Fortified rice kernels. File {photograph}
| Photo Credit: V RAJU
The Madras High Court has directed the Centre to look into apprehensions of sure risk factors that may be related to the consumption of fortified rice supplied through the Public Distribution System (PDS), Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS), Midday Meal Scheme and other such welfare schemes.
The First Division Bench of Chief Justice Sanjay V. Gangapurwala and Justice J. Sathya Narayana Prasad made it clear that two public curiosity litigation (PIL) petitions filed in opposition to the availability of fortified rice, with out conducting a correct scientific examine regarding the risk factors, shouldn’t be thought-about an adversarial litigation.
The judges granted time until June 19 for Additional Solicitor General AR.L. Sundaresan to get hold of directions from the Centre on the contentions of Senior Counsel Rev. Fr. A. Xavier Arulraj, assisted by Rev. Sr. Arul Mary and advocate M. Radhakrishnan {that a} risk evaluation should be performed earlier than supplying the fortified rice.
The counsel claimed that the operational tips issued by the Union Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution for evaluating the availability, protection and utilisation of fortified rice for the goal inhabitants had not been performed earlier than commencing the availability of rice via PDS and different schemes.
They additionally claimed that individuals with sure medical circumstances mustn’t devour fortified rice and but, the luggage during which they have been being provided don’t comprise any statutory warning. The Indian Council of Medical Research itself had highlighted the failure to conduct a correct medical analysis on the goal inhabitants after implementing the pilot scheme, the counsel mentioned.
It was additional submitted that NITI Aayog, a coverage think-tank of the Centre, too, had submitted a report suggesting {that a} baseline examine should precede the availability of fortified rice, earlier than its implementation as a pilot challenge, had not been performed.
The PIL petitions had been filed by Kanimozhi Manimaran of Tamil Thesiya Periyakkam, an unregistered socio- political motion and advocate M. Vetri Selvan. The petitioners had insisted on the conducting of an unbiased, scientific social-cum-medical audit of the pilot scheme to provide fortified rice earlier than extending it additional.
Rev. Fr. Arulraj advised the courtroom that malnutrition was a significant concern that was limiting human useful resource growth within the nation. However, the Centre was trying to handle the issue via a slender imaginative and prescient of supplying fortified meals via the PDS with none scientific knowledge or holistic evaluation, he mentioned.
“As rice is believed to be the staple food of 65% of the population in India and is availed [of] by even the most vulnerable population, the rice fortification scheme has been made the panacea for all ills arising from malnutrition. This perception of the government is considered to be highly erroneous,” he contended.
Explaining that fortification of rice was a course of during which important nutritional vitamins and minerals have been added to the grain to improve its nutritious worth, he mentioned important elements corresponding to vitamin A, vitamin B12, vitamin B1, iron, zinc, and folic acid have been additionally added in the course of the course of.
The Senior Counsel mentioned a three-year pilot scheme for distributing fortified rice was launched in 15 districts, together with Tiruchi, throughout the nation in 2020. He claimed that the Centre in addition to the State authorities have been planning to lengthen the scheme to all different districts with out conducting a scientific examine of its execs and cons.