Padmavathi Poshaka Ahara ... vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1619 AP

           HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO

                        W.P.No.40347 of 2018

ORDER:

The petitioners herein are Women Self Help Groups. The facts of

the case, as per the petitioners, are:

a) The Government of India, in the year 1975 had launched

a Scheme known as the Integrated Child Development Services

Scheme (ICDS) to tackle malnutrition problem in children below 6 years

of age and pregnant women and lactating mothers.

b) The Government of India in implementation of the

scheme had been issuing guidelines from time to time.

c) Under the Guidelines issued on 24.02.2009, it was

directed that supplementary nutrition in the form of Micro Nutrient

Fortified Food has to be provided to the children in the age group of 6

months to 3 years and Micro Nutrient Fortified Cooked Food to the

children in the age group of 3 years to 6 years.

d) The supplementary nutrition for children in the age group

of 6 months to 3 years has to be given as a Take Home Ration (THR)

and the food for the children in the age group of 3 years to 6 years has

to be given in the Anganwadi Centres, apart from the morning snacks.

e) As far as pregnant women or lactating mothers are

concerned, it has to be given as a take home ration.

                                         2                                     RRR,J
                                                              W.P.No.40347 of 2018




      f)     The cost of supply of supplementary nutrition was to be

borne equally by the Central and State Governments and the State

Government being responsible for the implementation of the scheme.

g) During the course of the implementation of the

Supplementary Nutrition Programme, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had

an occasion to issue directions in relation to this scheme dated

17.10.2004 in I.A.No.40-41/2004 in W.P.(C).No.196 of 2001;

dated 13.12.2006 in I.A.Nos.34, 35, 40, 49, 58, 59, 60, 61 &

62/2006; and dated 22.04.2009 in W.P.(C).No.196 of 2001, to the

effect that it is only the self help groups which can be supplying the

micro nutrient food as part of the supplementary nutrition programme

for the children in the age group of 3 years to 6 years, through

Anganwadies by using self help groups and Mahila Mandals and

Contractors would not be permitted to be involved.

h) Rule 9 of the Supplementary Nutrition (under the

Integrated Child Development Services Scheme) Rules, 2017 issued

under Section 39 of the National Food Security Act, 2013, stipulates

that supply of supplementary nutrition can be taken from other sources

or approved agencies till self help groups are engaged to undertake

such supply. The petitioners would submit that Rule 9 mandates that

the supply of food under the supplementary nutrition programme

should be done ultimately by the self help groups only.

i) The 1st petitioner has established a full-fledged

manufacturing unit at Chittoor for the purpose of manufacturing

supplementary nutrition food products and the other 10 groups are in 3 RRR,J W.P.No.40347 of 2018

the process of setting up of food manufacturing units at the time when

the writ petition was filed. The petitioners have given representations

on 25.09.2018 to the official respondents seeking approval for their

proposal to manufacture and supply supplementary nutrition to the

beneficiaries under the ICDS project in the State of Andhra Pradesh.

j) A part of the requirement under the scheme is being

made by the State of Andhra Pradesh by obtaining such supplementary

nutrition from M/s. Telangana Foods, which is a Government of

Telangana undertaking. This supply of supplementary nutrition is being

made under a Memorandum of Understanding executed between the

Government of A.P. and M/s. Telangana Foods. However, the

supplementary nutrition supplies being made by M/s. Telangana Foods

is not sufficient for the entire scheme and only certain parts of the

State are being provided with the supplementary nutrition supply made

by M/s. Telangana Foods.

k) The Government of Andhra Pradesh had initially issued

G.O.Rt.No.27, dated 08.02.2018 wherein permission was accorded to

start a special purpose vehicle with a trust. Thereafter, G.O.Rt.No.89,

dated 09.05.2018 was issued for the formation of a technical

committee to review and recommend a detailed project report and

collaborative agreement to start the special purpose vehicle with this

trust for establishing a factory for production of supplementary

nutrition food for children in the age group of 3 years to 6 years called

"Balamrutham". Thereafter, the Government had issued G.O.Ms.No.30

dated 01.10.2018 for establishment of factory under Section 8 of the

Companies Act for production of ready to eat foods and take home 4 RRR,J W.P.No.40347 of 2018

ration under the Integrated Child Development Scheme and the

Government is now taking steps for allotment of about Ac.10.00 of land

for the establishment of the factory to be set up by this trust.

3. The petitioners have now approached this Court by way of

this writ petition to set aside G.O.Ms.No.30 Department for Women,

Children, Differently Abled & Senior Citizens, dated 01.10.2018 and to

direct the 2nd respondent to comply with the Supplementary Nutrition

(under the Integrated Child Development Services Scheme) Rules, and

declare that the petitioners are eligible to supply supplementary

nutrition food under ICDS Programme.

4. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit setting out

their case. It is stated that M/s. A.P. Foods, which was founded in the

year 1971 as a non-profit organisation was undertaking the supply of

Ready to Cook Hot Foods and Ready to Eat Weaning and Snack Foods

for children covered under ICDS and also ready to eat foods

"Balamrutham". However, after the bifurcation of the State, the said

A.P. Foods was taken over unilaterally by the Telangana Government

and renamed as Telangana Foods. As the manufacturing unit of M/s.

