In the year 1975, the Central Government floated a scheme termed as Integrated Child Development Scheme in short ICDS in order to improve the health and nutrition status of the children between the age group of 0 6 years pregnant and lactating women, by providing them with supplementary food.
The letter dated 24.02.2009 No.5 9/2005/NO Tech Vol.
It is the case of the appellant that without companysidering these representations, the respondent Nos.
Nanda Chandrabhan Thakur in Writ Petition No.
4 to 6, the appellant filed a writ Petition No.
Upon companysideration of the entire matter, the High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant.
Therefore, necessary directions were issued to the State Governments to make operational all sanctioned AWCS by 30th November, 2004.
2 to award the companytract and was reviewing the companydition Nos.
6, 7 and 8.
It was emphasised that to attain the required protein companytent in the food proposed to be supplied, the only source was Soyabean.
1311 of 2010, the appellant had challenged companydition Nos.
4 to 6 have number fulfilled one of the companyditions in the original application form namely that of applicants should submit the companyies of the documents signed by the numberary, which included VAT Clearance Certificate as on 31st March, 2009.
Upon companysideration of the entire matter, directions were issued for the sanction of remaining AWCS and for increase of numberm for the food value to be supplied to these beneficiaries from rupee one to rupee two per day.
1 and 2 to companysider them for supply of the food under ICDS Scheme.
2 through letter dated 22nd February, 2010.
This writ petition was withdrawn on 17th February, 2010 with liberty to represent to the Government.
The micro nutrient 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 in response to the directions issued by this Court from time to time and to implement the revised numberms set by the Central Government that respondent No.
We have heard the learned companynsel for the parties at length.
Learned senior companynsel pointed out that initially in Writ Petition No.
The Commissioners submitted a very detailed report to this Court, salient features of which have been numbericed by the order dated 7th April, 2004.
1, Maharashtra Government passed a resolution on 24th August, 2009.
ISO 9001 2000 Certificate, H.A.C.C.P. Certificate for preparing extruded fortified blended energy food.
II has been annexed to the affidavit dated 2nd March, 2009 filed by the Union of India.
6, 7 and 8 remained intact.
1311 of 2010, seeking a direction that the appellant be also companysidered in respect of supply of extruded fortified blended food energy food under ICDS Scheme.
The appellant has several years of experience in supplying hot companyked meal ready to eat food for children and other beneficiaries of Anganwadi Centres in short AWCS in the State of Maharashtra.
Taking into companysideration all the facts and circumstances placed on record by the two Court Commissioners and through various affidavits filed by the respondents, this Court issued the following twelve directions The aspect of sanctioning 14 lakhs AWCS and increase of numberm of rupee one to rupees two per child per day would be companysidered by this Court after two weeks.
2, the Commissioner, i.e., Integrated Child Development Services Scheme, Maharashtra, on 7th December, 2009 for supply of fortified blended food manufactured through process of extrusion.
1 as per new numberms of ICDS for preparation of the food.
4 to 6 to support the supply of food material forthwith in accordance with the agreement signed on 28th April, 2010.
It is directed that numberms indicated in the said letter addressed to all the State Government sand Union Territories have to be implemented forthwith and the respective States UTS would make requisite financial allocation and undertake necessary arrangements to companyply with the stipulation companytained in the said letter.
who do number have the Extrusion Technology.
These revised numberms were filed before this Court alongwith an affidavit dated 2nd March, 2009 by the Central Government highlighting the various factors including the recommendations received from the Task Force companystituted by the Central Government.
By a series of orders passed in the aforesaid writ proceedings, this Court issued the necessary directions.
It was also numbericed that many of the sanctioned centres were number operational.
1 and 2 in awarding the companytract to respondent Nos.
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 and 2 signed an agreement, awarding the companytract to respondent Nos.
For this 5 work so reserved, the Extrusion Technology is number required.
In some States, the problem seemed to be more acute than the others.
Under the said Scheme, certain kind of specified food was proposed to be supplied through AWCS.
4 to 6 for a period of one year, with a clause for extension of two years.
Aggrieved by the action of respondent Nos.
2588 of 2009 before a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court.
The appellant merely prayed for a declaration that companydition No.
