Supreme Court Strikes Down Allahabad HC’s Ruling on Anganwadi Food Supply for Lactating Mothers and Children

Legal AI associate for drafting & compliance

In a recent development, the Supreme Court has strongly criticized the Allahabad High Court for passing an interim order on the supply of food to lactating mothers and young children in Anganwadi centres, despite the matter being actively considered by the Supreme Court. The bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Manmohan expressed its displeasure over the High Court’s actions and urged the lower court to act more responsibly in future proceedings.

This case pertains to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) initiated in 2021, questioning whether the food provided in Anganwadi centres meets the nutritional standards set under the National Food Security Act, 2013 and related guidelines such as the Integrated Nutrition Support Programme (Shaksham Anganwadi and Poshan 2.0 Rules, 2022).

Details of the Case and Interim Orders

High Court's Interim Order:

• The Allahabad High Court had been hearing a PIL concerning the adequacy of food supplied under the Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS). It was alleged that the food distribution did not meet the nutritional standards mandated by the National Food Security Act, 2013.
  • Key Issue:
    The High Court was informed that NAFED (National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India Ltd.) was authorized by the state authorities to tender for the procurement of nutritious products under the ICDS scheme, but without adhering strictly to legal requirements.
  • Consequently, the court imposed an interim order on November 11, 2024, preventing procurement from proceeding without prior permission from the court.

Supreme Court’s Intervention:

• This order was challenged before the Supreme Court, which stayed the Allahabad High Court’s order on December 19, 2024.
• The bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Prashant Kumar Mishra observed that the High Court acted prematurely by passing an order without taking into account the ongoing proceedings before the Supreme Court."The High Court acted abruptly in passing this order," the Supreme Court observed in its judgment.

Modification of Order:

• On December 20, 2024, the Allahabad High Court modified its earlier order, directing the states regarding the procurement process, despite the Supreme Court's interim stay. This led to further criticism from the Supreme Court.
• The bench noted that the High Court’s actions were "neither warranted nor desirable," given the Supreme Court had already granted an interim stay and scheduled the matter for further hearing in February 2025."The High Court ought to have awaited further orders, instead of issuing directions on how the appellants should act," the Supreme Court remarked.

Supreme Court’s Decision to Set Aside High Court’s Interim Order

Unreasonable and Abrupt Action:

• The Supreme Court pointed out that the Allahabad High Court’s interim order, passed over three years after the PIL was instituted, was abrupt and lacked reasoning.
• Therefore, the Supreme Court deemed it fit to set aside the impugned interim order and all subsequent directions passed by the High Court in the PIL."The impugned interim order being wholly unreasoned and having been abruptly passed is liable to be set aside,"the Supreme Court stated in its judgment.

Supreme Court’s Order:

• The Supreme Court also clarified that appellants were entitled to continue implementing the food supply scheme for lactating mothers and young children while maintaining the requisite quality of the food items, until the final disposal of the PIL.
• "The appellants shall be entitled to implement the subject scheme for supply of food items maintaining the requisite quality, to be used by lactating mothers and young children, till final disposal of the Public Interest Litigation."

Case Title: THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS. v. PRATYUSH RAWAT & ORS., Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 30405/2024.

Attachment: