Supreme CourtDivision Bench(2012) 02 SC CK 0042

People''s Union for Civil Liberties vs Union of India (UOI) and Others

Supreme Court Of India · Decided on 3 February 2012 · Citation: (2012) 2 SCALE 456

HON’BLE JUDGES
Dipak Misra, J · Dalveer Bhandari, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (C) No. 196 of 2001, I.A. No''s. 90, 93, 98, 102 to 108, 110, 111 and 112 in Writ Petition (C) 196 of 2011 and Compt. Petition (C) No. 99 of 2009 in Writ Petition (C) No. 196 of 2001

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 509 words
1.

Mr. Justice D.P. Wadhwa has submitted a Report on the basis of the visit of the Committee to District Satara, Maharashtra on 23rd January, 2012 where a presentation was made by the Deputy Secretary, Department of Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Protection and District Supply Officer, Satara. According to the observation of Justice Wadhwa, it was found that progress of computerization was extremely slow and almost non-existent. No substantial work has been done except just initiating the digitization process which was at the initial stage and facing great deal of problems. The Committee also visited the Data Centre where digitization of data was being carried out. It was clear at the Data Centre that the Data Entry Operators had been engaged a day earlier. They were uploading data from forms which had not been verified by any authority but bore the seal of the verifying authority.

2.

Justice Wadhwa has earlier submitted a number of reports to this Court stating that diversion of food grains can be eliminated or at least reduced to a large extent if there is complete computerization in Public Distribution System. All counsel for the parties also endorsed the view of Justice Wadhwa. The Government of India had undertaken a massive operation to provide food to poor in the country and for its effective implementation, computerization is absolutely imperative. It is evident from the report that there is no coordination between the Central Government and the State Governments.

3.

Learned Counsel for the parties suggest and we also feel that this long outstanding problem can be sorted out if the Secretary (Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution) is made incharge of the computerization programme in Public Distribution System. We order accordingly. The concerned Secretary is nominated as the Chief Coordinator of computerization programme. He is directed to coordinate with all the State Governments and the Union Territories and ensure that entire computerization is carried out on a top priority basis. He is directed to coordinate the programme with all the Chief Secretaries or Administrators of the Union Territories. All the Chief Secretaries and Administrators are directed to fully cooperate with the Chief Coordinator and meticulously comply with his directions. The Chief Secretaries and Administrators are also directed to submit the progress report of computerization in their respective States or Union Territories. The Chief Coordinator is directed to file a comprehensive affidavit about the progress of the computerization programme in all the States and the Union Territories on or before 12th March, 2012 with an advance copy to the Petitioners and to other parties.

4.

The Chief Coordinator would be at liberty to take assistance of any other officers/officials in carrying out the directions of this Court. All officials and authorities are directed to fully cooperate with the Chief Coordinator.

5.

The Petitioner's representative shall be involved in the entire programme of computerization.

6.

List this matter on 16th March, 2012 for further directions.

7.

I.A. No. 110 (for modification of Court's order dated 22.4.2009)

8.

Issue notice.

9.

Reply be filed within two weeks.