Supreme Court In Employment: Emphasizing on creating employment opportunities and capacity building for migrant workers who have been receiving free ration since the Covid pandemic, the Supreme Court on Monday (December 09, 2024) asked, “For how long can the free facilities be provided?” “
The bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Manmohan was surprised when the Center told the Supreme Court that under the National Food Security Act, 2013, 81 crore people were being given ration free or at concessional rates. “This means only taxpayers are left out of its scope,” the bench told Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, appearing for the Centre.
‘For how long can free facilities be provided’
Senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing on behalf of an NGO in the suo motu case related to the problems and condition of migrant laborers during the Covid pandemic in the year 2020, said that all the migrant workers registered on the “e-Shram” portal There is a need to issue instructions to provide free ration. The bench said, “For how long can free facilities be provided? Why don’t we work for job opportunities, employment and capacity building for these migrant workers?
Bhushan said that from time to time, this court has issued instructions to all the states and union territories to issue ration cards to migrant workers so that they can avail the benefits of free ration provided by the Centre. He said that the latest order states that those who do not have ration cards but are registered on the “e-Shram” portal will also be given free ration from the Centre.
Justice Surya Kant said, “This is the problem.” The moment we direct states to provide free ration to all migrant workers, not a single migrant worker will be seen here. They will go back. States can issue ration cards to woo people because they know well that it is the responsibility of the Center to provide free ration. Bhushan said that if the census had been conducted in 2021, the number of migrant workers would have increased. It would have happened, because the Center is currently dependent on the 2011 census data.
The bench said, “We should not create division between the Center and the states, otherwise it will become very difficult.” Mehta said that the orders of this court were mainly for the times of Covid. The Solicitor General said that at that time, this Court, in view of the crisis faced by the migrant workers, had passed orders more or less on a daily basis to provide assistance.
‘Can’t trust NGO’s figures’
He said the government is bound by the 2013 Act and cannot go beyond the statutory scheme. Mehta said that there were some non-governmental organizations (NGOs) which did not work at the ground level during the pandemic and he can state in the affidavit that the petitioner NGO is one of them. There was a heated exchange of words between Mehta and Bhushan during the hearing, as the Solicitor General said that the court should not rely on the data given by an NGO which, instead of providing relief to the people, is drafting the petition and submitting it to the Supreme Court. Was busy filing in court.
Bhushan said Mehta was angry with him because he had released some e-mails related to him, which had a detrimental effect. Mehta hit back, saying, “I never thought he (Bhushan) would stoop to such a low level, but since he has raised the issue of emails, he needs to answer.” Those emails were considered by the court. When someone tries to harm the government or the country, then he is committed to object to such petitions.
Justice Surya Kant tried to pacify both Mehta and Bhushan and said that a detailed hearing was needed in the case of migrant workers and listed it for January 8. The top court on November 26 marked the difficulties associated with the distribution of free ration and said the Covid times were different when relief was provided to distressed migrant workers.
