# VAISHNORANI MAHILA BACHAT GAT v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS

- **Citation:** [2019] 3 S.C.R. 485
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 2019-02-26
- **Case number:** Civil Appeal No. 2336 of 2019
- **Bench:** Arun Mishra, Deepak Gupta
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/vaishnorani-mahila-bachat-gat-v-state-of-maharashtra-ors-33593
- **Pages:** 38

## Headnote

Government Contracts/Tender: Eligibility conditions of the
tender - Reasonableness - Contracts for the supply of food for
Anganwadis - Issuance of tender notice by State of Maharashtra -
Supply of ready to cook food to Anganwadi centres as supplementary
nutritional food for children, pregnant women and lactating mothers,
adolescents girls under Integrated Child Development Scheme
(ICDS) - Case of the petitioner that conditions in the tender insisting
on mandatory use of extrusion technology in preparation of mealsTHR(take home ration); that Mahila Mandals to have automated
production units, turnover of Rs.1 crore or more, and that under
the guise of the conditions of the tender, the contract given by the
State to large corporates/contractors instead of the local Mahila
Mandals, thus, the conditions of tender arbitrary and unreasonable
- Held: Imposition of the condition in the tender not in tune with the
spirit of the Act and the orders passed by this Court as well as the
policy framed by the Government of India - Thus, the tender
conditions cannot be held to be valid as they were arbitrarily
fixed - Tender notice issued is struck down - Tenders are directed
to be invited afresh, within the stipulated period strictly as per the
policy and observations made in this judgment - State Government
to make alternative arrangement and are restrained from continuing
the existing system of supply in the interregnum period -
National Food Security Act, 2013.
Disposing of the appeals and the writ petition, the Court
HELD: 1.1 On 26.2.2010, Government of India sent its
clarification to the Government of Maharashtra regarding the use
of extrusion technology and as to mandatory specifications laid
down in the recipe dated 28.7.2009. It was clarified by the
Government of India that there is no specific recommendation
[2019] 3 S.C.R. 485
 485
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
486
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 3 S.C.R.
for the use of extrusion technology or any other technology for
THR. The suggestion given by the Regional DTA, (Western
Region) is only suggestive in nature and not a recommendation
made by the Government of India. It is thus clear that
observations made by this Court in Shagun's case was based upon
not upon Government of India recommendations but in the letter
of Deputy Technical Director, Western Region, which was wrongly
represented to this Court as recommendations of the Government
of India. In view of the clarification made by the Government of
India, the observations made by this Court as to extrusion
technology stand diluted, based on misrepresentation. By
introducing the extrusion Technology it was pointed out that in
2010 three Mahila Mandals, which were chosen, were found to
be fake and were only acting as fronts for existing companies and
industrialists. Thus, it was urged that the field has been left open
to the industrialists in the conditions of the tender under the
guise of Mahila Mandal's fake persons are obtaining contracts.
In the judgment rendered by the Aurangabad Bench, it has been
noted that three big contractors were selected who were not really
Mahila Mandals or Mahila self-help groups. [Paras 18, 19, 20,
21, 23, 24] [500-E-F; 501-A-B; 502-A-C; 503-E-F]
1.2 It was submitted rightly that this Court was misled while
rendering the decision in Shagun's case when it was projected
that it was mandatory to follow the recipes dated 28.7.2009
whereas Government of India itself has clarified that it was only
suggestive and was not the decision of Government of India as
pointed out in the letter dated 26.2.2010. Apart from that after
the decision has been rendered by this Court in Shagun's case,
the Act has been enacted and new policy has been framed by the
Government of India and thereafter new policies have been filed
by the Government of India on 6.8.2018, contained in the affidavit
of the Secretary, Ministry of Home and Child Development. It
has also been pointed out in the affidavit on behalf of the
Government of India dated 0

## Text

_Characters 0–39,844 of 80,979. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39844 for what follows._

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
485
VAISHNORANI MAHILA BACHAT GAT
v.
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 2336 of 2019)
FEBRUARY 26, 2019
[ARUN MISHRA AND DEEPAK GUPTA, JJ.]
Government Contracts/Tender: Eligibility conditions of the
tender - Reasonableness - Contracts for the supply of food for
Anganwadis - Issuance of tender notice by State of Maharashtra -
Supply of ready to cook food to Anganwadi centres as supplementary
nutritional food for children, pregnant women and lactating mothers,
adolescents girls under Integrated Child Development Scheme
(ICDS) - Case of the petitioner that conditions in the tender insisting
on mandatory use of extrusion technology in preparation of mealsTHR(take home ration); that Mahila Mandals to have automated
production units, turnover of Rs.1 crore or more, and that under
the guise of the conditions of the tender, the contract given by the
State to large corporates/contractors instead of the local Mahila
Mandals, thus, the conditions of tender arbitrary and unreasonable
- Held: Imposition of the condition in the tender not in tune with the
spirit of the Act and the orders passed by this Court as well as the
policy framed by the Government of India - Thus, the tender
conditions cannot be held to be valid as they were arbitrarily
fixed - Tender notice issued is struck down - Tenders are directed
to be invited afresh, within the stipulated period strictly as per the
policy and observations made in this judgment - State Government
to make alternative arrangement and are restrained from continuing
the existing system of supply in the interregnum period -
National Food Security Act, 2013.
