Maharashtra food scam: Private companies eat up Rs 1,000cr meant for poor

November 3, 2012

poor_pay

New Delhi, November 3: Private companies have hijacked the government's flagship scheme to provide food to poor children and their mothers, the Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS), with contractors in Maharashtra alone controlling Rs 1,000 crore worth of supplies in contravention of Supreme Court orders, a report of the SC commissioners office has said.

The SC orders bar contractors from supplying rations under the scheme. It only permits village communities, self-help groups and mahila mandals to buy grains and prepare food for children.

The commissioners' report, submitted to the court on Friday, warned that the contractor-corporate lobby had a firm grip over ICDS rations supply business, worth Rs 8,000 crore, in several states. It specifically referred to Karnataka, Uttar Pradesh and Meghalaya, besides Maharashtra.

Detailing Maharashtra's case, the report said private companies had floated fronts in the names of 'mahila mandals' or women's organizations to corner the lucrative Rs 1,000 crore annual supply of rations.

The ICDS is India's primary social welfare scheme to tackle malnutrition and health problems in poor children below 6 years of age and their mothers. It is considered the backbone of government's efforts to improve the dismal family health indices in India - some of the worst even among developing countries.

The commissioners recommended that an independent investigation be conducted under the apex court's supervision to investigate the possible nexus "between politicians, bureaucrats and private contractors in the provisioning of rations to ICDS, leading to largescale corruption and leakages".

The report, prepared by the principle advisor to the commissioners, said the Maharashtra chief minister had been made aware of the scam by the commissioners as well as the National Commission for the Protection of Child Rights. They said the fact that the corrupt system continued unchecked showed the "level of influence" the contractors had over the "levers of power in Maharashtra".

This report lays bare the modus operandi companies used to corner the lucrative contracts in Maharashtra. The state government first changed its rules in 2009 to allow not only community-based organizations but also 'women's institutions' to bid for the supply - a loose enough term to permit any contractor, company or agency with women on board to bid for the contracts.

Only three of these 'women's institutions' got contracts for the entire state's ration supply which is worth over Rs 1,000 crore annually. None of these three mahila mandals - Venkateshwara Mahila Audhyogic Sahakari Sanstha, Mahalaxmi Mahila Grhaudyog & Balvikas Buddhesiya Audhyogic Sahakari Sanstha and Maharashtra Mahila Sahakari Grahudhyog Sanstha Limited -- had any production capacity of their own.

The three mahila mandals each formed sub-committees with select members handling complete control of administration, finances and operations of the organizations. The sub-committees then gained legitimacy by directly contracting with the state government, securing bank guarantees as well as opening separate bank accounts.

The sub-committees went on to contract five companies to supply the rations. But the members on board these sub-committees were all relatives of the owners of the five companies.

In other words, the companies had formed shell agencies to bid for the contracts on the pretext of being community-based women's organizations.

Venkateshwara formed two sub-committees. One sub-committee farmed out contract to Swapnil Agro Limited owned by Ulhas Pagariya. The sub-committee comprised Pagariya's wife and two relatives. The second sub-committee gave a contract to Paras Agro Private Limited, with one Satishrao Munde as managing director. Munde's wife and daughter comprised the sub-committee.

Similarly, Mahalaxmi formed three sub-committees giving out contracts to Indo Allied Protein Foods run by Rajan Shankar Jadhav, Sai Food and Sai Food Products owned by Pradip Auradkar and Sanjay Auradkar and Kota Dal Mill based in Rajasthan.

Maharashtra Mahila Sahkari, which is actually a company and not a society with Rama Agrawal as vice-chairman, gave the contract to Sagar Foods run by her father-in-law Prabhudayala Agarwal.

The principle advisor to the court commissioners, Biraj Patnaik, refused to comment when contacted.

His report said lab reports testing the quality of food grains supplied was also suspect as all three mahila mandals went to the same private lab but government testing found the food lacking. The report said media had earlier highlighted how the ration was of such bad quality that it was at times sold as cattle feed and many times, fungi and termites were found in them. A case on the matter is being heard in the high court as well.

The author added that the report should be seen as a preliminary inquiry and not a comprehensive indictment of the parties. They have asked for court directions for an independent authority carrying out an investigation. The apex court gave the state the opportunity to respond to the report and posted the next hearing for November 23.


Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 11,2024

birensingh.jpg

The Manipur Kuki MLAs have released a statement calling out Solicitor General Tushar Mehta's 'lies' in the Supreme Court. In a joint statement, the MLAs, including those from the Bharatiya Janata Party, said they had not had any meeting with the Chief Minister since May 3, 2023, nor did they intend to meet him in the future as “he was the mastermind behind the violence”.

As per the MLAs, the SG lied about state CM N Biren Singh speaking to Kuki MLAs to control the situation there, in order to halt a Supreme Court probe into the leaked tapes which allege that Singh has been complicit in the violence that broke out between Kukis and Meitis there.

"We...clarify that we have never had any meeting with Chief Minister, Shri N. Biren Singh since May 3, 2023, nor have any intention to meet him in future as he is the mastermind behind the violence and ethnic cleansing of our people from the Imphal valley, which is continuing till today, the latest being the brutal killing and burning of Mrs Zosangkim Hmar on November 7, 2024," the letter read, while condemning the recent 'barbaric' killing of the woman there, and noting the SG's assertion is 'tantamount' to misleading the top court.

“We, the undersigned ten MLAs, have come to know that during the Supreme Court hearing held on November 8, 2024, the Solicitor General of India submitted that ‘CM is meeting all Kuki MLAs and trying to bring the situation down to get peace’. In this connection, we hereby categorically state that this submission is a blatant lie and tantamount to misleading the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India,” the statement said.

The Supreme Court, while hearing a petition by a Kuki organisation, asked that it submit audio tapes to substantiate its claim that the Chief Minister was instrumental in inciting and organising violence in the northeastern State.

Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta orally informed the court that the Chief Minister was meeting all the Kuki-Zo MLAs and that peace in the State had come at a huge cost.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 15,2024

amitshah.jpg

Union minister Amit Shah on Friday, November 15, said PM Narendra Modi will amend the Waqf Act despite opposition from leaders like Uddhav Thackeray and Sharad Pawar.

"Modi ji wants to change the Waqf Board law, but Uddhav ji, Sharad Pawar and Supriya Sule are opposing it," Shah said, addressing a rally at Umarkhed in Maharashtra's Yavatmal district.

"Uddhav ji, listen carefully, you all can protest as much as you want, but Modi ji will amend the Waqf Act," he said. Shah said there are two camps in the November 20 Maharashtra assembly polls, one of 'Pandavas' represented by the BJP-led Mahayuti and the other of 'Kauravas' represented by Maha Vikas Aghadi.

"Uddhav Thackeray claims that his Shiv Sena is the real one. Can the real Shiv Sena go against renaming Aurangabad to Sambhajinagar? Can the real Shiv Sena go against renaming Ahmednagar to Ahilyanagar? The real Shiv Sena stands with the BJP," Shah said.

"Rahul Baba used to say that his government would credit money in the accounts of the people instantly. You were unable to fulfil your promises in Himachal, Karnataka, and Telangana," he said.

Shah said the Mahayuti alliance has promised that women will get Rs 2,100 per month under the Ladki Bahin Yojana. "Kashmir is an integral part of India and no power in the world can snatch it away from us," Shah said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 13,2024

buldozerjustice.jpg

New Delhi: The Supreme Court took a firm stance on ‘bulldozer justice’ today, affirming that the Executive cannot bypass the Judiciary and that the legal process must not prejudge the guilt of an accused. In a significant judgment, the bench led by Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan set new guidelines for demolition practices, responding to petitions challenging the controversial bulldozer actions taken against individuals accused of crimes.

The rise of this practice, termed 'bulldozer justice,' has seen authorities in various states demolish what they claim to be illegal structures belonging to accused individuals. However, multiple petitions questioned the legality and fairness of this approach, bringing the matter before the court.

Justice Gavai highlighted that owning a home is a cherished goal for many families, and an essential question was whether the Executive should have the authority to strip individuals of their shelter. “In a democracy, the rule of law protects citizens from arbitrary actions by the state. The criminal justice system must not assume guilt,” stated the bench, underscoring that due process is a fundamental right under the Constitution.

On the principle of separation of powers, the bench reinforced that the Judiciary alone holds adjudicatory powers and that the Executive cannot overstep these boundaries. Justice Gavai remarked, “When the state demolishes a home purely because its resident is accused of a crime, it violates the doctrine of separation of powers.”

The court issued a strong warning about accountability, stating that public officials who misuse their power or act arbitrarily must face consequences. Justice Gavai observed that selectively demolishing one property while ignoring similar cases suggests that the aim might be to penalize rather than enforce legality. “For most citizens, a house is the product of years of labor and dreams. Taking it away must be an action of last resort, thoroughly justified,” he said.

In its directives under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court established new demolition guidelines. These include:

Mandatory Show-Cause Notice: No demolition should occur without first issuing a show-cause notice. The person served has a minimum of 15 days or the duration stated in local laws to respond.

Transparency of Notice Content: The notice must include specifics about the alleged unauthorized construction, the nature of the violation, and the rationale for demolition.

Hearing and Final Order: Authorities are required to hear the response of the affected individual before issuing a final order. The homeowner will have 15 days to address the issue, with demolition proceeding only if no stay order is obtained from an appellate authority.

Contempt Proceedings: Any breach of these guidelines would lead to contempt proceedings. Officials who disregard these norms will be personally accountable for restitution, with costs deducted from their salaries.

Additionally, the court mandated that all municipal bodies establish digital portals within three months, displaying show-cause notices and final orders on unauthorized structures to ensure public transparency and accountability.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.