Statement of Facts

PETITIONER

Freedom From Hunger

RESPONDENT

State Of Marissa

1. Freedom from Hunger, an NGO, filed a Public Interest Litigation, in the Supreme Court, drawing the attention of the Court to a number of starvation deaths in the district of Palahandi in the State of Marissa in the Union of India. The petitioner prayed for the appointment of Commission to investigate into the starvation deaths. The Petitioner further prayed that, if the Commission were to confirm that these deaths were due to starvation, the State of Marissa should, through the issue of a Writ of Mandamus, be directed to supply food etc., to the starving population.

The Division Bench of the Supreme Court issued rule nisi. The State of Marissa appeared in response to the notice. After hearing both the parties, the Supreme Court appointed a Commission, headed by a retired bureaucrat, to inquire into the alleged starvation deaths. The Commission was also directed to suggest remedial measures for future action. The Commission, after making a local visit, meeting State officials and a cross section of people, submitted its report to the Supreme Court. The report disclosed that:
2.

a. Due to starvation, 248 men, 152 women and 400 children and died during the period between the 1st of March and 30th of April. b. More than 1000 men, women and children were at Deaths door due to starvation. c. Nearly 2 lakhs, out of the 6 lakh people living in 6 talukas of the district of Palahandi and belonging to the section of people known as Below the Poverty Line, were suffering from lack of food.

d. Causes for starvation included, inter alia, the lack of purchasing power, as there were no employment opportunities for the landless people. e. The Government in order to remedy the situation, should immediately supply free food to all the people living Below the Poverty Line for a period of six months in six talukas of Palahandi district. f. In the long run, the Government should guarantee employment, unemployment allowance and free milk distribution to children in the six talukas of Palahandi district. g. Payment of a compensation of Rs. 10,000/- to the near relatives of dead was also a must. 3. The petitioner, NGO, namely Freedom From Hunger, relying on the findings of the Commission, sought directions in terms of the findings in paras (c), (f) and (e) above. The State of Marissa accepted the findings, but disputed the remedial measures suggested in para (f) above. According to the State of Marissa, payment of compensation and free supply of food for the people living Below the Poverty Line, would meet the ends of justice. The Advocate General also contended that no directions could be issued against the State of Marissa for implementing the measures recommended in para (f) above. According to him under the provisions of the Constitution of India, neither an enforceable right viz., Freedom of Hunger is vested in the people nor an enforceable obligation to remove hunger is cast on the State. ISSUES INVOLVED 1. Whether the writ is maintainable under article 32 of the constitution of India? 2. Whether directive principle is enforceable through court of law? 3. Whether the state is liable to pay compensation and other remedies recommended by the commission?