A bench comprising Justices L Nageswara Rao, B R Gavai and B V Nagarathna Tuesday adjourned the Centre’s petition for November 12 after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta sought time.
The Centre in its plea contended that the High Court, without affording an opportunity to it, reversed its order on March 22 allowing the Delhi government to curtail the supply of foodgrain under the National Food Security Act 2013 to the fair price shops.
“The high court by its order dated March 22 directed the Delhi government not to curtail or stop the supply of the existing PDS distributors while implementing the Mukhya Mantri Ghar Ghar Ration Yojana.
“However the High Court on September 27 modified, reversed the same without considering that the said scheme promulgated by the Delhi government is an attempt to run a parallel distribution scheme utilising the resources…served under the NFSA 2013 and the same shall have adverse impact upon the beneficiaries of the NFSA, 2013,” the Centre said.
The petition stated that the high court has passed the interim order placing sole reliance on the submissions and statements by the counsel for the Delhi government and has erred in not appreciating the provisions of the NFC, 2013 and the adverse effect that shall be caused by the implementation of the Mukhya Mantri Ghar Ghar ration Yojana.
The Centre said the high court further erred in not analysing the material deficiencies in the scheme sought to be introduced by the Delhi government, promulgated in stark contradictions to NFSA, 2013.
The high court in its order dated September 27 modified its earlier order dated March 22, 2021 in which it had directed the Delhi Government not to stop or curtail the supply of food grains or flour to the members of the Delhi Sarkari Ration Dealers Sangh, Delhi.
“The Delhi Government shall first issue communication to each of the fair price shop holders, informing them of the particulars of the ration cardholders who have opted to receive their rations at their doorstep and, only thereafter, the rations, to the extent that they are being supplied to such beneficiaries, need not be supplied to the fair price shop holders,” the high court had said.