Disposing of the appeals and the writ petition, the Court
HELD: 1.1 On 26.2.2010, Government of India sent its
clarification to the Government of Maharashtra regarding the use
of extrusion technology and as to mandatory specifications laid
down in the recipe dated 28.7.2009. It was clarified by the
Government of India that there is no specific recommendation
[2019] 3 S.C.R. 485
 485
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
486
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 3 S.C.R.
for the use of extrusion technology or any other technology for
THR. The suggestion given by the Regional DTA, (Western
Region) is only suggestive in nature and not a recommendation
made by the Government of India. It is thus clear that
observations made by this Court in Shagun's case was based upon
not upon Government of India recommendations but in the letter
of Deputy Technical Director, Western Region, which was wrongly
represented to this Court as recommendations of the Government
of India. In view of the clarification made by the Government of
India, the observations made by this Court as to extrusion
technology stand diluted, based on misrepresentation. By
introducing the extrusion Technology it was pointed out that in
2010 three Mahila Mandals, which were chosen, were found to
be fake and were only acting as fronts for existing companies and
industrialists. Thus, it was urged that the field has been left open
to the industrialists in the conditions of the tender under the
guise of Mahila Mandal's fake persons are obtaining contracts.
In the judgment rendered by the Aurangabad Bench, it has been
noted that three big contractors were selected who were not really
Mahila Mandals or Mahila self-help groups. [Paras 18, 19, 20,
21, 23, 24] [500-E-F; 501-A-B; 502-A-C; 503-E-F]
1.2 It was submitted rightly that this Court was misled while
rendering the decision in Shagun's case when it was projected
that it was mandatory to follow the recipes dated 28.7.2009
whereas Government of India itself has clarified that it was only
suggestive and was not the decision of Government of India as
pointed out in the letter dated 26.2.2010. Apart from that after
the decision has been rendered by this Court in Shagun's case,
the Act has been enacted and new policy has been framed by the
Government of India and thereafter new policies have been filed
by the Government of India on 6.8.2018, contained in the affidavit
of the Secretary, Ministry of Home and Child Development. It
has also been pointed out in the affidavit on behalf of the
Government of India dated 06.08.2018 that the guideline
prescribes the measures for maintaining hygiene and sanitation
at the Anganwadi centers and ensuring food safety. It has also
been pointed out by the Secretary in the affidavit dated 06.08.2018
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
487
that Supplementary Nutritional Programme ('SNP') is
implemented, managed and controlled by the respective States/
UTs, it is at their discretion to decide items of food to be supplied
under the supplementary nutrition as the local food habits, regional
preferences and availability of food in the local area vary from
place to place. However, this is to be done by keeping in view
the overall guidelines, nutritional norms and food safety standards,
a copy of some of the suggestive recipes prepared by the National
Institute of Nutrition, Hyderabad, has been placed on record.
[Paras 31-34] [509-F-H; 510-A; 511-H; 512-A; 513-D-E]
1.3 The various recipes which have been prescribed were
Cereal-Pulse Mix, Regina, Rice Flakes-Groundnut Barfi, WheatGroundnut Barfi, Bajra and Pulse/Legume Mix, Sweet Ready
Mix, Paushtik panjeeri, Besan-Suji Ladus, Paushtik Barfi,
Paushtik mathri, Amylase Rice Energy Food, Wheat Soya Laddu,
Nutro Soya Corn Chikkis. However, it would be for the concerned
State or the Union Territory to take an action on the recipes they
want as per local requirement, the said recipe is only suggestive,
as specified in the affidavit of 06.08.2018 of the Secretary
Government of India of the concerned department itself. It has
also been pointed out that under THR normally dry mixtures are
supplied such as Daliya, Khichdi etc. However, some other States
are giving in some other forms. Most of the items do not require
a sophisticated technique of manufacturing process and the selfhelp groups/Mahila Mandals are fully equipped and competent
to supply the said food. The concerned Authorities of the State
Government are expected to undertake all such steps which
becomes necessary that the self-help groups/Mahila Mandals and
such other similar organizations are allowed to meaningfully
participate in providing HCM and THR, all over the country and
terms and conditions of the tenders etc., should not be framed in
such a manner that they get excluded from participating itself in
such tenders. It has also been pointed out that with respect to
management, preparation, supply, monitoring and service of the
supplementary nutrition under the Integrated Child Development,
Scheme the policy of the Central Government is guided by the
provisions contained in the Office Memorandum dated 24.02.2009
VAISHNORANI MAHILA BACHAT GAT v. STATE OF
MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
488
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 3 S.C.R.
