IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction [SCR ORDER XXI RULE 3(1) (a)] Special leave Petition (C) 2177 of 2017 [Under Article 136 of the Constitution of India] (Arising out of the Final Order and Judgement dated: 11.07.2016 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay Bench, Aurangabad in Writ Petition 3359 of 2016) With Prayer for Interim Relief IN THE MATTER OF : Jayshree Mahila Bachat Gat & others Goeaearceeeereee a VERSUS. Union of India and others ...Respondents ADDITIONAL WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER PAPER BOOK (FOR INDEX, PLEASE SEE INSIDE) Filed by: ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER: SATYA MITRA.IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA \ Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 2177 of 2017 IN THE MATTER OF: Jayshree Mahila Bachat Gat .Petitioner Versus Union of India & Ors. Respondents ADDITIONAL WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER 1. On 19. 17 this Hon’ble Court made an order, the relevant part of which is as under: “vuuWe have not permitted the contract which has lapse with efflux of time in those areas, the State of Maharashtra can allow the selectee to operate on pro rata basis. Needles to say, the present order is passed subject to final adjudication in the matter. No earlier contract of anyone shall be liable for contempt of this Court. If any contract has been extended after the license period is over, the same shall come to an end by 30.4.2017. As undertaken by learned counsel for the State, in case the contracts which will be operative by virtue of the ad interim arrangement to distribute on pro rata basis if eventually nullified, the State shall cancel the2 tendering process and be guided by the directions of this Court" Pursuant to this order, state of Maharashtra issued contracts on 29.4.17 to 3 fake Mahila Mandals namely Venkatashwara Mahila Audhyogic Utpadak Sahakari. Sanstha _Limited, Mahalakshmi Mahila Grhaudhyog and Balvikas Buddheshiya Audhyogic Sahakari Sanstha and Maharashtra Mahila Sahakari Gruhodhyog Sanstha Ltd. as well as 15 other fake Mahila Mandals. Surprisingly these fake Mahila Mandals were not able to supply take-home rations to about 40 Lakh beneficiaries covering 36 districts of Maharashtra and this non supply continued for a period of 2 months. Therefore, during the Court vacation, the petitioner filed IA No: 46020 of 2017 dated 5.6.2017. Thereafter petitioner filed Additional Affidavit dated 4.8.2017 in 2 volumes to demonstrate that fake Mahila Mandals have been awarded the contracts by the State of Maharashtra. By fake, what is meant is that, a corporate house is behind these Mahila Mandals and that the latter are only a facade for the corporate entities. In respect of all the 18 fake Mahila Mandals who have now been allotted work under contracts with the state, the following are the common features:% a) 16 out of the 18 Mahila Mandals are licensed under the Food Safety and Standards Act and have been given a state license which authorises production of upto 2 tons per day and they are actually producing the realm of 25 tons per day indicating that these organisations are not local organisations of poor women (IA. No: 37230 of 2017 dated: 3.5.17 at page 157 of Vol-l) b) 16 out of the 18 Mahila Mandals are operating under the authority letters given to male members (Pages 37-43, 44-46 and 47-49 of I.A. No: 37230 of 2017 dated: 3.5.2017 of Vol-I). 9 of these authority letters are identical with the identical misspelling of the word “honerey” indicating centralised control over all the Mahila Mandals (Pages 428-436; I. A. No: of. 2017 dated 4.8.2017 of Vol-II). First batch of fake Mahila Mandals Venkateswhara ] Mahalakshmi Maharashtra 6. The Food Commissioners Report dated: 31 October 2012 (Page No 327 of the Compilation of Documents VOL- II dated: 27.2.2017 ) makes the following conclusion: “The Contract to supply THR in Maharashtra have been given to Three Mahila Mandals namelyuU Venkateshwara Mahila Audhyogik Utpadan Sabakari Sanstha Itd, Mahalaxmi Mahila sahakari Grahudhyog sanstha Ltd. These Mahila Mandals in turn have lease in the facilities for production of THR from private Agro Companies. My Report establishes the defacto and dejure ownership of mahila mandals and the private agro companies are by the same family. In each case the Mahila Mandals has formed a sub Committee which has been given also operational control over production and finances in relation to a unit which is owned by family members of the members of a said subcommittee. The Report also highlights the violations of the rules of the Cooperative Society Act. ” The abovementioned 3 fake Mahila Mandals have licenses from the government of Maharashtra under Regulation 2.1.4 (6) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 for a maximum production of 2 tons. However, from the state government