Holding

The Court directed that all Anganwadi centres sanctioned up to September 2006 be made operational by 15 July 2007 (31 July for Uttar Pradesh) and those sanctioned up to January 2007 by 30 September 2007, and ordered states to file affidavits on compliance.

Summary

The Supreme Court entertained a public‑interest writ petition filed by the People’s Union for Civil Liberties seeking compliance with its earlier direction that the Government of India sanction and operationalise a minimum of 14 lakh Anganwadi centres under the Integrated Child Development Scheme by December 2008. By March 2007 only 10.53 lakh centres had been sanctioned and a large proportion of those sanctioned were not functional, prompting the Court to examine the reasons offered by various states. The Court found the explanations unsatisfactory and reiterated the necessity of functional Anganwadi centres for child and maternal welfare. Consequently, it imposed specific deadlines for the clearance of the backlog: centres sanctioned up to September 2006 must be operational by 15 July 2007 (31 July for Uttar Pradesh), and those sanctioned up to January 2007 by 30 September 2007. The Court also ordered the states to file affidavits by stipulated dates indicating compliance, warning that any failure would be seriously viewed. The matter was listed for further hearing and adjourned.

Issues considered

Whether the states have complied with the Supreme Court’s earlier direction to sanction and operationalise 14 lakh Anganwadi centres by December 2008.
Whether the reasons given by the states for the delay in operationalising sanctioned centres are satisfactory.
What specific remedial directions can the Court impose to ensure timely operationalisation of the sanctioned Anganwadi centres.

Subjects

Integrated Child Development SchemeAnganwadi centresPublic Interest LitigationImplementation of government schemesChild welfareAdministrative law

Judgment

)-

I
'
PEOPLE'S UNION FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES A
v.
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

JULY 9, 2007

[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND S.H. KAPADIA, JJ.] B

Public Interest litigation-Integrated Child Development Scheme-In
terms of the directions by Supreme Court, 14 lakhs Anganwadi Centres to
be sanctioned and operationalized in a phased and even manner by December,
2008-0nly 10.53 lakhs sanctioned as on March, 2007 and sanctioned
c
centres not made operational to a large extent-Thus, issuance of directions
to States to make sanctioned centres operational and functional and t.o file
affidavits regarding the action taken.

This Court by order dated 13.12.2006 directed the Government of India D
to sanction and operationalize minimum of 14 lakh Anganwadi centres in a
.,, phased and even manner starting forthwith and ending December 2008 .
However, the number of centres sanctioned as on March, 2007 was 10.53 lakhs
and about 3.47 lakhs centres were to be sanctioned; and even the sanctioned
centres did not become operatiQnal in some of the States to a large extent.
Hence the present matters. E
Adjourning the matters and giving directions, the Court

HELD: In the circumstances, it is directed that the backlog has to be
cleared immediately and the centres which have been sanctioned upto
September 2006 shall be made operational and functional by 15.07.2007 in F
case of all States except State of U.P. where last date is fixed to be 31.07.2007.
Those centres which ban been sanctioned upto January, 2007 shall be made
:t functional by 30.9.2007. Non observance of the time period fixed would be
seriously viewed. The States are directed to file affidavits by 20.07.2007,
10.08.2007 and 10.10.2007 in respect of the date lines fixed indicating the
G
action taken. [Paras 8 and 91 [163-F-Hl

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : I.A. Nos. 34, 35, 40, 49, 58, 59, 60,
I 61 &62
_..
~

159 H
160 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2007] 8 S.C.R.

A IN
t
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 196 of2001.