of the Ministry concerned and the decision of this Court in PUCL
v. Union of India dated 22.04.2009 in W.P.(C) No.196/2001 to
follow and implement the guidelines.[Para 35-37] [513-F-H;
514-A-C]
1.4 Before enactment of the Act of 2013, the National Food
Security Ordinance was issued on 5.7.2013. Note 1 below
Schedule II of the said Ordinance states "Energy Dense Food
fortified with micronutrients as per 50 percent of Recommended
Dietary Allowance". However, the Parliament while discussing
and passing the Act of 2013 deleted the above provision thereby
making the preparation of THR in the simplest way. In exercise
of powers, under Section 39 of the Act of 2013, the Central
Government has framed the Rules after consultation with the
State Government and Union Territories, experts and the civil
society notified the Rules relating to Sections 4, 5 & 6 of the Act
of 2013 called as Supplementary Nutritional (under ICDS) Rules,
2015 on 08.06.2015, which have been amended on 20.02.2017.
It has been also pointed out in the affidavit filed by the Union of
India that the Government of India has launched the POSHAN
Abhiyaan on 08.03.2018 with the objective to comprehensively
address the problem of stunting, under-nutrition, low birth weight,
and anemia in a time-bound manner children and Pregnant &
Lactating Mother. Further instructions have been issued vide
letter dated 10.07.2017 with respect to meet the requirement of
fortification of food with micro-nutrient, the Union of India has
mandated the use of double fortified salt (Iodine & Iron) and
fortified oil (Vitamin A & D) and fortified Wheat flour (Iron, Folic
Acid and Vitamin B-12) for preparation of SNP under the ICDS.
In POSHAN Abhiyaan, a National Council on India's Nutrition
Challenges which is an apex body to give policy direction, review
and effective coordination and convergence between Ministries
having a sectoral responsibility was constituted on 03.01.2018
with the following Chairperson/Members. [Paras 40, 41, 44, 45]
[516-A-C; 518-C, G-H]
1.5 The National Council of India, pursuant to the meeting
held on 18.04.2018 discussed the issue of Hot Cooked meals for
children in the age group of 3 years to 6 years and Take Home
Ration (THR) for the children in the age group of 6 months to 3
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
489
years and Pregnant Women and Lactating Mother as decided by
the State Government in conformity with the the Act of 2013 and
the Supplementary Nutrition (Under the Integrated Child
Development Services Scheme) Rules, 2015, which have been
amended in 2017. Minutes have been placed on record. It has
been pointed out in the affidavit on behalf of the Government of
India, Ministry of Women and Child Welfare that the policy of the
Government of India vis-a-vis the Supplementary Nutrition under
the ICDS Scheme based on the Nutritional Norms on 24.02.09
read with the Act of 2013 and Supplementary Nutrition (Under
the Integrated Child Development Services Scheme) Rules, 2015,
which have been amended in 2017 and the guidelines issued by
the Union of India. [Paras 47, 49] [520-A-B, E-F]
1.6 NIT issued by the Government of Maharashtra was not
in the spirit of the orders passed by this Court as the imposition
of the condition of 25% of turnover during any one of the last
three financial years in the various districts by insisting for the
performance for supplying at least annual average value equal to
25% of required turnover of applied sectors. As to the formation
of applied sectors it is apparent from the tender notice that each
of the districts has been taken as a unit and yearly expenditure,
for example, Ahmednagar is Rs.31,78,87,200/- yearly, 25% would
come to Rs.7,94,71,800/- and so on district-wise which ranges
from Rs. 1 Crore to more than Rs.10 Crores in various districts.
By virtue of the imposition of the said condition only big players
have been left in the field and that is not in tune with the spirit of
the Act and the orders passed by this Court as well as the policy
framed by the Government of India, as projected in the said
affidavit dated 06.08.2018. Thus, the tender conditions cannot
be held to be valid as they were arbitrarily fixed and it was fairly
conceded by counsel for the State of Maharashtra that they have
to abide by the conditions as imposed by the Union of India and
the policy framed by the Union of India as projected in the affidavit
dated 06.08.2018. [Para 50] [521-C-G]
1.7 Tender notice which has been issued also falls down,
the tenders are directed to be invited afresh, within the stipulated
period. [Para 51] [521-G-H]
VAISHNORANI MAHILA BACHAT GAT v. STATE OF
MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
490
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 3 S.C.R.
1.8 It has also been found that fixing of unit area as a district
several players have been effectively ousted from the field, it
would be appropriate to form groups of the smaller area such as
at panchayat or group of panchayats etc., within the District so
that the real intention behind the policy is fulfilled in its real sense
and supply should be decentralized as much as possible as it is
not for the big players/industrialists in the field to cater to the
needs of the Scheme as they have usurped in past. It is open to
the State Government to make alternative arrangement within
the stipulated period and they are restrained from continuing the
existing system of supply in the interregnum period.
