"We can only feel sorry for the people of Haryana," the Supreme Court noted in a judgment on Monday. The court was speaking about how the State Food Commission, set up under the National Food Security Act in Haryana, has been sitting “jobless” and “without proper infrastructure” owing to the state government's lacklustre response to the four-year-old welfare legislation.
The judgment by a Bench of Justices Madan B. Lokur and N.V. Ramana also listed nine other States — Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Jharkhand, Bihar and Chhattisgarh. These states had all come under the SC’s scanner for their damp response to the food security law meant to help those living below the poverty line.
The Supreme Court said the Centre cannot look the other way, passing the buck on to the states for not implementing the law. Referring to Article 256 of the Constitution, the judgment said the “Government of India cannot plead helplessness in requiring State Governments to implement parliamentary laws”.
In his separate view, Justice Ramana focused on the spirit of co-operative federalism unique to the Indian democracy. Stating that here, the “Union and the States are co-equals”, Justice Ramana exhorted the executive powers to bridge the growing gap between the Centre and State governments.
No recourse for citizen
He wrote that States cannot ignore the “plight of the common man”. It was time to start a “meaningful dialogue” between the Centre and the State governments to save people, especially living in the drought-affected areas from abject poverty.
But in the course of the judgment, Justice Lokur also expressed skepticism about the motivation of the Centre and the States to implement the much-needed law, which has now been lying on the back burner for years. At one point, it asked itself an open-ended question: “What remedy does a citizen of India have if the Government of India does not issue a direction and the State Government or the Union Territory does not implement a law passed by Parliament?"
“Mere schemes without any implementation are of no use. Similarly, one may ask what use is a law passed by Parliament if State Governments and Union Territories do not implement it at all, let alone implement it in letter and spirit,” Justice Lokur wrote.
In a series of directions, the court ordered the Secretary in the Union Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution to meet with State Chief Secretaries by August 31 and brainstorm ways and means to implement the food security law.
Frame rules
The court directed the government to frame rules and designate independent officials for a grievance redressal mechanism under the Act within a year. It directed the states to set up State Food Commissions and vigilance committees in every state by the end of the year and set up a social audit machinery.
The National Food Security Bill was passed by both Houses of Parliament and received the assent of the President on September 10, 2013. Almost four years have gone by but the authorities and bodies mandated to be set up under the National Food Security Act, 2013 have not yet been made functional in some States.
The court expressed its disappointment when the Haryana government said that there was “hardly any work for the State Food Commission”.
“With such an attitude, it is very unlikely that any progress will ever be made either by the State of Haryana or the State Food Commission in Haryana in the matter of food security. One can only feel sorry for the people in Haryana,” Justice Lokur observed.
