States told to enforce Famine Code

In the PUCL versus Union of India case, the two-member bench of Y K Sabharwal and H K Sema also connected the Article 21 right to life with Article 47 on nutrition and health as as primary duties of the state acknowledging that the state is responsible for providing health and nutrition to the poorest of the poor.

The Famine Code was formulated by Rajasthan 1962 and then copied by other states and till date is acknowledged as an 8216;8216;enlightened document8217;8217;. It is never really implemented because it means that the state has to undertake massive food for work programme and has to provide gratuitous relief for the aged and the infirm.

The Additional Solicitor General, during the course of the hearing, submitted that various aspects of it have been dealt with under schemes like SGRY. Inspite of this, the Court 8212; seeing the detailed relief operations listed in voluminous chapters of the Famine Code 8212; decided to endorse it.

However, the Court has clarified that this is subject to the condition that if in subsequent schemes the relief to be provided is better than the one stipulated by Famine Code, the same needs to be implemented.

The judgement also makes a reference to the High-Level Committee on Long- Term Grain Policy 2002 whose report has been buried by the Ministry of Food and Consumer Affairs. The report outlines a two-year plan of action which includes immediate steps like a large food-for-work programme, a revitalised universal PDS and other grain-based welfare schemes.

It strongly recommends the expansion of the present SGRY schemes. 8216;8216;Ten months have lapsed since the report was given. We do not know what kind of consideration it has got,8217;8217; note the judges.

The report also mentions that the half the food subsidy is being spent in holding stocks in excess of buffer stock levels necessary for food security.

As these, food stocks are reduced to normal levels, Rs 10,000 core would be saved. The order makes a note of these observations.

The prayer of the petitioner PUCL, in fact, is for allocation of 20 million tonnes, though the requirement is 40 million tonnes. Also they drew the attention of the Court to the allocation for the BPL families has been reduced from 10 kg per day to 5 kg and 10 days in every month till June 2003.

The Court has also has passed strict direction to authorities to monitor distribution channels like ration shops.

The state governments have been asked to file compliance reports by August 8. Incidentally, the last time the Court asked the state governments to file these reports, it got little response prompting it to note the 8216;8216;distressing8217;8217; attitude of the state governments.