[Para 52] [522-A-C]
PUCL v. Union of India (2013) 2 SCC 663; Shagun
Mahila Udyogik Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit v. State
of Maharashtra and Others [2011] 13 SCR 789 -
referred to.
Case Law Reference
(2013) 2 SCC 663
 referred to
Para 3
[2011] 13 SCR 789
 referred to
Para 3
CIVIL ORIGINAL/APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal
No. 2336 of 2019.
From the Judgment and Order dated 15.03.2016 of the High Court
of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench at Nagpur in Writ Petition
No. 1807 of 2016
WITH
Civil Appeal Nos. 2337, 2348, 2346, 2340-2341, 2344, 2349, 2338,
2347, 2342, 2339, 2345, 2343, 2350, 2351 of 2019 and Writ Petition (C)
No. 910 of 2017.
A. N. S. Nadkarni, Ms. Madhvi Divan, ASGs, K. Radhakrishnan,
Colin Gonsalves, Balbir Singh, Sr. Advs., Anmol Chandan, Gurmeet Singh
Makker, Ms. Olivia Bang, Ms. Deepika Sahani, Satya Mitra, Nar Hari
Singh, Gagan Sanghi, Abhijeet Sinha, Anas Tanwir, Maryam N. Alavi,
Ebad Mushtaq, Fuzail Ahmad Ayyubi, Shashibhushan P. Adgaonkar,
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
491
Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, Sudhanshnu S. Choudhari, Amol
Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi, Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Ms. Hemantika Wahi,
Ms. Jesal Wahi, Ms. Puja Singh, Ms. Vishakha, Gaurav Agrawal,
Anshuman Ashok, Sandeep Sudhakar Deshmukh, Vinay Navare,
Ms. Gwen Karthika, Ms. Abha R. Sharma, Ms. Manisha T. Karia,
Shashank S. Mangal, Ms. Sukhda Kalra, Abhijit Sinha, Ms. Shubhangi
Tuli, Prashant Bhushan, Ms. Pratiksha Sharma, Ankit Acharya, Advs.
for the appearing parties.
The following Judgment of the Court was delivered:
 JUDGMENT
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellants/petitioner(s) have questioned the judgment and
order dated 11.7.2016 passed by the High Court of Bombay, Bench at
Aurangabad and order dated 15.03.2016 of the High Court of Judicature
at Bombay, Bench at Nagpur. The petitioners in the writ petition filed
before the High Court i.e. W.P. No.3359/2016 questioned the tender
notice dated 08.03.2016 issued by the State of Maharashtra inviting tender
for multilevel contract and for supply of ready to cook food to Anganwadi
Centres as supplementary nutritional food for children, pregnant women
and lactating mothers, adolescents girls under Integrated Child
Development Scheme (ICDS Scheme). The conditions were questioned
by the appellants/petitioner(s) being arbitrary, unreasonable against the
spirit of the decision of this Court in W.P.(C) No.196/2001.
3. The question as stated in the appeal is that the local self-help
groups are sought to be ousted by the money power of large corporate
houses with the help of the State ,the decision by this Court in PUCL v.
Union of India (W.P.(C) No.196/2001) is being violated and that of
Shagun Mahila Udyogik Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit v. State of
Maharashtra and Others, passed in Civil Appeal No.7104/2011. It is
urged that the local organization of women (Mahila Mandals) and selfhelp groups are best suited to give local food and other necessary efforts
to provide supplementary nutritional food for children. The so-called
Mahila Mandals who have applied under the tender that has been floated
is, in fact, large industrial units and nothing to do with the Mahila Mandals
and self-help groups. They are close to certain political personalities in
the State of Maharashtra. Industrialists are not supplying good food as
compared to these Mahila Mandals in different parts of the country, as
VAISHNORANI MAHILA BACHAT GAT v. STATE OF
MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
492
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 3 S.C.R.
accepted by the Union of India in its Report. The imposition of the
unrealistic conditions made it impossible for the Mahila Mandals to
compete. Thus, the State is entertaining fake business units and is acting
contrary to the various decisions of this Court and the spirit of the Scheme.
4. The principal issue raised is whether contracts for the supply
of such food for Anganwadis should be given to local Mahila Mandals
run along democratic lines with local women participating or whether
such contracts ought to be given by the State to large corporates/
contractors under the guise of the conditions of the tender. In PUCL v.
Union of India & Ors. (W.P. (C) No.196 of 2001), this Court has
passed the order, on 07.10.2004, inter alia to the following effect:-
"The contractors shall not be used for the supply of nutrition in
Anganwadis and preferably ICDS funds shall be spent by making
use of village communities, self-help groups and Mahila Mandals
for buying of grains and preparation of meals."
