LexPEOPLE'S UNION FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2009] 6 S.C.R. 812 A PEOPLE'S UNION FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES 8 v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. (Writ Petition (c) No. 196 of 2001) APRIL 22, 2009 [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND S.H. KAPADIA, JJ.] Child weffare: c Integrated Child Development Services Scheme - Malnutrition in children/pregnant women - Revised nutritional and feeding norms - Directions to State Governments and Union Territories to implement the norms prescribed. CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petition (Civil) No. D 196 of 2001. Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. Gopal Subramanium, ASG, Manjit Singh, AAG, T.S. Dobia E Colin Gonsalves, A. Mariarputham, D.S. Mehra, Sushma Suri, S.N. Terdol, Sunita Sharma, SWA Qadri, Anil Katiyar, Puja Sharma, Jyoti Mendiratta, Shweta Garg, Anil Kr. Jha, V.G. Pragasam, S.J. Aristotle, P. Subramanian, K.N. Madhusoodhanan, R. Sathish, Atul Dakh, R.K. Adsure, T.V. George, R.C. Kaushik, T. Harish Kumar, V. Vasudevan, F Rachna Srivastava, Mohd, Noorullah, Himani Jadoun, H. Wahi, Pinky, K. Enatale Serna, Vikas Mehta, Nar Hari Singh, Gopal Singh, Manish Kumar, Rituraj Biswas, Riku Sharma, Ranjan Mazumdar (for M/s. Corporate Law Group), T.C. Sharma, Neelam Sharma, Sanjay R. Hedge, R. Rohen Singh, Nishant G Mishra, A. Mariarputham, Aruna Mathur, Vimal Dubey, Rahul Srivastava, Supama Srivastava, Adesh Sharma, Ram Swarup Sharma, K.H. Nobin Singh, S. Biswajit Meitei, M.P. Singh, B.S. Banthia, Vikas Upadhyay, Jana Kalyan Das, A. Subashini, Anil H 812 -· ... PEOPLE'S UNION FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES v. UNION 813 OF INDIA AND ORS. i Kr. Srivastava, Kavita Wadia, Ashok Kr. Mathur, Ramesh Babu A • M.R. Pramod Dayal, R.S. Suri, T.R. Ramalingam, T.V. Ratnam, Milind Kumar, V.N. Raghupathy, Prakash Shrivastava, P.K. Maheshwari, N.S. Sohrawardi, Kuldip Singh, K.V. Mohan, G. Prakash, J.K. Bhatia, S.S. Mishra, Anjana Chandrashekar, B.B. Singh, Kamini Jaiswal, Naresh K. Sharma for the appearing B parties. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the c Union of India that keeping in view the orders passed by this Court on several dates, several actions have been taken, which substantially comply with the directions given by this Court. 2. Colin Gonsalves, Sr. counsel on the other hand stated D that though there has been substantial compliance of the directions given by this court yet there is some reservation about the revised nutritional and feeding norms for supplementary nutrition in ICDS Scheme. It is submitted that there is scope of involving contractors in the supplies which was prohibited by E that Court. 3. By affidavit dated 2nd March, 2009, the Union of India has highlighted several factors which create serious dent against malnutrition. It is stated that same can be made to achiev~ a significant reduction in the rate of malnutrition. The F said affidavit clarifies that these interventions include universalization of ICDS (by sanctioning 13.80 lakh Anganwadi/ Mini Anganwadi Centres and 20,000 Anganwadis-on-Demand making a total of 14 lakh Anganwadis/Mini Anganwadi Centres .. as mandated by this Court) and, most importantly, reduction in G ... the gap between Recommended Dietary Allowance (hereinafter referred to as "RDA") and Actual Dietary Intake (hereinafter referred to as "ADI"). On a careful consideration of the matter, the Central Government has revised both the ___,...... .-- nutritional and feeding norms as well as thee financial norms H ,., 814 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 6 S.C.R. A of supplementary nutrition under the ICDS Scheme. 4. It is noted that the nutritional norms have remain unchanged since inception of the Scheme (in 1975) until a recent comprehensive review by a Task Force constituted by 8 the Central Government. On the basis of the recommendations of this Task Force, the calorific and feeding norms for supplementary nutrition in ICDS Scheme in respect of children of all categories below 6 years of age and pregnant women and nursing mothers have been revised. The Table below shows the old and revised norms: c D E F G Old Norms Revised Norms Category Rate Calo- Protein Rate Calo- Protein Rs. ries (g) Rs. (ries (g), /per (Cal) /per (Cal) benefi- benefi- ciary ciary per per (i) Children 2.00 300 8-10 4.00 500 12-15 below 3 (ii) Children 2.00 300 8-10 4.00 500 12-15 3-6 years (iii) Sev
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.