Supreme Court Expresses Concerns Over Sustained Free Ration Distribution: Calls for Focus on Employment Opportunities
In a significant hearing on Monday, the Supreme Court raised pressing questions about the long-term implications of distributing free or subsidized rations to 81 crore individuals under the National Food Security Act, 2013. While recognizing the relief provided during the COVID-19 pandemic, the bench, comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice Manmohan, emphasized the urgent need to transition from welfare to capacity-building initiatives.
“For how long can freebies be given?” Justice Kant asked pointedly. “Why don’t we focus on creating job opportunities, employment, and capacity building for migrant workers?” This observation stemmed from a suo motu case initiated during the pandemic to address the immediate needs of migrant laborers, a vulnerable group that bore the brunt of lockdown-induced disruptions.
Representing the Centre, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati detailed the extensive efforts to distribute rations. However, the bench expressed concern about the exclusion of taxpayers from such benefits and the potential dependency the policy could foster.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing an NGO, highlighted the persistent challenges faced by migrant workers, many of whom lack ration cards. He argued for the continued provision of free rations to registered migrant workers under the "e-Shram" portal. Bhushan also pointed out the reliance on outdated 2011 Census data, calling for updated figures that reflect the growing number of migrant workers.
Justice Kant, however, voiced apprehensions about the possible misuse of free ration provisions by states, cautioning against populist measures. “If we direct states to provide free ration to all migrant workers, there’s a risk they’ll issue ration cards indiscriminately, knowing that the Centre bears the liability,” he remarked.
The discussion also saw a heated exchange between Mehta and Bhushan. Mehta criticized the NGO for its alleged lack of ground-level involvement during the pandemic and accused it of tarnishing the government's image. Bhushan, in turn, defended the organization’s role, emphasizing its commitment to safeguarding the rights of marginalized groups.
Justice Kant sought to steer the conversation back to the core issue, urging all parties to engage constructively. “Let us focus on the substance of the case. These are complex issues that require a detailed hearing,” he said.
The Supreme Court has scheduled the next hearing for January 8, signaling its intent to delve deeper into the nuances of migrant workers' welfare and the sustainability of large-scale welfare schemes. As the nation awaits further deliberation, the case underscores a broader question of balancing immediate relief with long-term empowerment for the most vulnerable sections of society.
Advotalks: Talk To Lawyers https://www.advotalks.com/
For More Legal Updates visit our youtube channel
.jpeg&w=80&h=80&crop-to-fit)
