Vinod Trivedi and others vs State of U.P., Through Secretary Basic Education and others

Ritu Raj Awasthi, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel and Sri Mukund Asthana appearing for the respondents.

The work with regard to distribution of Mid Day Meal earlier was assigned to the village Pradhans. By the impugned order the Government took a decision to distribute the Mid Day Meal through the Mahila Samakhya, a society consisting of the ladies.

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that by relegating the right to issue by the Mahila Samakhya the cause shall be increased manifold.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that only in some districts this provision has been made not for all the districts

It is a policy matter taken by the State Government relegating the power to different body taking away it from the village Pradhans. The decision as to how to Mid Day Meal is to be distributed in terms of the Government Orders, rules and regulations is to be taken by the State Government.

We, therefore, do not find any good ground to interfere with the impugned order under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. No statutory or fundamental right of the petitioners has been violated on account of the impugned order.

Accordingly the writ petition is not maintainable and the same is liable to be dismissed.

The writ petition is dismissed.