Jyoti Mendiratta, V.K. Verma, Sushtna Suri, S. Wasim A. Qadri, D.S.
Mahra, Kamlendra Mishra, Pradeep Misra, Ravindra K.
B Adsure, T.V. George, Anil Shrivastav, Hemantika, Wahi, U. Hazarika, Sumita
Hazarika, Ajay Pal, A. Subhashini, Tara Chandra Shanna, Gopal Singh, Ng. J.R.
Luwang, Riku Shanna, Corporate Law Group, J.S. Attri, A. Mariaputham,
Aruna Mathur, Arputham Aruna & C~. K.N. Madhusoodhanan, R. Sathish,
T.V. George, S. Balaji, Supama Srivastava., Rajesh Srivastava, KH Nobin Singh,
Ranjan Mukherjee, V.G. ~ami.S.Vallinayagam. S. Prabhu Ramasubramanian,
C Sibo ·shankar· Mish~a, G. Prakash, Beena Prakash, Rachna Srivastava,
Aruneshwar Gupta, Vikas Upadhyay, B.S. Banthia, Sunita Shanna, Kamini
Jaiswal, Gopal Prasad, D. Bharthi Reddy, Apama Bhardwaj, Rajesh Srivastava,
Jana Kalyan Das, Anis Suhrawardy, B.B. Singh, Indra Sawhney, R.K.
Maheshwari, Prashant Kumar, S.V. Dehspande, K.V. Mohan, Mukesh K. Giri,
D Ramesh Babu, M.R. Prakash Shrivastava, Sanjay R. Hedge and Viswajit Singh
for the Appearing parties.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

DR. ARIJIT PASA YAT, J. I. Grievance of the writ petitioner in these
E I.As. is that a number of Anganwadi centres which are required to be
sanctioned by December 2008 is 14 lakhs. But the number of centres sanctioned
as on March, 2007 is 10.53 lakhs.1 Therefore, about 3.47 lakhs centres need to
be sanctioned. As per the data available. the numbers of Anganwadi centres
w~ich are operational as on 30.9.2006 is 7.81 lakhs. Therefore, even the
sanctioned centres have not become operational and their ~umber is 2. 72
F lakhs. The details of some of the States where sanctioned Anganwadi centres
have not been operati.onalized to a large extent are as follows:

~··
PEOPLE'S UNlON FORCIVILLIBERTIESv. U.0.1. [PASAYAT,J.] 161
State No. of sanctioned No.of sanctioned A
Anganwadi* Anganwadi centres
Not operationalised*
As per UOI As per State
Govt.Affidavits
B
Bihar 80528 22761 19602
Jharkhand 32(1)7 10638 7680
Madhya 69238 19432 16165
Pradesh
Punjab 20169 5439 5439 c
Haryana 17192 1225 1225
West Bengal 92152 37088 3700
Uttar Pradesh 150727 33987 22087
Manipur 7639 3138 3138
D
Assam 37082 11635 11(,66
*This includes the ICDS centres sanctioned in December 2006 under
Phase II expansion. None of these centres have obviously been
oper:ationalised.

From the affidavit of the Union of India it appears that the positio11 E
is as follows:

2. By 31.3.2005 - 7,64, 709, by 30.9.2006 - 9,46,000 (approx.) and by
December 2006- 1.02 lakhs centres have been sanctioned with a total of about
10,48,000.
F
3. By order dated 13.12.2006 it was inter-alia directed as follows:

"(l) Government of India shall sanction and operationalize a minimum
of 14 lakh AWCs in a phased and even manner starting forthwith and
ending December 2008. In doing so, the Central Government shall
identify SC and ST hamlets/habitations for AWCs on a priority basis. G
(2) Government of India shall ensure that population norms for opening
of AWCs must not be revised· upward under any circumstances..
While maintaining the upper limit of one AWC per 1000 populatio~,
the minimum limit for opening of a new AWC is a population of 300 H
may be kept in view. Further, rural communities and slum dwellers
162 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2007) 8 S.C.R.

A should be entitled to an Anganwadi on demand" (not later than three
('
"'
months) from the date of demand in cases where a settlement has at
least 40 children under six but no Anganwadi."