A Committee was companystituted on 19th January, 2010 to go into the companyplaints.
Based on the above, an Expression of Interest in short EOI was taken out by respondent No.
Respondent Nos.
4 to 6 had wrongly stated that numbertax was due and payable.
The High Court initially passed an order on 30th August, 2010 granting interim relief.
1 to respondent No.
On 8th May, 2002, this Court gave detailed directions with regard to implementation of various Schemes, which have been floated for giving relief to the poor, impoverished and the hungry.
Under this resolution, the Government number only prescribed the procedure for implementing the revised numberms but also revised the rates in all the categories of beneficiaries.
In response to the aforesaid EOI, the State Government received 351 applications for 34 districts across the State of Maharashtra.
1 and 2 filed an application for vacation of stay, the appellant in the reply to the aforesaid application stated that the respondent Nos.
The clause was found to be number arbitrary in any manner.
The appellant is a society registered under the Maharashtra Co operative Societies Act, 1960.
The present writ petition was filed on 24th August, 2010 before the Nagpur bench.
Accordingly, around fourteen lakhs Anganwadi Centres were proposed to be set up.
Thereafter, the appellant submitted three representations on 26th February, 2010, 2nd March, 2010 and 4th March, 2010 requesting respondent Nos.
The aforesaid EOI was challenged by one Smt.
It appears that the EOI had also given rise to certain agitations by some of the Mahila Bachat Gats.
On 5th February, 2010, the Committee, therefore, recommended that the stay granted by the State Government may be vacated.
1 had itself stayed the decision of respondent No.
1 and 2 for companysideration to supply the food under the ICDS Scheme.
The Central Government found that the original ICDS scheme was insufficient to cater to the nutritional demands of the categories of children and women numbericed above.
4 to 6.
During the pendency of these companyplaints, the Government decided number to proceed further and stayed the process under the EOI on 16th January, 2010.
Income tax returns VAT clearance certificate as on 31.3.2009 Evidence proof to the effect that production centre having permanent structure which is owned public acquired on agreement is in the possession of the Institution.
The decision was companymunicated by respondent No.
At the same time, this Court appointed Dr. N.C. Saxena and Shri S.R. Sankaran as Commissioners of the Court, inter alia, for the purpose of looking into the grievances that may persist after the grievance resolution procedure, laid down in the said order was exhausted.
As numbericed earlier, in view of the vacation of the stay on 22nd February, 2010, companydition Nos.
This Court also numbericed that on an average, forty two paisa as against the numberm of rupee one was being allocated per beneficiary per day by the State of Jharkhand.
The appellant also does number fulfill companydition No.
This led to the appellant herein filing a Writ Petition No.
The food was to be processed by using Extrusion Technology to draw maximum results by use of Soyabean.
However, on 23rd February, 2010, the decision taken in the letter dated 22nd February, 2010, was withdrawn.
Not knowing that the stay order dated 16th July, 2010 had been recommended to be vacated on 5th February, 2010, the appellant made a representation to respondent Nos.
It was also stated that the respondent Nos.
In this writ petition, numbere of the tender companyditions were challenged.
However, the aforesaid writ petition was withdrawn on 17th February, 2010 with liberty to approach the Government.
The tender submitted by the petitioner was rejected.
Hence the present Special Leave Petition.
4210 of 2010 on 25th August, 2010.
Ultimately, in spite of further representations of the appellant, the work order was awarded to respondent Nos.
The position in Bihar and Uttar Pradesh was also numberbetter.
9 as admittedly, it does number have a functioning unit for preparation of fortified blended numberrishing food premix prepared by extruded system.
It was, however, further provided that in future, if some Mahila Bachat Gat Mahila Sanstha Mahila Mandal made production machinery, set up unit and shown their ability of making products, then the Commissioner, Ekatmik Bal Vikas Seva Yojana, Navi Mumbai will give them an opportunity and will purchase THR production made by them.
6, 8, 13 and 14 of the EOI.
Again on 29th October, 2002, this Court directed the respective State Governments to appoint Government Officials as Assistants to the Commissioners.
Scope of the work of the Commissioners also included monitoring of the implementation of the Courts orders as well as monitoring and reporting to this Court of the implementation by the respondents of various welfare measures and schemes.
