Right to Food: An Analyses

October 19, 2024
The Case of Iftikhar Ahmed v Syed Meharban Ali (1974)

Food is the most important component of life. Without food, life is not possible. It is the first basic requirement of living. Also, food has to be quality food to ensure a healthy life. Considering the importance and value of food, the United Nations celebrates October 16 every year as World Food Day.

The right to food has been recognized as a fundamental right in India since 2001. When the Constitution was framed, ‘right to food’ was not specially recognized as a fundamental right. It was only through the judicial interpretation that such a right was read into Article 21 under Right to Life in the case of People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India (2001).

The present article aims to present before the readers a brief history of the right to food in India, how this right was discussed in the constitutional assembly debates, the difference between fundamental rights and Directive Principles of State Policy, various facets of Article 21 of the Constitution, and the statutory provisions governing the right to food in India.

History of the Right to Food

The right to food was not originally in the Constitution. Though there were some provisions in the Directive Principles of State Policy, yet no direct provision was there for the right to food. Article 39(a) states the state shall direct its policies towards securing adequate means of livelihood. Article 47 mandates the state to maintain nutrition in diet and ensure the good of its people.

It is to be noted that directive principles are only directions as given to the state, but they are not binding in any court of law. Article 37 clearly states that the directive principles shall not be enforceable in any court of law; however, the state shall consider those while making laws and forming policies.

These are the social and economic rights of the people. With regard to these principles, Dr. Ambedkar has stated that economic freedom is as important as political freedom, and to exercise political freedom, economic freedom is also important.

Relation between Directive Principles and Fundamental Rights

Though Fundamental Rights are directly enforced in any court of law and Directive Principles are not enforceable, directive principles can’t be completely ignored. In fact, a harmonious construction between the two must be achieved, as held in the case of Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India. The Court held that no one is supreme and a harmonious construction between the two has to be maintained. It can’t be said that directive principles may be completely ignored. Due regard must be taken to DPSPs as well. Considering the welfare nature of the Indian Constitution, as reflected in the Preamble itself, the state or the government must take positive steps to enforce these principles.

Also, the constitutional framers have enacted these DPSPs to give the government certain time to enforce them. As initially, the financial condition of India was not as such that these rights may be enforced, but directions were given that with the passage of time, these have to be allowed when the financial condition of the state allows.

Current status of DPSPs in India

Now some DPSPs in India have acquired the same status as fundamental rights and have been given priority over the fundamental rights. In the case of Bijoy Cotton Mills v. State of Bihar, the Supreme Court held that the right to carry out any trade, occupation, or business as guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g) shall not be given priority over the directive principle of adequate means of livelihood. Accordingly, the Court held that the Minimum Wages Act, which guarantees minimum wages to workers, is constitutional and not against Article 19(1)(g).

In the case of Randhir Singh v. Union of India, the Supreme Courtheld the directive principle of equal pay for equal work as akin to a fundamental right.

Today, India, in its path to becoming a welfare state promoting the socio-economic rights of the people, has started to prioritize the rights given in the DPSPs (collective rights) over the individual rights (fundamental rights).

DPSPs and Article 21 of the Constitution (How the Right to Food became a Fundamental Right?)

Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees the right to life to all persons. The Supreme Court has evolved this right to include in it all the essential rights that guarantee a meaningful life, a life that is worth living.

Also, in doing so, the Supreme Court has given the status of the fundamental rights to some of the DPSPs. In Hussaiara Khatoon v. State of Bihar, the Supreme Court held that right to free legal aid (which was DPSP under Article 39A) was a fundamental right. Additionally, the right to education has been made a fundamental right explicitly under Article 21 A. The right to a clean environment, the right to equal pay for equal work, the right to livelihood, and the right to shelter have been made fundamental rights.

Similarly, the Supreme Court in People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India (2001) has made the right to food a fundamental right. It was stated that food is the essential requirement for living a dignified life. Therefore, for a meaningful and dignified life, this right to food is essential.

How is right to food ensured?

The Indian Parliament, considering the welfare nature of the Indian Constitution, has enacted various laws to carry out the functions of a welfare state. One such act is the National Food Security Act, 2013. This Act provides food to the Indian population at the rate of Rs 3/kg, Rs 1 or 2/kg in the form of coarse grains, wheat, or rice. Maximum limit is 5 kg/per month/person.

The government has also launched the Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Anna Yojana during COVID, under which free food was provided to the most vulnerable section of society. These actions have been taken to promote the right to food.

ConclusionPeople’s Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India (2001) is a landmark decision in India’s constitutional history. The right to food is definitely essential to guaranteeing a meaningful life. However, the government today is spending a huge amount of money to provide free food to its people. Even 800 million people are beneficiaries of this scheme, which forms around 55% of India’s population. Therefore, the government must implement the schemes in such a way that only the targeted people benefit from the scheme and try to remove all the loopholes from the system.

Leave a Comment