This PIL sought uniform practice for food grain distribution to poverty line beneficiaries in Maharashtra. The Court found uniformity existed per a 1998 Government Resolution, thus disposed of the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
22-pil-87-07.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No. 87 of 2007.
Sanjay Parameshwar Ghodake
..Petitioner.
Vs
The Divisional Commissioner, Pune Division and ors
..Respondents.
None for the Petitioner.
Mr V.P. Malvankar, AGP “A” Panel for Respondent Nos. 1,2,3 and 5. Mr Siddharth Gadhave i/by Vijay Killedar for Respondent No.4.
CORAM :A.S. OKA & A.S.CHANDURKAR, JJ
CORAM :- 5th August, 2014.
ORDER (PER : A.S. CHANDURKAR, J)
and Civil Supplies to adopt an uniform practice for providing food
grains at concessional rates to people below the poverty line.
1 / 5
2
22-pil-87-07.doc
Relief is also sought to hold an enquiry into the identification of persons below the poverty line under the Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP) for providing food grains at concessional rates.
2 / 5
3
22-pil-87-07.doc
implement schemes in the matter of distribution of food grains. It
is stated that the scheme for distribution of food grains at
concessional rates to persons below the poverty line has been introduced from 1st June, 1997. On 18th May,1998 a Government Resolution was issued directing that eligible families below the poverty line category should be issued yellow colour ration cards. It is further stated that pursuant thereto a uniform practice has been adopted. It is further stated that in the aforesaid Government Resolution detailed criteria has been laid down in the matter of eligibility. It is further stated that the list of beneficiaries prepared under the District Rural Development Project were taken into account and the names therein were scrutinized in terms of requirements of eligibility under the Government Resolution dated 18th May, 1998. It is further stated that food grains are now being distributed in accordance with said Government Resolution dated 18th May, 1998.
3 / 5
4
22-pil-87-07.doc
Nos. 1 to 3 and 5 and Shri Siddharth Gadhave has appeared for
Respondent No.4. With the assistance of the learned Counsel for the respondents, we have gone through the averments made in the writ petition, the documents filed as well as replies filed on record. Considering the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of Respondent No.3, it is clear that now there is an uniform policy in the form of Government Resolution dated 18th May, 1998 and food grains are being accordingly distributed to eligible families below the poverty line. Considering aforesaid Government Resolution dated 18th May, 1998 which specifies the criteria for eligibility to receive food grains at lower prices, it is clear that now there is uniformity in the matter of distribution of food grains under the public distribution scheme. After aforesaid reply was filed on record, there is no rejoinder filed on record to dispute the stand taken in the said reply. Hence, considering the reply and Government Resolution dated 18th May, 1998, it is clear that now there is an uniformity in the matter of distribution of food grains at concessional rates. The principal grievance of the petitioner thus stands redressed.
4 / 5
5
22-pil-87-07.doc
Accepting the statements made in the aforesaid affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No.3, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the present Public Interest Litigation pending.
stands disposed of with no order as to costs.
(A.S. CHANDURKAR,J)
( A.S. OKA, J)
5 / 5
Sanjay Parameshwar Ghodake
The Divisional Commissioner, Pune Division
A.S. Oka
A.S. Chandurkar
As recorded by the court registry
Litigation brought on behalf of the public interest rather than a personal grievance, relaxing the usual rule of locus standi.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
