|
Right to Food Campaign
|
||||
| PUCL VS. UOI AND ORS Advocate on record: Aparna Bhat The petitioner is represented by Advocate Colin Gonsalves and his team at Human Rights Law Network. For further details, please contact them at slicdelhi@vsnl.net IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA EXTRAORDINARY ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
IN THE MATTER OF: PEOPLE UNION FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SEEKING ENFORCEMENT OF RIGHT TO FOOD.
To, The Hon'ble Chief Justice of India and His Lordship's Companion Judges of The Supreme Court of India
The humble petition of the petitioner above named
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: 1. That the Petitioner is a voluntary organisation fighting for the civil liberties of people and has units all over the country. The Petitioner also takes up issues of public interest and has also approached courts including this Hon'ble Court whenever there are violations/infringements of fundamental rights
2. The respondent No. 1 is the Union of India through its Ministry of Food and Consumer Affairs. This Ministry is largely responsible for allocation food to various states and also governs the public distribution system, prevalent in the country. The Respondent no 2 is the Food Corporation of India, a statutory corporation fully controlled and managed by the Government of India and is the "State" as defined by Article 12. The Respondents nos. 3-8 are the relevant State Governments who are responsible for managing the public distribution system in their states.
The petition raises the following questions of law public importance which need to be adjudicated by this Hon'ble court.
The facts leading to the petition are as under:
3. That there are innumerable cases of starvation deaths reported across the country. Starvation deaths are caused largely due to non-availability of food over a long period of time. Owing to the topography of our Country, there are certain areas that are drought prone and are in the grip of severe drought year after year. Consequently, there is no food available in the public distribution system outlets, and prices at commercial shops are exorbitant, making it impossible for people to purchase food grains. The relief measures provided, in case of drought and famine, are far from adequate and increasing numbers of people have been falling victim to starvation deaths. According to the Government of India figures, out of thirty-six crore people living below the poverty line, there are more than five crore people who have been victims of starvation. The petitioner craves leave to refer to and rely upon the said records at the time of hearing of this petition.
4. The food grains are distributed through the public distribution system, and the 'Department of Food and public Distribution' under the Respondent no 1 manages the system. The Department of Public Distribution is charged with the prime responsibility of the management of the food economy of the country. The twin objectives of the Department are:
It is submitted that until 1997, the food distributed through the public distribution system was available for all citizens irrespective of their economic status. However, the Government of India changed its policy and decided to make it available only to those who fall below the poverty line.
5. The Public distribution system is run jointly by the Central and State Governments. The Respondent No. 2 is the main agency for the procurement, storage and distribution of food grains. The respondent No 2 procures food grains from the market and stores the same at godowns all over the country. The distribution is on the basis of the quota allocated by the Government of India. Annexed hereto and marked Annexure-P1 is a true copy of the statement indicating various state quotas under the public distribution system.
6. That the central government also has a policy wherein it stores certain buffer stocks for emergencies like drought/famine of crop etc. as well as enable open market intervention in case of price rise. Annexed hereto and marked Annexure-P2 is a true copy of the table indicating the buffer stocks that the Central Government is required to maintain under its policies.
7. That it is submitted that the Respondent no 1 in January 2001 made certain allocations to seven states that were identified as �drought hit� states by Central Government. Annexed hereto and marked Annexure-P3 is a true copy of the table indicating special allocation of food grains under the 'Food for Work' programme.
8. That in December 2000, the Central Government introduced a scheme to cover the poorest of the poor families, who were supposed to be given food grains at the rate of Rs. 2/- per K. G. of wheat and Rs. 3/- per K. G. of rice. Annexed hereto and marked Annexure-P4 is a true copy of the table indicating the percentage of the 'poorest of the poor' families in each state.
9. That the Petitioner submits that though the government introduces various schemes, they have not been effective and the problem of starvation has been sharply increasing.