5. On 13.12.2006, in PUCL (supra), the Court inter alia passed
the following order:-
"...Chief Secretaries of all State Governments/UTs are directed
to submit affidavits giving details of the steps that have been taken
with regard to the order of this Court of October 7th, 2004 directing
that "contractors shall not be used for supply of nutrition in
Anganwadis and preferably ICDS funds shall be spent by making
use of village communities, self-help groups and Mahila Mandals
for buying of grains and preparation of meals". Chief Secretaries
of all State Governments/UTs. must indicate a time-frame within
which the decentralization of the supply of SNP through local
community shall be made."
6. Thereafter, Food Safety Ordinance, 2013 was promulgated on
5.7.2013 in which provision has been made for the benefit of children in
the age group of 6 months to 14 years. The Ordinance which has taken
the shape of the Act i.e. National Food Security Act, 2013 (for short
'the Act of 2013'), aims at to reform the public distribution system and
bringing in transparency and accountability apart from creating obligation
of the Central Government and the State Governments in respect of all
issues relating to food security.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
493
7. A report was submitted to this Court by the Commissioner
appointed in PUCL [W.P.(C) No.196/2001] regarding Take Home Ration
(for short 'THR') in Maharashtra, relevant portion is extracted
hereunder:-
 "In the attached report claims large-scale irregularities in the
supply of supplementary nutrition in violation of the orders of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court. The report claims though it is not
specifically proven that there is a nexus between politicians,
bureaucrats and private contractors in the provisioning of SNP to
the ICDS leading to large-scale corruption and leakages.
 The contracts to supply THR in Maharashtra have been given
to three Mahila Mandals, namely, Venkateshwara Mahila
Audhyogic Utpadan Sahakari Sanstha Ltd, Mahalaxmi Mahila
Grahaudhyog & Balvikas Buddheshiya Audhyogic Sahakari
Sanstha and Maharashtra Mahila Sahakari Grahudhyog Sanstha
Ltd. These Mahila Mandals, in turn, have leased in the facilities
for production of THR from private agro-companies. My report
establishes the de-facto and de-jure ownership of the Mahila
Mandals and the private agro-companies are by the same family.
In each case, the Mahila Mandal has formed a sub-committee
which has been given also operational control over production
and finances in relation to a unit which is owned by family members
of the members of the said sub-committee.
 In some States like Uttar Pradesh, the supplementary nutrition
has been contracted out to private companies like Great Value
Foods, promoted by Gurdeep Singh (Ponty) Chadha in complete
violation of the Supreme Court orders. This continues despite an
adverse report on the issue (in Gorakhpur) by the National Human
Rights Commission. Similarly, a contractor based out of Noida,
Continental Milkose (India) Ltd. provides the supplementary
nutrition for the ICDS in Meghalaya. The contract continues
despite adverse CAG reports on the provision of SNP in
Meghalaya. This state of affairs prevails across many States/
UTs.
 According to the National Family Health Survey 3, every day
close to 5,000 children dies in India due to preventable causes
including malnutrition. The ICDS is the only institutional mechanism
VAISHNORANI MAHILA BACHAT GAT v. STATE OF
MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
494
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 3 S.C.R.
of the Government to deal with issues of children under the age
of six. The government of India/States and UTs spend close to
8,000 crores every year on the provision of Supplementary
Nutrition. It is unconscionable that a country with one of the highest
rates of child malnutrition, globally, allows rampant corruption to
undermine the ICDS and thereby the future of its children."
8. The second report was submitted by the Commissioner
appointed in PUCL (W.P.© No.196/2001) to this Court, the relevant
portion is extracted hereunder:
 "Part A of the existing report further probes the subject of the
large-scale irregularities in the supply of Supplementary Nutrition
Provisioning (SNP) in violation of the orders of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court by the engagement of contractors in ICDS in four
states namely, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Uttar Pradesh, and
Gujarat.
 Part B of the report documents the best practice study from
two states viz, Odisha and Kerala on the effective involvement of
the local women's' groups in the form of the decentralized model
of nutrition provisioning under ICDS, which is in consonance with
2004 and 2006 Hon'ble Supreme Court order.
 Part C of the report is the nutrient analysis of the samples
Take Home Rations collected from four states (Maharashtra,
Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat, Meghalaya), carried out by National
Institute of Nutrition (NIN) Hyderabad. NIN data shows a
significant gap between state specifications and the results of the
lab test.
 We reiterate our concern for the health, nutrition, and life of
millions of children in India, in the larger public interest and in
order to be able to indisputably establish the facts of this case, we
would again request the Hon'ble Supreme Court to set up an
independent Special Investigation Team (SIT) to enquire into the
matter."
9. Further directions were issued by this Court in PUCL (W.P.©
No.196/2001) on 10.7.2013:
 "Mr. Colin Gonsalves, learned senior counsel appearing for the
writ petitioner, on the other hand argued that although the
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
495
Government of Gujarat had made a statement before the High
Court on 14 March, 2011 that they will completely switch-over to
the system of providing rations through Mahila Mandals and SelfHelp Groups within a period of one year, the Government had not
been diligent in doing the needful with the result that the switchover was achieved only to the extent of 16 percent. He submitted
that the Government had in derogation of the orders of this Court
dated 7.10.2004, 13.12.2006 and 22.04.2009 engaged a contractor
for the supply of nutritional food to the children falling in the age
group of six months to three years and that the present application
was only an attempt to perpetuate that violation. He submitted
that according to his instructions each Anganwadi was equipped
with pucca/kaccha kitchen for many many years and that there
was indeed no difficulty in supplying to the targeted age group of
children cooked nutritional food in terms of the scheme as directed
by this Court.
