The Calcutta High Court has asked the West Bengal government for clarity on a proposal to involve ISKCON in preparing mid-day meals for Kolkata schools. While the government maintains the plan is only a proposal, the court is addressing concerns about the impact on local self-help groups and constitutional guidelines for state-funded schemes.
The Calcutta High Court has directed the West Bengal government to file an affidavit clarifying the status of a proposal to transition the preparation and distribution of mid-day meals in Kolkata schools to the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON). The court’s division bench, led by Acting Chief Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty and Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, intervened after a legal challenge was filed questioning the process of implementing this change under the PM POSHAN scheme.
The petitioner, represented by advocate Sirsanya Bandopadhyay, argued that awarding these responsibilities to a specific organization without formal public procurement processes could violate established constitutional and statutory norms. The petition also raised questions regarding the secular nature of state-funded welfare programs and the potential influence on the nutritional choices of children served by these meals.
Impact on Local Livelihoods and Procurement
A primary concern raised in the petition involves the thousands of self-help groups and community-based organizations that currently operate the mid-day meal kitchens in Kolkata. These groups fear that a shift toward a centralized kitchen model managed by ISKCON could jeopardize their livelihoods. The court acknowledged these apprehensions, noting that the ongoing involvement of these local groups is a significant factor that the government must address in its official response.
Government Stance and Court Observation
In response to the court, Advocate General Surajit Nath Mitra clarified that the government has not issued any formal notification or taken concrete steps to implement the change. He described the situation as an offer under consideration rather than a finalized decision. The court remarked that the legal challenge appears premature at this stage because no official government order exists. However, the bench permitted the matter to remain open, noting that parties could return to the court if and when an official notification is released.
For stakeholders and investors interested in the state’s welfare infrastructure, the key monitorable remains the state government’s official affidavit. Investors and observers will track whether the government proceeds with the centralized kitchen model or opts to maintain the current decentralized system involving local self-help groups. The eventual decision will determine the future of procurement contracts within the state's education welfare sector and the stability of the existing supply chain managed by community organizations.