10. That a large number of people in the country are living below the poverty line. The Public Distribution, which was supposed to cater to their food needs, is designed in an extremely unscientific manner. The ceiling on the maximum amount of food grains that a family will get has been fixed by the Government, which at twenty kilos proves to be extremely low for the family even of the nominal number of persons per family and is much less than the nutritional requirements as recommended by the Indian Council of Medical Research.
11. That the petitioner submits that there is no shortage of food in the country. Food grains are in surplus and are in fact rotting in godowns and warehouses of the Respondent No. 2. It is submitted that there are times when these grains are destroyed exported at throwaway prices or even allowed to be eaten by rodents instead of distributing them to starving people.
12. That the petitioner has obtained information from the official website of the Respondent No. 1, that the quantity of food presently in godowns and warehouses as buffer stock, is more than the requirement in buffer stock. In any event the basic purpose of buffer stock are to be used for the benefit of the people of the drought affected areas in order to serve its basic purpose. Annexed hereto and marked Annexure-P5 is a true copy of the table indicating the quantity of grain lying in the buffer stock as against the requirement of the buffer stock.
13. That the Hon'ble Minister of Consumer Affairs and Public Distribution in his letter the Chief Ministers of all states has infact accepted the fact that there is surplus in the stocks of the country. Annexed hereto and marked Annexure-P6 is a true copy of the letter addressed to Chief Ministers by the Minister.
14. That the Petitioner has undertaken extensive studies at various regions and has compiled data which indicate that although there are surplus stocks available with the Respondent No. 2, the same are not being given to the State Governments. The State Governments too, have not purchased the minimum grain allotted to them under the Public Distribution System quota on grounds of financial deficits. Annexed hereto and marked Annexure-P7 is a true copy of the table indication the details of the grains allotted by the Central Government to the States and the actual intake by each State.
15. That in order to indicate the gravity of the problem the petitioner is stating facts in relation to the State of Rajasthan and craves leave to refer to and rely upon similar information from other states at the time of hearing this petition.
16. This year, drought conditions prevail in 73.3% (26 out of 35) of Maharastra�s districts. As many as 20,000 villages, with a human population of 454.99 lakhs are drought-affected. For a large majority of these villages, this is the third consecutive drought year. Things were very bad in the first two years, but now because of the compounded effect, matters have reached an alarming state. Already there are reports of starvation deaths. The petitioner craves leave to refer to and rely upon the said report at the time of hearing this petition. Over and above this, many people are facing starvation and will die soon if nothing is done immediately to alleviate their misery. There is massive unemployment, the people are sinking deeper and deeper into debt, children are dropping out of school and cattle are either dying or being abandoned in large numbers because their owners cannot provide them with fodder.
17. That relief measures provided by the State of Maharashtra and the Union of India have thus far proved inadequate, incompetent, and unable to stem the misery or alleviate the situation. These relief measures have not even met the standards these governments have set out for themselves in Rajasthan�s Famine Code, 1962. Nor have they fulfilled the obligation to protect a citizen�s right to life enjoined on them by the Indian Constitution. The State of Rajasthan and the Union of India have failed to safeguard the affected population�s basic entitlements to work and life thereby causing untold misery, starvation deaths, near starvation situations and demoralisation.
18. Meanwhile, close to 50 million tonnes of grain are lying idle in public godowns in Rajasthan and across the country. There is so much grain the Government�s reserves that the Respondent no. 2, the Food Corporation of India has run out of storage space. In some cases, there is barely a distance of 75 kilometers between the location of these godowns and the places where starvation is rampant, people are malnourished, and cattle are dying.
19. Their resources should be used immediately for purposes of drought relief, prevention of starvation and alleviation of misery. Moreover, in accordance with the standards laid down by the State Government itself, open-ended employment at the legal minimum wage for all willing to avail of it in the drought affected areas should be provided forthwith.
