Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
S.L Samity (Self Help Group) & Anr vs Ar The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 20 June, 2016
Author: Tapabrata Chakraborty
Bench: Tapabrata Chakraborty
24 20.6.2016 WP 10281(w) of 2016
Hansabahini Mahila Swanirbhar
S.L Samity (Self Help Group) & Anr.
Vs.
ar The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Shuvro Prokash Lahiri
... For the Petitioners
Mr. Supriya Chattopadhyay
Mr. Sabyasachi Mondal
... For the State
Affidavit of service filed by the petitioners be
kept on record. The instant writ application has
been preferred, inter alia, praying for issuance of
necessary direction upon the respondents to take
necessary steps to ensure the continuance of engagement of the petitioner no. 1 in the Jamlahar Primary School (hereinafter referred to as the said school).
Mr. Lahiri, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no. 1 is a duly constituted self help group and in the year 2004 it was engaged in the said school for the purpose of cooking meal for the students in the said school under the Mid-day Meal Schme (hereinafter referred to as the said scheme). The normal functioning of the said self help group was abruptly sought to be interfered with by certain members of other self help groups in the locality in a most illegal and mala fide manner and as a consequence thereof the students of the said school had been the worst suffers. Protesting against such illegal action of the members the other self help groups and the attempt on their part to forcibly prevent the petitioners from functioning in the said school, a detailed representation was made by the petitioners to the respondent no. 4 on 31st December, 2015 for taking effective steps to ensure continuance of the petitioner as a self help group in the said school under the said scheme.
Drawing the attention of this Court to the memoranda dated 2nd June, 2009 and 20th December, 2010, Mr. Lahiri submits that it is obligatory on the part of the respondents to ensure smooth functioning of the petitioner no. 1 in the said school. On 08th October, 2015 the respondent no. 4 issued a memorandum directing the self-help groups in the locality to submit application for engagement under the said scheme. The said memorandum was subsequently withdrawn by a memorandum dated 26th November, 2015 and that as such there was no bar towards continuance of engagement of the petitioner no. 1 under the said scheme. The said memoranda, as produced by Mr. Lahiri, be kept on record.
Mr. Chattopadhyay, learned advocate appearing State respondents does not dispute the facts that the petitioner no. 1 was engaged as the self help group in the said school and that presently its functioning had been sought to be disrupted by outsiders by putting a padlock in the kitchen and that as such the students of the said school are suffering.
I have heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and I have considered the materials on record.
The primary object of the Mid-day Meal Scheme is to ensure improvement of nutritional status of children studying in the schools and to encourage the poor children to concentrate on class room activities and also to provide a source of living to the poor women constituting the SHGs. Any hindrance towards the normal functioning of SHG should be appropriately dealt with by the competent authority as the scheme involves interest of poor children. It would also be explicit from the memorandum dated 20th December, 2010 that it is incumbent upon all the respondents to ensure that the Mid-day Meal Scheme is properly implemented in the schools of the district and the continuance of engagement of the petitioner no. 1 stands fortified by the memorandum dated 26th November, 2015 issued by the respondent no. 4.
For the reasons discussed above, this Court directs the respondent no. 4 to take necessary steps to ensure continuance of engagement and functioning of the petitioner no. 1 in the said school within a period of two weeks from the date of communication of this order. The said respondent no. 4 would also be at liberty to take the assistance of the police authorities, if necessary.
If for any pressing reason such steps cannot be taken by the respondent no. 4, a reasoned order to that effect shall be communicated to the petitioners within a period of two weeks from the date of communication of this order.
With the above observations and directions, the writ application is disposed of.
There shall, however, be no order as to costs.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be handed over to the parties on compliance of necessary formalities. (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)