 In the circumstances, therefore, and keeping in view the
submissions made at the Bar we direct the State Government of
Gujarat to file an additional affidavit on the lines indicated above,
indicating the time-frame within which it will switch-over to the
system of supply of food to the targeted population of children
and others entitled to the same in the State of Gujarat under the
Ordinance and also indicating the time-frame within which every
school and Anganwadi may be equipped with facilities for cooking
meals within the meaning of Section 5 (2) of the Ordinance."
10. On 6.8.13, this Court passed an order in PUCL (W.P.© No.196/
2001) with respect to Gujarat:-
 "In the meantime, we permit the Government of Gujarat to
continue the system under which it has been procuring for
distribution take-home ration as EFBF from the original
manufacturers by inviting competitive bids for a period of one
more year.
 The State would, therefore, would do well to diligently identify
not only reliable self-help groups who can be entrusted with the
process of setting up of the plants but also providing all such
assistance as may be required for the plants to become functional
as early as possible.
VAISHNORANI MAHILA BACHAT GAT v. STATE OF
MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
496
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 3 S.C.R.
We make it clear that in case its found that the State Government
have not taken appropriate steps in terms of what we have said
above, we may be forced to recall this order and issue appropriate
direction in the matter."
11. This Court again in PUCL (W.P.© No.196/2001) directed State
of Gujarat and Rajasthan, on 01.09.2014, to the following effect:-
"Rajasthan: The directions of this Court have over the past 10
years resulted in a switchover of decentralization of the feeding
process to Self-Help Groups and Women Co-operatives only in
107 such projects as against 304 projects spread over in the entire
State. The pace of switchover is very slow and needs to be
increased by the authorities concerned."
Gujarat: "There is no manner of doubt that the State has undertaken
steps in setting up of pilot projects four of which projects have
already been commissioned, no matter the capacity of the project
is limited. There is also no manner of doubt that the thirteen
additional sanctioned projects will not be sufficient to cater to the
States of its requirement of 12,000 metric tonnes. In that view,
therefore, we are inclined to extend the time fixed for completing
the switchover but impress upon the State to expedite the process
of switchover for otherwise it can go on indefinitely for decades."
12. The tender notice has been issued by Government of
Maharashtra dated 08.03.2016, the tender conditions that came to be
questioned were contained in Clauses VII (h), (j) and (l) and Clause X
(e) and (g), which are extracted hereunder:-
"VII... (h) Machinery Performance Certificate: Proposer must
furnish a list of machineries installed in his premises and a latest
certificate from a Chartered Engineer registered with the Institution
of Engineers (India), stating that the machinery is sufficient to
meet the production requirement of various Ready to Cook Food
Mixes as per product specification given under this proposal and
also stating that the machinery can effectively perform for a
further period of 5 years. The certificate shall also clearly indicate
the installed capacity of such machinery.
(j) The Proposer should have In house Quality Control facilities,
and any quality control laboratory equipped with appropriate
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
497
laboratory equipment for testing the parameters prescribed in the
Food Safety and Standard Act (Prevention of Food Adulteration
Act) and as per the specifications given in the proposal regarding
the Nutrient contents, Moisture content, Microbiological and
Chemical contamination, Physical conditions e.g. dryness, softness,
consistency, Micronutrient contents. The proposer must submit a
list of equipment list of technically qualified personnel engaged in
quality control etc.
(l) The latest consent letter received from the micronutrient
manufacturer/importers, for the supply of micronutrient, minimum
for the contract period to the proposer, should be submitted before
the work order gets awarded.
X. Blueprint/drawing of the plant approved by the Food and Drug
Authority from where the product as specified in this proposal
will be produced and supplied by the proposer. The design/detail
should cover location and capacity (in MT) of silos, covered
storage areas with capacity in MT, open storage areas with
capacity in MT, process divisions like extrusion, cleaning, grinding
etc. Proposers shall also submit Notarized copies of the following
registration/licenses for producing Extruded Fortified Blended Food
as specified in this proposal.
(e) A valid license under FSSA, 2006.
(g) ISO 22000:2005, ISO 14001:2004 OHSAS 18001:2007 Good
Manufacturing Practice."
13. The Nagpur Bench has dismissed W.P. No.1807/2016 that
has been questioned in the special leave petitions i.e.
SLP(C) Nos.10103/16, 8551/16 and 2415/2017.