20. The Famine Code published by the Government of Rajasthan, describes the State of Rajasthan in the following terms:
Annexed hereto and marked Annexure-P8 is a true copy of the Famine Code, 1972. The Famine Code was introduced with the object of codifying relief operations in order to enforce relief and rehabilitation measure effectively in the State. It is submitted that even at that state that is nearly forty years ago, the code noted that there was a situation of surplus food. Nor have they fulfilled the obligation to protect a citizens right to life
21. Even in ordinary years, hunger and undernutrition are widespread in Rajasthan. According to the National Family Health Survey (1998-99(, for instance:
According to National Sample Survey data in 1993-94, almost half of the rural population in Rajasthan lived below the poverty line�. The poverty line is defined as the level of per-capita expenditure at which minimum calorie requirements (2,400 calories per person per day in rural areas) are met, based on observed consumption patterns.
21. High as they are in ordinary years, undernutrition levels increase alarmingly in drought years. During the second year of the current drought, in 1999-2000, intense hunger and hardship were widely reported. The situation is worse this year because of the cumulative effect of the suffering and hardship of the previous two years, and is expected to deteriorate further in the next few months. Already there are reports of acute hunger and starvation deaths. Annexed hereto and marked Annexure-P9 is a true copy of a magazine report in the Frontline.
22. It is submitted that even the Official documents indicate that the state of Rajasthan is facing severe drought for the third consecutive years. Annexed hereto and marked Annexure-P10 is a true copy of the letter addressed to the Prime Minister of India by the Chief minister of Rajasthan. Annexed hereto and marked Annexure-P11 is a true copy of letter written to the Union Minister for Food and Civil Supplies. These letters admit that the state of Rajasthan is facing drought for the third consecutive year. In his letter to the Prime Minister, dated 20 September, 2000, the Chief Minister observed: -
23. According to State Government statistics 73.6% of the villages in the State (30,583 out of 41, 529) are drought affected, i.e. crop damage of 50% or more. The population affected, according to these State Government statistics, is 330 lakhs. In 47% of the villages (19,817 out of 41,529), crop losses are above 75%. Annexed hereto and marked Annexure-P12 is a true copy of the relevant extracts of the Memorandum of Scarcity, 2056 dated November 1999.
24. A related effect of this drought is large-scale unemployment. In drought-affected villages there is virtually no agricultural employment. Due to lack of diversification of the rural economy, non-agricultural employment is also extremely limited. Rampant unemployment in drought-affected areas has led to large-scale distress migration. Even migration-based employment opportunities, however, are very limited. In particular, because of the recent earthquake, there are few work opportunities in Gujarat, a traditional destination for impoverished migrant labourers in Rajasthan. Many of the labourers who had recently migrated to Gujarat from southern Rajasthan in search of work have been returning empty handed to Rajasthan for want of work in Gujarat.
25. In a welfare state of the primary duty of the Government is to secure the welfare of the people. Article 21 imposes an obligation on the State to safeguard the right to life of every person. Preservation of human life is thus of paramount importance. The State cannot avoid their constitutional obligations in that regard on account of financial constrains. [Paschim Bangal Khet Mazdoor Samity v State of W. Bengal (1996) 4 SCC 37�].
26. In any organised society, the right to live as a human being is not ensured by meeting only the animal needs of man. It is secured only when a man is assured of all facilities to develop himself and is freed from all those restrictions that inhibit his growth. All human rights are designed to achieve this object. The Right to Life guaranteed in any civilised society implies the right to food, water, shelter, education, medical care and a decent environment. These are basic human rights known to any civilised society. The civil, political, social and cultural rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Convention or under the Constitution of India cannot be exercised without these basic human rights. [Chameli Singh v State of UP (1996) 2 SCC 549.]
27. For the State of Rajasthan, in particular, the duties of the State Government, as described by the State Government itself, are clearly spelt out in the Famine Code. As is explained in the preface of the Code, which has been signed by the Relief Commissioner and Secretary to the Government, the Famine Code was intended to replace the ad hoc nature of the relief operations that were undertaken from time to time, and to codify the procedures, duties and responsibilities of the State Government:
28. Therefore, the duties and responsibilities listed in the Code are binding on the State of Rajasthan as they have the status of �circulars and orders� and �rules and instructions�.
