Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

5. The Petitioners contend that Self-Help Groups have a preferential right to participate in the distribution of the Take Home Ration based on the decentralized distribution policy being a fundamental principle. While the State Government acknowledges that Self-Help Groups had such a preferential right under the previous policy, regime the new policy, reflected through changes in the statutory Rules, does not confer any vested or preferential rights on the Self-Help Groups, nor does it mandate decentralization. In essence, this is the core dispute in these Petitions.

Trupti 20 Writ Petition No- 5942-2023 and Group.docx

19. At this stage, the Petitioners - Women's Self-Help Group filed this group of Petitions challenging the tender, claiming that it violates the policy of decentralization and their preferential rights.

20. The Petitioner in Writ Petition No. 5942 of 2023 is Renuka Mata Mahila Bachat Gat. It is a women's Self-Help Group established on 7 June 2013 at Aurangabad. The Petitioners have challenged the tender dated 6 April 2023 and sought to quash and set aside conditions in Clause Nos. 4.1.3 and 4.1.7 of tender. The Petitioners in Writ Petition No. 7632 of 2023 are Vaishno Rani Mahila Bachat Gat with five other Bachat Gats. In addition to the challenge to the tender conditions as above, they have sought a mandamus directing the State to decentralise the procurement of Take Home Rations for children in Anganwadi and also take steps to award the work for Take Home Rations production to women from local mahila mandals/ mahila bachat gats and Self-Help Groups. The Petitioners in Writ Petition No.7394 of 2023 are Dhanlaxmi Mahila Mandal with four other Bachat Gats. These Petitioners have sought proceedings to be initiated against the State authorities for breach of the judgment and orders passed by the Supreme Court of India in the matter of Vaishnorani and in the matter of PUCL and the State be directed to decentralise the tender at the block level. The Petitioners in Writ Petition No. 7388 of 2023 are Nari Niketan Mahila Mandal, Trupti 21 Writ Petition No- 5942-2023 and Group.docx with 22 other Bachat Gats. Except for stating that the Petitioners are Mahila Bachat Gats and are challenging the tender process, these Petitioners have also not placed before us their details.

24. The fundamental question is whether there is a fixed and unyielding principle dictating that the distribution of Take Home Ration must follow a decentralized approach and involve Self- Help Groups and whether the Petitioners can legitimately assert a claim to preferential treatment in their participation in the procurement and distribution process of Take Home Ration. The basis of the Petitioners' argument rests on decisions by the Hon'ble Supreme Court emphasizing the involvement of Self- Help Groups, like the Petitioners while excluding larger players and stressing procurement at a decentralized level. Additionally, the argument seeks to draw support from the provisions of the NFS Act and the Rules, with reliance on secondary material to establish a principle of decentralization. If there indeed exists an overarching and inflexible principle favouring decentralization, then the Petitioners would have a good case as the impugned tenders are admittedly issued at the division level and not decentralised and do not provide preference to Self-Help Groups. On the other hand, if there is no such inflexible principle but a policy and a policy shift has occurred, then the challenge raised by the Petitioners to the tender conditions will have to be assessed as a regular challenge by a bidder with specific preferential rights.

65. Therefore, to conclude on this aspect, once it is observed that the emphasis on Self-Help Groups has been removed through a statutory enactment, the argument based on decentralization, which is not an overarching principle but a policy decision, loses its force. It is not the case that the Petitioners are prohibited from participating in the tender process. If the intention was opening the bidding to entities other than Self-Help Groups while still giving preferential rights to Self-Help Groups, and if the tenders were to be called at the project level, Poshan (2.0) Rules 2022 would have specifically provided for such contingency. The Petitioners contentions would be rewriting the Rules. A clear intent is evident from the way Poshan (2.0) Rules 2022 as interpreted, indicating the removal of preferential rights previously granted to Self-Help Groups. If the Petitioners were aggrieved by the removal of this preferential right, specifically outlined in the earlier Rules, they should have challenged the statutory Poshan (2.0) Rules 2022, which they have not done. Maintaining the Rules as they do not permit the inclusion of the Trupti 69 Writ Petition No- 5942-2023 and Group.docx preferential right that existed before but has now been deleted, merely through the interpretation process. Thus, we respectfully conclude that the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of PUCL and Vaishnorani and the judicial pronouncements that followed them, were as per the policy and legislative position prevalent at that time only, and there is no overarching principle or policy set for all time to come.