 has been issued pursuant to the delegation given by the Central Government under Clause 7 of the Central Control Order, 2001. The Central Government, after 66 years of independence in order to ensure access to adequate quantity of quality food at affordable prices to its people, enacted NFSA, 2013 on 10th September, 2013 and for implementation of NFSA, 2013, it introduced TPDS Control Order, 2015 superseding the earlier Central Control Order, 2001, targeting a particular section of the society for providing them with food at affordable price. With the supersession of Central Control Order, 2001 by coming into force of TPDS Control Order, 2015, the State Control Order, 2013 loses its force and becomes redundant. The legality of the scheme of Duare ration i.e. doorstep delivery of foodgrains to the beneficiaries was under challenge at the instance of Fair Price Shop owners in FMA 764 of 2022 (Sekh Abdul Majed versus State of West Bengal & Ors.) with MAT 910 of 2022 (Sk. Manowar Ali & Ors. versus State of West Bengal & Ors.). In the aforesaid appeals, submissions were made by learned Advocate General of the State of West Bengal that the NFSA, 2013 has not yet been implemented fully in the State. Considering such submissions and in view of Proviso to Clause 1 of TPDS Control Order, 2015, which provides that the Control Order, 2001 would be effective in the States till full implementation of NFSA, 2013, the Hon’ble Division Bench did not interfere with the argument advanced on behalf of the petitioners that after coming into force of TPDS Control Order, 2015, the Central Control Order, 2001 has become redundant. However, the State challenging the judgment of Hon’ble Division Bench passed in the aforesaid appeals preferred a SLP before the Hon’ble Supreme Court wherein in ground No. R at p
The court emphasized that the appellants had no legal right to challenge the State's policy decision, as it was taken at the top level of the administrative hierarchy and implemented through the subs....
An association can challenge the validity of legislation affecting its members, as it constitutes an injury to its collective rights. The court affirmed that procedural rights must adhere to principl....
The court upheld the classification in the Public Distribution System (Control) Order, justifying the exclusion of private individuals from running fair price shops due to historical malpractices, wh....
A dealer is bound by the license/agreement and violation of any of the conditions of the agreement leads to suspension/revocation of his license.
The State Government exceeded the limit of delegation by obliging the Fair Price Shop dealers to distribute the rations to the beneficiaries at their doorstep in absence of any authority to that effe....
The court upheld the validity of amendments regulating the public distribution system, ruling no fundamental rights were violated by limiting fair price shop allotments to three per agency.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.