14. Whereas Aurangabad Bench has set aside the tender notice
to the extent of reducing the products to 70. All the terms and conditions
of the tender have been held valid. The direction was issued to the
respondent to conduct the survey of the eligible units with respect to
extrusion technology and satisfying all other conditions and shall thereafter
proceed to form projects and issue tender notice accordingly.
15. It was pointed out that while rendering the decision in Shagun
(supra) on 19.8.2011 this Court was shown a letter dated 28.7.2009
which was issued by the Deputy Technical Advisor, Food and Nutrition
VAISHNORANI MAHILA BACHAT GAT v. STATE OF
MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
498
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 3 S.C.R.
Board (Western Region), Ministry of Women and Child Development,
sent recipes to the Government of Maharashtra. The recipes inter alia
provided for mandatory micronutrient fortification and mandatory use of
extrusiontechnology in preparation of meals, thus requiring factory-based
production which is difficult at the level of Anganwadi Centres, Relevant
portion of the recipes, which was relied on in the case of Shagun (supra),
is extracted hereunder:
 "Protein content in the food can be increased by confined
sources and among the available sources Soybean is the best
sources for who are vegetarian, now the question arises that milk
can also be considered as one of the sources but protein content
of milk are not as much as that of soybean. Again we can say that
legumes can also be considered as one of the sources available
for protein but when compared to soybean the protein contents of
legumes is very less and the problem faced with legumes is very
expensive.
 Hence the only sources left to attain the required protein
content are SOYABEAN which fits into the budgetary and
nutrition norms Problem encountered with soybean is that presence
of Tropism inhibitor and complex starch structure in Soybean
makes protein unavailable the solution to this was the use of apt
processing technology.
 The technology that we came across after studying the various
factors was "EXTRUSION TECHNOLOGY".
EXTRUSION TECHNOLOGY
 Is a multivariable unit operation i.e. mixing shearing, cooking,
puffing and drying in one energy efficient rapid continuous process?
This process of High-Temperature Short Time (HTST) combined
with high-pressure cooking in presence of moisture.
 Try spin Inhibitor: They interface with the proper digestion of
the protein kakde at all (1973) estimated that nearly 40% of the
reduction in growth performance of any mammal fed raw soybean
is due to the trips in inhibitor.
 The anituntironal factors can be deactivated through proper
heat processing such as across in extrusion.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
499
 Once the product is being extruded and is in granule or powder
form the fortification of the micronutrients will be easy which
leads to a homogeneous mix of required nutrition in correct
proportion.
 Micronutrient Fortification: The revised guidelines lays major
streets on micronutrient fortification of the THR to be provided to
the beneficiary this step of micronutrient fortification requires
expert technical supervision and can be achieved in precise
perfection by using accurate machines with precision in measuring
the quantity in milligrams. The fortification of the said receipts at
AWC will be quite difficult."
16. The Government of Maharashtra passed a Resolution dated
24.08.2009 on the basis of the advice dated 28.7.2009, which required a
highly mechanized and automated process of extrusion and micronutrient
fortification. The State Government further issued a tender notification
based on these requirement laying onerous conditions on Mahila Mandals
to have automated production units, turnover of Rs.1 Crore or more etc.
Following is the Resolution of the Government of Maharashtra:
"There being need of change in the diet system to bring about
multifariousness in the diet and to effect micronutrient certification
by chemical process, individual cleanliness from the public health
point of view, or cleanliness of the premises, vaccination, creating
public awareness are the points which require to be given
preference. It is not possible to remove the deficiency in the diet
of children and mothers by the diet being provided under the
Integrated Child Development Service Scheme. However, the
instructions of the Central Government are that 50% need of the
micronutrient requirement may be made good by fortification
process."
17. The Government of Maharashtra sought clarification from
Government of India regarding extrusion process, factory-based
production etc., as required in the recipe dated 28.07.2009. A letter was
written on 29.1.2010. Relevant extract of a letter dated 29.01.2010 is
extracted hereunder:-
"Meanwhile, we have received a report from Mr.Balbeer Singh,
Dy. Director (Technical), Food and Nutrition Board, Western
Region, a copy of which is enclosed herewith.
VAISHNORANI MAHILA BACHAT GAT v. STATE OF
MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
500
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 3 S.C.R.
From this report, it is seen that the Food and Nutrition Board has
recommended factory-based production with extrusion technology
and specific recipes which use this technology for production of
THR.
In this regard, we would be grateful, if you would kindly clarify
the following points so that the further tender process can be
finalised.
1. Does GOI prescribe or recommend factory-based production,
or any specific technology, for production of THR? Has it
prescribed any specific recipes or products?
2. Does it recommend 'Extrusion Technology for THR
production'?
3. Does it recommend any minimum shelf life for THR? Is there
any prescribed water content?
4. Can the state go in for gur-groundnut chikki or similar products
as THR, as long as it satisfied the prescribed criteria for calories
and proteins etc.?
5. Has it authorized Food and Nutrition Board, Western Region,
to prescribe Extrusion technology for THR?"