4. It is a matter of concern that even the sanctioned centres (the number •
of which is much less than the targeted one) have not been made operational.
B
5. Learned counsel appearing for different States have indicated various
reasons for the same. Prima facie we are not satisfied with the reasons
indicated. The need for having functional Anganwadi centres have never
been questioned and cannot be questioned.

c 6. The importance of Anganwadi centres has been highlighted by this
Court in several orders. By order dated 7 .10.2004 it was noted as follows:

" ..... Now we would deal with the aspect of sanctioned A WCs and their
working. In the Order dated 29.4.2004 it was directed that the sanctioned
A WCs shall be made fully operational by 30th June, 2004. Further
D direction issued was that the sanctioned A WCs shall supply nutritious
food/supplement to the children, adolescent girls and to pregnant and
lactating women under the scheme for 300 days in a year. The Report
presents a glooming picture both in regad to the operation of the
sanctioned A WCs in some of the States like Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and
Jharkhand and the position in those which are operational. Instances
E
have been given in the Report where for months the supplies were not
made to the children. For example, in the State of Jharkhand, the
sanctioned A WCs were not working from May to December, 2003. No
satisfactory reply is forthcoming from that State. Further, there are-
material discrepancies in two affidavits filed by the said State one in
F September and the one handed over in the Court today. In the
September affidavit, it was deposed on oath that 16689 A WCs were
operational. In the affidavit filed today, the figure of operational A WCs
is stated to be 7429. According to the Report, on an average, 42 paisa
as against the norm of rupee one was being allocated per beneficiary
per day by the State of Jharkhand. The position in Bihar and Uttar
G Pradesh is also no better. Out of 394 sanctioned ICDS projects, only
249 were operational in the State of Bihar. As per the affidavit dated
30 Septem!Jer, 2004, all the projects were being made operational from
4 October, 2004. Whether that has happened or not, Mr. B.B. Singh \

learned counsel appearing for the State is unable to state for want of '.
H instructions. Be that as it may, if all have not been ma~e operational ..,,.>-

!-
~'
PEOPLE'S UNIONFORCIVILLIBERTIESv. U.0.1. [PASAYAT,J.] 163
since 4th October, 2004 has already passed and gone we direct that A
the same shall be made operational in period not later than one week
from today.
In the State of Uttar Pradesh, though percentage of non- functional/
non-operational A WCs is more as per the Report but according to the
State, admittedly 24 per cent are not operational. In the affidavit, it has B
been claimed that the remaining will be operational by 30th November,
2004. We direct the State Government to make operational all sanctioned
A WCs by 30th November, 2004. After that, we would not entertain
any application for extension of time.
The Report also mentions that some of A WCs are operating from
private houses including those of grain dealers which it is suggested C
is not a healthy way of working as it is likely to increase the chances
of pilferage of the grain etc. We are happy to note that as stated in
the affidavit of State of Uttar Pradesh, it has made efforts to shift
A WCs to primary schools. It is a good example for other States to
follow. The Report also mentions about the attempt to centralise the
procurements in some of the States which has many fallouts. It has D
been explained in one of the affidavits that the procurements is at
district level and not at the State level. Further, the problem of using
contractors for procurement has also been mentioned in the Report
suggesting that it should be done by agencies and officers at the
Government level. These are only by way of illustrations as to facts
and figures given in Section I of the Report relating to Integrated E
Child Development Services.
7. Learned counsel for the State of U.P. has pointed out that because
of elections there was some delay.

8. In the circumstances, we direct as follows:
F
The backlog has to be cleared immediately and the centres which have
been sanctioned upto September 2006 shall be made operational and functional
by 15th July, 2007 in the case of all States except the State ofU.P. where the
last date is fixed to be 31st July, 2007. Those centres which have been
sanctioned upto January 2007 shall be made functional by 30.9.2007.

9. It is made clear that ifthere is any non observance of the time period G
fixed would be seriously viewed. Affidavits shall be filed by 20th July, 10th
August and l 0th October, 2007 by the States in respect of the date lines fixed
/ indicating the action taken.

10. List this matter on 20th July, 2007.

NJ. Matter adjourned. H