SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Gau) 894

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.
Bijay Borah, S/o. Late Tulan Borah & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
The State of Assam, Rep. by the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Department of Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs & Ors. - Respondents
WP(C) Nos. 5470, 5994, 6544, 6815, 6181, 5956, 6933, 5641, 5206, 6107, 6070, 7357, 7066 of 2021, WP(C) Nos. 2418, 34, 4786, 2159, 3035, 3927, 2402, 2047, 693, 2302, 2503, 623, 462, 506, 2008, 3085, 1593, 3057, 695, 253, 521, 1949, 3558, 5310, 501, 1165, 1693, 3164, 1077, 2022, 3905, 365, 696, 836, 1950 of 2022
Decided On : 22-12-2022

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. R.C. Borpatra Gohain, Sr. Adv.; Mrs. S.B. Gohain, Mr. S.P. Sharma, Mr. S. Ahmed, Mr. S. Borthakur, Mr. D. Gogoi, Mr. M. Dutta, Mr. K.M. Bora, Mr. M. Islam, Mr. H.M. Ali, Mr. B.J. Mukherjee, Ms. R. Saha, Mr. H. Buragohain, Ms. D. Borgohain, Mr. P. Gohain, Ms. M. Sarmah, Ms. K. Baruah, Mr. R. Boruah, Mr. B. Gogoi, Mr. M. Biswas, Ms. M. Das, Mr. D. Das, Mr. R. Rahman, Mr. N. Ahmed, Mr. F.U. Barbhuiya, Mr. H. Ali, Ms. S. Das, Mr. P.K. Saharia, Mr. I.U. Choudhury, Dr. B. Ahmed, Mr. F.A. Laskar, Mr. J. Barman, Mr. H.I. Choudhury, Mr. S. Borthakur, Mr. G. Uddin, Ms. P. Adhikari, Mr. P.H. Konwar, Mr. N. Sarkar, Mr. P.K. Basu, Mr. N.M. Deka, Mr. U.J. Saikia, Mr. Chakravarty, Mr. S. Upadhay, Ms. A. Lala, Mr. U.N. Chattry, Mr. O. Laskar, Mr. A. Sarma, Mr. K. Kalita, Mr. Lentso, Mr. R.S. Mishra, Mr. K.J. Saikia, Mr. D. Hussain, Mr. R.A. Choudhury, Mr. B. Rahman, Mr. J.I. Mondal, Mr. J. Islam, Mr. A.N. Igbal, Mr. S.A. Hussain, Mr. D.J. Haloi, Mr. T.U. Laskar, Mr. ATH Ahmed, Mr. ABT, Haque, Mr. AFNU Ahmed, and Mr. K. Zaman.
For the Respondents:Mr. D. Saikia Advocate General, Assam and Mr. D. Nath, Senior Government Advocate.

Headnote:

National Food Security Act, 2013 - Section 2 (5), (23), (16), (4), 3, 9, 10, 12, 27, 36, 39, 40, 12 (2) (b), 22 (4) (d) - Essential Commodities Act, 1955 - Fair price shops - Ration cards - Renewed licences - Whether action of State Government in tagging fair price shops having 50 or less than 50 ration cards to nearest fair price shops is within parameters of Constitutional - Whether action of respondent State is within realm of Constitutional mandate, it would be relevant to take note of Act of 2013 and Rules framed therein under as well as also Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and Orders issued in pursuance thereof on basis of which petitioners claim right upon licences being issued to them – Held, Contention of petitioners that in terms with Rule 7 (6) (c) of Assistance Rules, 2015, petitioners are willing to purchase, install and maintain EPOS device and as such EPOS device cannot be reason for policy decision - Contention is misconceived in as much as Assistance Rules, 2015 confers a discretion upon State Government to adopt any of models in Rule 7 (6) of Assistance Rules, 2015 - State Government for economic and administrative reasons has approved System Integrator model, Court cannot interfere with such a decision and as such said contention is turned down - Amongst various writ petitioners, there are some writ petitioners who are specially abled or are widows - Taking into account that Government has already decided in its Cabinet meeting not to apply said decision to those persons who are specially abled or are widows, Court directs State respondents to renew their licences of those petitioners belonging to category of specially abled or widows, if not already done - It is also to be taken note of that in some cases, Licensing Authority had renewed licences of petitioners - Such renewal is contrary to policy decision of State Government and as such renewal so granted would not confer any right upon such writ petitioners - Such writ petitions would definitely be entitled to refund of renewal fees – Petitions dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. R.C. Borpatra Gohain, the learned senior counsel assisted by Mrs. S. Borpatra Gohain along with all other counsels appearing on behalf of all the petitioners in the writ petitions. I have also heard Mr. D. Saikia, the learned Advocate General, Assam assisted Mr. D. Nath, the learned Senior Government Advocate for the State respondents.

2. The issue involved in the batch of the writ petitions relates to as to whether the action of the State Government in tagging the fair price shops having 50 or less than 50 ration cards to the nearest fair price shops is within the parameters of the Constitutional mandate. The stand of the respondent State is based upon that such measures are being taken to progressively undertake necessary reforms in the Targeted Public Distribution System in consonance with the National Food Security Act, 2013 (for short, the Act of 2013) and its implementation thereof.

3. For ascertaining as to whether the action of the respondent State is within the realm of the Constitutional mandate, it would be relevant to take note of the Act of 2013 and the Rules framed therein under as well as also the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and the Orders issued in pursuance thereof on the basis of which the petitioners claim right upon the licences being issued to them.

4. Let this Court first take into consideration the Act of 2013. The Act of 2013 was enacted to provide for food and nutritional security in human life cycle approach, by ensuring access to adequate quantity of quality food at affordable prices to people to live a life with dignity and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. It is beneficial to refer to the “Introduction” to the Act of 2013 to understand the scope and purpose of the said Act which is reproduced herein below:-

    “INTRODUCTION

Eradicating extreme poverty and hunger is one of the goals under the Millennium Development Goals of the United Nations. It casts responsibilities on all State parties to recognize the right of everyone to adequate food. Food security means availability of sufficient foodgrains to meet the domestic demand as well as access, at the individual level, to adequate quantities of food at affordable prices.

Providing adequate food has always been focus of the Government's planning and policy. However, this legislation marks a paradigm shift in addressing the problem of food security from the current welfare approach to a right based approach. This legislation would confer legal rights on eligible beneficiaries to receive entitled quantities of foodgrains at highly subsidized prices. Besides, it also confers legal rights on women and children and other special groups such as destitute, homeless, disaster and emergency affected persons and persons living in starvation to receive meal free of charge or at affordable price.”

5. Article 47 of the Constitution of India inter-alia provides that the State shall raise the level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of public health as among its primary duties. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, to which India is a signatory, also casts responsibilities on all State parties to recognize the right of everyone to adequate food. Eradicating extreme poverty and hunger is one of goals under the Millennium Development Goals of the United Nations. In the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Bandhua Mukti Morcha vs. Union of India and Others, reported in (2021) SCC Online SC 441, the Supreme Court observed that the right to life as guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution gives right to every human being to live a life of dignity with access to at least bare necessities of life. It was observed that to provide food security to impoverish persons is the bounden duty of all States and the Governm

                                                Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                                                1
                                                2
                                                3
                                                4
                                                5
                                                6
                                                7
                                                8
                                                9
                                                10
                                                11
                                                SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                                                supreme today icon
                                                logo-black

                                                An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

                                                Please visit our Training & Support
                                                Center or Contact Us for assistance

                                                qr

                                                Scan Me!

                                                India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                                                For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                                                whatsapp-icon Back to top