29. Since the State of Rajasthan (as is seen in the letters of the Chief Minister) has already acknowledged that drought, scarcity and famine conditions exist in many parts of the State, and since this is supported by data collected and published by the State of Rajasthan (see Exhibit 7), it is not necessary to show that famine conditions, scarcity, and drought are actually prevailing in many parts of the State. Given this situation, the imperatives contained in the Famine Code immediately become operative, and the State Government is required to provide relief according to the terms of the Code.
30. The Famine Code is quite specific about the nature of relief to be provided by the State Government to the affected areas.
Accordingly, In times of drought, the Code [page 4, clause 8] requires the Relief Commissioner to:
On page 21, clause 50 (A) of the Code provides that: 1. Relief Works:
2. Relief to the people employed otherwise than on relief works. 3. Gratuitous relief. 4. Miscellaneous:
On page 33, clause 75 of the Code provides that:
Further, labourers employed on relief work are legally entitled to the legal minimum wage, currently Rs.60 per day in Rajasthan.
On page 6, clause 12 of the Code states that:
On page 9, clause 21 of the Code states that:
On page 10, clause 24 of the Code states that:
On page 5, clause 11 of the Code states that:
On page 29, clause 66 of the Code provides that:
On page 26 of the Code states that:
On page 33, clause 73 (A) of the Code provides that:-
On page 35, clause 82 of the Code provides that:
Chapter 12 of the Code is entitled �Gratuitous Relief in villages� and contains clause 152 on page 59 which provides that:
31. As things stand today, the Government of Rajasthan has failed abjectly in discharging its responsibilities to most of the drought-affected people of the State, either under Article 21 of the Constitution of India or the Famine Code.
32. Despite being required to give work to �every person who comes for work on a relief work� [Famine Code, page 33, clause 75], the Government of Rajasthan has introduced arbitrary �ceilings� on the numbers of persons that are to be given employment through relief works. See Exhibit 8. The ceiling was 1.93 lakhs in January, 3 lakhs in February and 4.96 lakhs in March. The last figure (4.96 lakhs) represents only 1.5% of the drought-affected population by the Government�s own statistics. It is also important to note that �ceilings� apply to the numbers of labourers employed, and that there is also, in addition, a ceiling of 15 days on the number of days of employment per labourers in a particular month. Annexed hereto and marked Annexure-P13 is a true copy of the transcript of the wireless message from the Relief Secretary, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur to the Collectors of various districts in Rajasthan.
33. It is submitted that employment actually given is well below the �ceiling�. In January, according to its own statistics, the Government employed only 1.2 lakh persons as against a ceiling of 1.93 lakhs. Similarly, in February, when the ceiling was 3 lakhs, the number of persons employed was only 1.8 lakhs as per official statistics. This amounted to less than 1% of the drought-affected population. Further, these official claims need to be verified, and there is a possibility that the numbers actually employed in January and February were even lower, bearing in mind that official figures are often inflated by fake muster rolls and other fraudulent practices. (There is much evidence of these practices in the context of earlier droughts). In 1986-88, for instance, test checks conducted by the Comptroller an Auditor General of India revealed �irregularities amounting to Rs.146 crores representing 59 per cent of the expenditure)
34. Official statements suggest that it is the State Government�s aim to raise labour ceilings to 8 lakhs in April, 12 lakhs in May and 16 lakhs in June. However, there is absolutely no guarantee that these informal �targets� will be met. Indeed, they have been mentioned mainly in the context of requests for assistance from the Union Government. There is no indication that the State Government is firmly committed to these targets if the requests for assistance are unsuccessful, as they have been so far. Even if the �ceilings� are raised, as per these targets, it is likely that actual employment will be much lower, judging from the experience of the last few months.
35. Even the peak target ceiling of 16 lakhs for June represents less than 5% of the drought affected population according to the Government�s own figures.
