Plea seeks allotment linked to SIR in West Bengal, SC asks petitioner to move HC

The petition alleges that the June 4 West Bengal government order directed the authorities to identify, investigate and delete the beneficiaries based on the classifications made during the SIR. | Photo credit: The Hindu

The Supreme Court on Tuesday (Jun 23, 2026) said the petitioners must ideally approach the Calcutta High Court, arguing that the West Bengal government’s June 4 order effectively deprived lakhs purged from the electoral roll after the Special Intensive Review (SIR) of access to subsidized food and nutrition.

Appearing before a bench headed by Justice BV Nagarathna, Paschim Banga Khet Majoor Samity, an independent trade union of agricultural labourers, marginal farmers and share traders, said the SIR result is linked to the functioning of the Public Distribution System (PDS) and the Annapurna Yojana.

PDS is a social mechanism designed to ensure access to basic food grains for economically vulnerable households. The program operates under the National Food Security Act of 2013. It is designed to provide basic sustenance to families facing economic hardship. Annapurna Yojana is a welfare scheme designed to provide financial assistance to economically disadvantaged women.

Represented by advocate Prasanna S., the farmers’ group argued that food security benefits for the economically vulnerable must not depend on unrelated considerations such as SIR.

In oral submissions before the Bench, which also included Justice Joymalya Bagchi, counsel said from the petition that the June 4 order reflected an “emerging pattern” among other states, suggesting similar exclusionary links between SIR results and welfare systems.

The petitioner argued that the June 4 order directed authorities to identify, screen and delist beneficiaries based on classifications made during the SIR, effectively introducing into the food security framework considerations completely foreign to the purposes of the National Food Security Act, 2013.

Counsel said the June 4 order effectively treats electoral status, inclusion in electoral rolls and criteria developed during electoral verification as valid determinants of eligibility for food security benefits.

However, the contested regulation effectively treats such classifications as indicators of eligibility. The petitioners alleged that the linkage between SIR and food security programs may lead to deactivation of ration cards for 35 and 60 million people in the state.

The counsel submitted that deletion of names from PDS and Annapurna scheme only on the basis of SIR would not result in the aggrieved persons being heard. Such actions on the part of the state work against its social character according to the Constitution. The petitioner stated that the social benefit once provided by the state should not be withdrawn based on the principle of non-retrogression.

The Bench, however, observed that a preliminary determination has to be made as to whether the cause of action in the petition actually arose out of the SIR exercise as suggested by the petitioner or was due to other political reasons. The Supreme Court asked the appellant to approach the High Court first.

Published – 23 Jun 2026 12:56 IST