work order dated 29.4.17 petitioner has calculated that Venkateshwara has been allocated work for supply of 29.3 tons per day, Mahalakshmi 47.32 tons per day. The scale of the operation is itself a good indicator that the Mahila Mandals are not genuine. The charts at pages 65 — 67, Volume 1 of the compilation of documents shows that these 3 fake Mahila Mandals have grabbed 87.76% of the work and the remaining 12.24% has been distributed among the remaining 15 fake Mahila Mandals.c The Income Tax Form No. 3CD filled by Venkateshwara along with the returns shows that the Secretary of Venkateshwara is a man. Mahila Mandals comprise of women only. He has his wife as the Chairman. The next form submitted by Venkateshwara for a factory license is in the name of Deepak and the email given is of one Satish Munde, both men. The Commissioners report dated 31st October 2012 ( Page No: 338 at the Compilation Document VolII ) makes the following conclusion: “While it is the Ventateshwara Mahila Sanstha that is supposed to be producing the THR; it is in fact private companies with whom they have lease agreement that are actually involved in the production. Venkateshwara Mahila Sanstha has contracted out the production of THR to two companies-Paras Foods and Swapnil Agro. Two sub- committees have been formed within the Mahila mandal and resolutions have been passed authorising the sub -committee to undertake all financial dealings, and monitoring of the contract with private companies. The members of the sub-committee that is dealing with the Paras Foods unit are all family members of the owner of Paras Foods. Similarly, members of the sub-continent that is dealing with Swapnil Agro are all family members of the owner of Swapnil Agro. This shows that the Mahila Sanstha is functioning as nothing but affront to these privateae ane 12. 6 companies. The mahila Sanstha therefore is not a mahila mandal at all” Venkateshwara has a second unit which also made an application for industrial license and Roshan Dharmaraj (male) has been shown as the entrepreneur/partner/director (Page No: 110 Vol. I of the Additional Affidavit dated: 4.8.17). Regarding Maharashtra, Writ Petition 1885 of 2017 filed in the Bombay High Court shows one Shashikant as the Secretary. Maharashtra emerged by an amendment in the factory license of a company called Sagar Foods, where the name was changed (page 31 IA No. 37230 of 2017 dated: 3.5.17). The Udhyog ‘Aadhar card of Maharashtra shows Rakesh Subhash Aggarwal as the entrepreneur (page 37 IA No. 37230 dated 3.5.17) and Shashikant Aggarwal as the entrepreneur (page 44 IA No. 37230 dated 3.5.17). The authority letter to sign all documents is given by Maharashtra to Shashikant Aggarwal in the capacity of Secretary (page 47 IA No. 37230 dated 3.5.17). Mahalakshmi is registered in Nanded, Maharashtra (Page 50 IA No. 37230 of 2017 dated: 3.5.17). Mahila Mandals are supposed to be local organisation of women. Mahalakshmi has taken over the Kota dal mill unit in Rajasthan. It is by no means a decentralised local organisation (Page 55 IA No, 37230 dated: 3.5.17) All the 3 organisations abovementioned have given authorisation in writing to male members to run the fake Mahila14, 15. 4 Mandals and to execute documents (Page 55 — 58 IA No 37230 dated:3.5.17). The second batch of fake Mahila Mandals Bhakti Mahila Bachat Gat Mahalakshmi Mahila Vikas Sanstha Sawaleshwari Petitioner will now demonstrate that all these 5 fake Mahila Mandals are in fact owned and controlled by Shivaji Ghughe and Sanjay Auradakar who own and control Mahalakshmi. The Chartered Engineer's certificate at page 111 Vol. 1 of the Additional Affidavit dated: 4.8.2017 shows that the fake Mahila Mandal, Bhakti Mahila Bachat Gat is supplied ready to cook food by M/s. Bhakti Caterers. The electricity consumer number mentioned in machinery performance certificate issued for Bhakti Mahila Bachat Gat is registered in the name of M/s. Sai Enterprises Proprietor Sanjay Pradeeprao Auradakar who is mentioned in the Commissioner's report as the Proprietor of Mahalakshmi.16. a 18. ¢ The premises of Bhakti Mahila Bachat Gat (page 113 Vol. 1 of the FDA License of the Additional Affidavit dated: 4.8.2017) is the same as Gauri Mahila Bachat Gat (page 116 of the Additional Affidavit dated: 4.8.2017). The licenses issued to the abovementioned 2 fake Mahila Mandals are issued on the same day and the license numbers are consecutive. What is most crucial are the charts at pages 118 — 121, Vol. 1 of the Additional Affidavit dated: 4.8.2017 showing that government pays the abovementioned fake Mahila Mandals and then withdrawals are made from them in the name of Bhakti Caterers and the 4 men who operate the abovementioned fake Mahila Mandals. The bank account details of these 4 fake Mahila Mandals do not show any withdrawal for purchase of grains or for normal functioning. The chart at page 14 VOL -I of the Additional Affidavit dated: 4.8.2017 shows that 93% of all the government funds deposited in these fake Mahila Mandals are withdrawn by Bhakti Caterers and the 4 persons allegedly operating the fake Mahila Mandals. Thus it is clear that they are empty shells operating only to accept government funds and that the moment the funds come in they are withdrawn and the beneficiary is Bhakti Caterers which is not a Mahila Mandal at all. The chart at page 123 Vol. 1 of the Additional Affidavit dated: 4.8.2017 shows that the 4 fake Mahila Mandals were set up on the same day and in the same manner, obtained credit arrangement letters on the same day by the same bank that was 340 kms away from them and in which they had no account4 (page No: 123 to127 Vol.1 of the Additional Affidavit dated: 4.8.2017). The chartered engineer who issues their certificates regarding operation of the units is the same person who issues identical certificates on the same day for all 4 fake Mahila Mandals The chartered accountant certifying the turnover does so on the same day for all 4 fake Mahila Mandals (128-135, Vol. 1 of the Additional Affidavit dated: 4.8.2017). The laboratory where the samples are tested are the same and the certificates issued are identical and on the same day (page 187 to 190 Vol.1 of the Additional Affidavit dated: 4.8.2017). The contact mobile number given for the fake Mahila Mandals in the bank are the same (page 190-193 Vol. 1 of the Additional Affidavit dated: 4.8.2017). The micronutrient supplier is the same for all 4 (page 194 to 197 Vol.1 of the Additional Affidavit dated: 4.8.2017). The consultant who. issues the details of the machinery is the same person who on the same day issues identical certificates for all fake Mahila Mandals. The factory licenses are issued on the same day and the license numbers are consecutive. The stamp papers for the affidavits that are annexed to the tender document are all bought by the same individuals who are withdrawing money from the accounts of the fake Mahila Mandals. The purchase orders of these 4 fake Mahila Mandals showed the address of Sawleshwari and are in the name of Bhakti Caterers. All the affidavits and the supporting documents annexed to the tender application of Mahalakshmi Mahila Vikas Sanstha bear the rubber stamp of Sawleshwari19. 20. lo Mahila Sanstha (324 - 348, Vol. 2 of the Additional Affidavit dated: 4.8.2017). All the above 5 fake Mahila Mandals have given authority to 5 male members to sign documents on their behalf (page 139 to 143, IA 37230 of 2017). Third batch of fake Mahila Mandals Stree Aadhar Jagruti Pragati Maria The chart at page 349 Vol. 2 of the Additional Affidavit dated: 4.8.2017 shows that these 3 fake Mahila Mandals have been set up with identical paper work. The turnover certificates issued by the chartered accountant are identical (354 Vol II of the Additional Affidavit dated: 4.8.2017). The stamp paper on which the affidavits were made for the tender were all purchased by one Shaikh Siraj, in his name, on the same date with the name of the fake Mahila Mandal probably inserted later on in handwriting (357 onwards Vol. 2 of the Additional Affidavit dated: 4.8.2017). The solvency certificate are similarly identical and all issued by the Central Bank in which bank none of the fake Mahila Mandals have an account (page 373 onwards Vol. 2 of the Additional Affidavit dated: 4.8.2017). The micronutrient supplier is the same and has issued identical consent letters to government. This supplier is the same for the 3 fake Mahila Mandals referred to above (37621. 22. tT onwards of the Additional Affidavit dated: 4.8.2017 Vol -II). The laboratory reports regarding the testing of the samples for quality are issued on the same day by the same laboratory and are identical. The Udhyog Aadhar certificate of all the 3 fake Mahila Mandals are identical and have consecutive registration numbers (397 Vol.2 of the Additional Affidavit dated: 4.8.2017). The certificate regarding the list of machinery is by the same person the same date and the list of machinery is identical to all 3 fake Mahila Mandals. From all the bank accounts of the 3 fake Mandals no transactions are recorded except withdrawals of money from their bank accounts by 3 male persons. Fourth batch of fake Mahila Mandals The authority letters (379, 382 IA No: 37230 of 2017 dated: 3.5.2017 ) to submit the tenders, represent the Mahila Mandals and entered into business with government is given by the Mahila Mandal to two men indicating that these are not genuine Mahila Mandals as men are not even permitted to be members of a Mahila Mandal. The relevant portion regarding men being disallowed from being members of Mahila Mandals or representing Mahila Mandals are as follows:(e a) ‘6.4: It is necessary that all member of bachat gat are from of ladies. b) 7 The Mahila Bachat Gat and Mahila Mandal has been establish under this scheme to supply food and its all members are from ladies and its is registered under Public Trust Act 1950, Society Registration Act 1860, Maharastra State Co-operative Society Act 1960 or Company Act 1956.'