Telangana Foods is in the State of Telangana, the Government of

Andhra Pradesh had to enter into an Memorandum of Understanding

for meeting the requirements of the beneficiaries under ICDS. The

Government of Andhra Pradesh in order to achieve self sufficiency had

decided to establish a new plant for the supply of Micro Nutrient

Fortified Food and had issued permission to the trust to start a special

purpose vehicle by way of G.O.Rt.No.27 dated 08.02.2018. Thereafter, 5 RRR,J W.P.No.40347 of 2018

the subsequent G.Os., were also issued in pursuance of this aim of the

Government to achieve self sufficiency.

5. Smt. R. Annapurna, learned counsel for the petitioners

relies upon the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court mentioned

above and on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case

of Vishnorani Mahila Bachat GAT v. State of Maharashtra and

Ors., in Civil Appeal No(s).2336 of 2019 dated 26.02.2019 arising from

SLP.(C).No(s).10103 of 2016 to contend that the self help groups are

to be given primacy in the supply of food under the supplementary

nutrition programme being carried out under the ICDS Scheme. She

would submit that the setting up of a plant for large scale manufacture

of such micro nutrient food would strike at the very root of the intent

to allow self help groups and Mahila Mandals to supply the said micro

nutrient food.

6. The learned Additional Advocate General appearing for

the State would submit that the Government of Andhra Pradesh is

being forced to expend huge amounts of money for sourcing the micro

nutrient food from M/s. Telangana Foods and it was with the intention

of reducing such expenditure that the Government decided to

manufacture the said micro nutrient food by itself and for that purpose

had decided to set up a special purpose vehicle which would undertake

such a task.

7. The learned Additional Advocate General would also draw

the attention of the Court to the reports filed along with the counter

affidavit. These reports state that none of the petitioners have any 6 RRR,J W.P.No.40347 of 2018

capacity to manufacture or process micro nutrient food as none of

them had established any unit to manufacture such food. The reports

also state that most of the groups are being backed by business people

and the members of the petitioners have no role at all. This submission

is disputed by Smt. R. Annapurna, learned counsel for the petitioners.

8. The learned Additional Advocate General has also placed

on record the Memorandum of Understanding executed between the

Government and the Trusts for the purpose of establishing a special

purpose vehicle. The learned Additional Advocate General has taken

this Court through the provisions of the Memorandum of

Understanding to submit that the entire exercise is being carried out on

a non-profit basis and this exercise cannot be compared with the

activities which had been deprecated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

the judgments cited by the learned counsel for the petitioners.

CONSIDERATION OF THE COURT:

9. A perusal of the Memorandum of Understanding dated

22.11.2018 shows that a special purpose vehicle is to be set up as a

non-profit corporation under Section 8 of the Companies Act, 2013.

The Government would allot land of Ac.10.00 on lease basis to the

special purpose vehicle and the Trusts would fund the cost of

construction of civil works and establishment of factory for the purpose

of manufacturing the micro nutrient food. A significant fact that needs

to be noticed is that this manufacturing facility is to produce and

supply nutritious food not only to the schemes under ICDS but for

other food entitlement schemes also.

                                    7                                RRR,J
                                                      W.P.No.40347 of 2018

10. It is clear from the contents of the Memorandum of

Understanding that the entire exercise is being carried out on a non-

profit basis and there does not seem to be any scope for diversion of

funds in any manner under this scheme.

11. The judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, cited by the

learned counsel for the petitioners, are to the effect that self help

groups should be given a prime place in the supply of micro nutrient

foods. This direction had been given on account of the fact that various

persons had been seeking to corner the contracts for supply of micro

nutrient programmes under the ICDS programme. To ensure that self

help groups and Mahila Mandals are not pushed out of the programme

entirely, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had put in place certain

protections to the self help groups and Mahila Mandals. The

Supplementary Nutrition (under the Integrated Child Development

Services Scheme) Rules also provided for the same protection to the

self help groups.

12. In the present case, it is clear that even as on today, the

Government is depending on M/s. Telangana Foods for supply of micro

nutrient food "Balamrutham". The present exercise is only to reduce

the cost by setting up an alternative facility. It would also have to be

noted that this facility is not only for supply of food under ICDS but

also to cater to other food entitlement programmes.

13. The learned Additional Advocate General had submitted

that none of the petitioners are genuine self help groups or Mahila

Mandals and are only fronts by business people and the same has been 8 RRR,J W.P.No.40347 of 2018

deprecated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vaishnorani case. This

contention is strongly opposed by Smt. R. Annapurna, learned counsel

for the petitioners. It would not be possible for this Court to go into

this question as it would require a detailed enquiry into facts.

14. This Court is of the opinion that the present exercise

being carried out by the Government by setting up a special purpose

vehicle for production of micro nutrient food to be supplied to the

children and mothers, is not in violation of the directions of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court or the Supplementary Nutrition (under the Integrated

Child Development Services Scheme) Rules.

15. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. However, in

the event of any requirement of micro nutrient food in the areas of

operation of the petitioners, the Government may consider the cases of

the petitioners for being given contracts for such supply of food,

subject to the condition that the authorities are satisfied that the

petitioners are genuine self help groups. There shall be no order as to

costs.

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand

closed.

_________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J.

20th March, 2021 Js.

                          9                          RRR,J
                                      W.P.No.40347 of 2018




      HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO




               W.P.No.40347 of 2018




                  20th March, 2021
Js.