18. On 26.2.2010, Government of India sent its clarification to the
Government of Maharashtra regarding the use of extrusion technology
and as to mandatory specifications laid down in the recipe dated 28.7.2009.
Following is the reply sent by the Government of India:-
 "Please refer to your DO letter No.ICDS/2008/CR-59
(Part-II)/2005 dated 29th January 2010 raising queries regarding
factory-based production or specific technology for production of
THR.
 The provision of SNP, whether in the form of morning snack,
hot cooked meal or THR has been left with the State. So far,
there are no specific recommendations for the use of extrusion
technology or any other technology for THR. The suggestions
given by Regional DTA (Western Region) are only suggestive in
nature and not a recommendation by GOI."
 (emphasis supplied)
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
501
19. It was clarified by the Government of India that there is no
specific recommendation for the use of extrusion technology or any other
technology for THR. The suggestion given by the Regional DTA,
(Western Region) is only suggestive in nature and not a recommendation
made by the Government of India. In Shagun (supra) this Court on
19.08.2011 observed thus:-
 "The Central Government, through the Ministry of Women and
Child Development and Food and Nutrition Board office vide its
letter dated 28th July 2009, circulated the Recipe to the State
Government (respondent No.1) as per new norms of ICDS for
preparation of the food. It was provided that the feeding norms
ought to have two components in it, to be provided as supplementary
nutrition to the beneficiaries at Anganwadis namely:- Hot Cooked
Meal (HCM) and Take Home Ration (THR).
 Directions were issued that HCM and THR should be given
in the form of "energy-dense food/micronutrient fortified food"
and should conform to the standards laid by the Prevention of
Food Adulteration Act, Integrated Food Law, Infant, and Young
Child Practices. The micronutrient fortified food was defined to
be the food in which essential mineral and vitamins are added
separately to ensure that minimum dietary requirements are met.
It was emphasised that to attain the required protein content in
the food proposed to be supplied, the only source was Soybean.
The food was to be processed by using Extrusion Technology to
draw maximum results by use of Soyabean. The guidelines in the
aforesaid letter further emphasised that since the revised guidelines
laid major stress on micronutrient fortification of the THR, it
required "expert technical supervision" and that it can be achieved
by using accurate machines with precision in measuring the
quantity in milligrams.
 The Government of India communicated the judgment in the
Shagun Mahila Mandal case to all States/UTs. The judgment
nowhere mentioned that private manufacturers or contractors are
allowed, and the judgment was only limited to the tender conditions
applicable to eligible Mahila mandals. However, the Central
Government communication allowed the states to supply even
from manufacturers:"
VAISHNORANI MAHILA BACHAT GAT v. STATE OF
MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
502
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 3 S.C.R.
20. It is thus clear that observations made by this Court in Shagun
(supra) was based upon not upon Government of India recommendations
but in the letter of Deputy Technical Director, Western Region, which
was wrongly represented to this Court as recommendations of the
Government of India. In view of the clarification made by the Government
of India, the observations made by this Court as to extrusion technology
stand diluted, based on misrepresentation.
21. By introducing the extrusion Technology it was pointed out
that in 2010 three Mahila Mandals, which were chosen, were found to
be fake and were only acting as fronts for existing companies and
industrialists. Following facts have been mentioned in the reply filed by
the State of Maharashtra :
"The following women institutions are selected for the supply of
THR to the beneficiaries of the Gramin/Aadivashi and Urban
Project and the following product unit is allotted district wise.
1. Mahalaxmi Mahila Gruhuddyog and Bal Vikas Bahu Uddyeshiya
Aoudyo. Co.-Operative Society, Nanded
Unit 1. Mahalaxmi M.G.B.V.B.A. Cooperative Society, Nanded
Districts- Nanded, Parbhani, Hingoli
Unit 2. Indo Alied Protein Food Districts-Thane Pune, Ahmednagar
Unit 3. Kota Rajasthan Districts Mumbai, Raigad, Ratnagiri,
Sindhudurg, Sangali, Satara, Kolhapur, Solapur, Usmanabad, Akola,
Gondiya.
2. Maharashtra Women Cooperative Home Industry Societies,
Dhule, Districts - Dhule, Nandurbar, Nashik, Jalgaon, Aurangabad.
3. Vyankateshwar Women Cooperative Home Industry Societies,
Udgir.
Unit -1 Kapshikhurd Nagpur Districts- Bhandara, Gadchiroli,
Nagpur, Yavatmal, Jalna, Buldhana, Washim.
Unit 2- Dongargaon, Nagpur Districts Chandrapur, Amravati, Beed,
Latur, Vardha"
22. Following averments have also been made in reply filed by
the State of Maharashtra with respect to Venkateshwara Mahila
Ayodhogic Sanstha:-
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
503
"It is necessary here to clarify that applicant Venkateshwara
Mahila Ayodhogik Sanstha is in fact contractor: which is being
well practically operated by male members, merely by showing
female relatives or, documents for projection.
11.