(Government of Maharashtra Resolution Woman and Child Development Department at page 38 of the Compilation Document on behalf of the Petitioner Vol -1) c) 'However we are in strong disagreement with the manner in which the ministry of women and child Development is seeking to allow a backdoor entry of contracts and middlemen back to the Supplementary Nutrition Programme by suggesting the introduction of micro-nutrient fortified food obviously through contractors, although this is not specifically stated in the letter dated 24.02.09' (Page No: 133-134 of the Compilation Document on behalf of the Petitioner Vol -1) d) ‘Mahila mandal is the indigenous vernacular name for voluntary formed community based women's Group in India with the leadership and participation of women.They Undertake development activities for their communities and are self managed. Many of the current government programs like ICDS, Total Sanitation Campaign, Literacy23. 24, 13 campaigns, have formed and involved mahila mandals to increase women's participation ownership and effective delivery of the program.( Page No: 333 of the Compilation Document on behalf of the Petitioner Vol -1) e "8)All members of the above mention Mahila Bachat Gats/ Mahila Mandals/ Mahila Sansthas/ Village Community must be women only. ...The Mahila Bachat Gats/ Mahila Mandals / Mahila mandals/ Mahila Sanstha/ Village Community has exclusively only women and no male member in the last five years' ( Page No: 254 of the SLP Copy of the Petitioners Annexure P-8 ) The bank records at page 356 L.A. No: 37230 of 2017 dated: 3.5.2017 Vol-II shows that a significant sum of Rs. 28, 60,000 was transferred from Moreshwar to Renuka Mata. Fifth batch of fake Mahila Mandals Neelakshi } The 2 abovementioned fake Mandals have 3 common members (330, 346 LA No: 37230 of 2017 dated: 3.5.2017 Vol-II). Petitioner has annexed the photographs of Neelakshi unit (348 onwards IA No: 37230 of 2017 dated: 3.5.2017 Vol-II) showing that the units are very small, machines were brought on 9.2.17 one day prior to the inspection.aaa 26. 27. The remaining 3 fake Mahila Mandals ‘Stree Aadhar Mahila Mandal Jagdamba SvAmiciteeses Amrut has filed an affidavit dated 13.4.16 along with the tender application (page no: 384-385 of IA. No: 37230 of 2017 Vol-II dated: 3.5.2017 ) stating that their FDA license was suspended and the Appeal was pending. Regarding Stree Aadhar, the documents at page 437 of the Additional Affidavit Vol. 2 dated: 4.8.2017 shows that Sheetal Kukreja has authorised herself to sign all documents. This is a self certification. She is the daughter of Chandrabhan Thakur, the Proprietor of Thakur Food Products, Pune, who uses the Mahila Mandal to market his food products. Disruption of supply and poor quality Post the order dated 19.4.17 disruption of supplies took place prompting the petitioner to file IA No 37230 of 2017. The work orders for 18 fake Mahila Mandals was issued by the State on 29.4.17 (Page no: 18; IA. No: 37230 of 2017 Vol- I). The contractors were not able to supply THR. Government therefore, by letter dated 20.5.17 gave 45 days to the 18 fake Mahila Mandals to supply THR. One wonders why the state of Maharashtra so ferociously argued for the termination of the old contracts when they knew that the new suppliers were not in a position to supply food (Page No: 30 I. A. No: 46021 of 201728. 29, \S dated: 5.6.2017). Complaints of non supply by the beneficiaries are annexed at page 32 onwards I. A. No: 46021 of 2017 dated: 5.6.2017). 228 ICDS projects covering more than 25,000 Anganwadis and 40 lakh beneficiaries were affected (Page 56, onwards I. A. No: 46021 of 2017 dated: 5.6.2017). The document at page 440 I. A. No: of 2017 of the additional affidavit dated 4.8.17 Vol -II demonstrates that these suppliers started distributing THR from July 2017 meaning that THR was not supplied during May and June. Petitioners’ information is that though the supply only started in July the signature on the challans were taken as for the month of May and June 2017. The press reports at pages 442 onwards show the non supply and the anguish of the beneficiaries and particularly complaints of poor quality against Venkateshwara, Maharashtra and Mahalakshmi. At page 472 I.A. No: of 2017 of the additional affidavit dated 4.8.17 Vol -II is a copy of the letter dated 6.7.17 of the CDPO to the government stating that fungus infected THR was given to the beneficiaries of 21 Anganwadis (Page No: 472 of LA.No: of 2017 of the additional affidavit dated 4.8.17 Vol -II) the laboratory report at pages 475 show that the food is substandard. Drawn by: Olivia Bang Filed by: Advocate Satya Mita AOR For the Petitioner.