36. There is no case for discontinuing relief works at the end of June, as hardship is expected to continue, if not intensify, well beyond that until the arrival of the Kharif crop. According to the Famine Code (clause 50 (A), quoted in para 5.2 above), relief works are to be extended until the end of July. Further, the Famine Code [clause 50 (A) (4)] recognises the possible need for continuation of relief works beyond that date: �If there are no rains in the month of July, the relief operations may be extended upto the end of August or earlier till the principal autumn crop is ripe.�
37. The Failure to pay the legal minimum wage of Rs.60 has been reported in many places. The Government of Rajasthan�s own data also corroborates this. The Petitioner carves leave to refer to and rely on upon the relevant documents at the time of hearing this petition.
38. The Government of Rajasthan is providing subsidised food to only some BPL (�below poverty line�) families. This Petitioner has visited many villages where not a single BPL family has been provided with subsidised food. The official entitlement of BPL, families to subsidised food is 20 kg of wheat per household per month at Rs. 4.60 per kg. This provision is hopelessly inadequate for the following reasons:
Annexed hereto and marked Annexure-P14 is a true copy of the extracts of the survey conducted by academics.
39. The inadequacy of the relief measures in 2000-01 can also be seen by comparing them with the relief measures taken by the Government of Rajasthan during 1987-88, which was the period of the most recent major drought prior to the present drought. The 1987-88 drought was in some respects similar to the current drought: it was the third consecutive drought year in Rajasthan, with widespread crop losses across the State. Annexed hereto and marked Annexure-P15 is a true copy of the table giving comparative information on the drought situation in 1987 and 2000-01. However, this year�s drought is worse than the drought in 1987-88 in at least two respects:
40. Even though the 1987-88 drought was less severe than the current drought, relief measures in 1987-88 were far more extensive. In particular:
41. The basic effectiveness of the 1987-88 relief measures can be seen from the following facts:
Annexed hereto and marked Annexure-P17 is the relevant table from and academic paper published by the international Food Policy and Research Institute dated May 1997.
42. The relief measures of 1987-88 can be taken as an indication of what it takes to avert a humanitarian crisis in a situation of severe drought in Rajasthan. This year, the relief measures are nowhere near being undertaken on the same scale. Correspondingly, the drought has already led to widespread hunger, starvation and hardship, which are expected to increase sharply during the next few months.
43. It is submitted that the experience of the 1987-88 drought can be used for the purpose of rough estimates of the resources required this year to provide drought relief on an adequate scale. Suppose, for instance, that the total number of person-days of employment generated over the whole year in 1987-88 (i.e. 2,224 lakh person-days) were provided over the next six months at the legal minimum wage of Rs.60 per day, roughly equivalent to 10 kg of what per day. Evens if we make a generous allowance of another 10 kg per person-day for the cost of materials, we find that the total amount of wheat required for this massive food-for-work programme is only 4.4 million tonnes, i.e. less than 10 per cent of the current stocks of food held by the Food Corporation of India (see below). This illustrative calculation clearly shows that the resources required for a massive expansion of relief measures in Rajasthan are well within the means of the Respondents, the State and Central Governments.
44. According to government officials, the main reason for the limited scope of relief measures this year is that the Government of Rajasthan is short of funds. This not acceptable, and shortage of funds as an excuse has been rejected by the Supreme Court when it comes to preserving the fundamental right to life and to food: Paschim Bangal Khet Mazdoor Samity v State of W. Bengal (1996) 4 SCC 37
45. Not only is shortage of resources as an unacceptable excuse, it is also untrue and misleading. Close to 50 million tonnes of grain (mainly wheat and rice) are lying idle in public godowns across the State and the country. In some cases, there is barely a distance of 75 kms between the location of these godowns and the places where starvation is rampant. There is an urgent human need, supplemented by practical considerations, to utilise a substantial portion of these food stocks, particularly in view of the following:
46. The arguments made in the preceding paragraphs have been highlighted by the State of Rajasthan itself. In his letters to the Prime Minister and to the Union for Food and Consumer affairs, the Chief Minister has voiced the same opinion being:
|
||||