Implementation of NFSA in Rajasthan1

A Preliminary Report on Criteria and Process

The Government of Rajasthan has officially completed the process of selection of beneficiaries under NFSA on 20th of September 2013 (Table 2). The final lists have supposedly been approved on this day by the special meetings of the local bodies- gram sabhas in rural areas and urban local bodies in urban areas- which were to be held across the state as per the schedule finalized by the state government. The process of identification of beneficiaries under the NFSA thus officially stands completed irrespective of the actual status at the ground level. This brief write-up critically examines the implications of the basis and process of implementation. It is on the basis of inconsistencies and inadequacies in the implementation framework and first hand field observations during monitoring by the office of the Advisers to SC Commissioners. I: Introduction Government of Rajasthan, soon after the promulgation of NFSO, in pursuance of Section 10 initiated the process of identification of beneficiaries. Four task forces2 were appointed in the month of July with a time limit of two weeks to submit the reports for quick roll out of the food security ordinance. By early August task forces submitted their reports. Based on these reports inclusion/exclusion criteria were finalized along with the process and time line. The criteria were published in the newspapers on 14th August and objections and suggestions were sought from public by 26th August. The civil society including right to food campaign submitted objections and gave suggestions but the final set of criteria published on 31st August suggests that none of them were accepted. The final inclusion/exclusion criteria are provided in Table 1. Even cursory perusal of criteria for both rural and urban areas suggests that they are exclusionary, discriminatory and biased in favour of vested interests. It would not only perpetuate the existing large inclusion-exclusion errors but is likely to further aggravate it. Indeed the final sets of criteria are arbitrary and devoid of logic. Even the evidence based conclusions/recommendations/observations of the expert committees like that of NC Saxena committees on BPL 2002 survey, Hashmi Committee on urban poor and Justice Wadhwa committee on PDS and the hard evidences provided by Planning Commission evaluation reports and NSS data evidences have not been taken into account. The state administration also completely overlooked the objections and suggestions by civil society including by Right to Food Campaign several of which were based on proven facts. There was no public debate and almost all objections/suggestions have been summarily rejected by the state administration without assigning any reason. The state government implemented the NFSA without framing proper rules just on the basis of some administrative orders/criculars. Summary of select important orders/guidelines are provided in Table 3. In her haste, the state government seems to have missed the historic opportunity to ensure access to even the minimalist benefits under the law to many of the neediest vulnerable, poor and marginal sections of Rajasthan.

The central government, who has the monopolistic right to decide the number of poor in a State to be provided benefits under the law (Section 9), on the basis of 2011-12 NSSO data on consumer expenditure has fixed through the Planning Commission the Rajasthan quote of beneficiaries to the extent of 69.09 percent for the rural areas and 53 percent for the urban areas. This proportion of population relates to Census 2011 population figures. On 2014 projected population figures, the proportion of beneficiaries would come down by about four percentage points for rural Rajasthan3. This means that effectively the coverage of current population is roughly 65% for rural Rajasthan and not 69.09 percent as is being highlighted in the advertisements. In other terms this means that in rural Rajasthan 35% population need to be excluded. In such a situation a well-thought out strategy and methodology, especially the inclusion/exclusion criteria for selection of beneficiaries was the need of the hour. The importance of these criteria therefore need not be overemphasized. However that did not happen. The NFSA turns the PDS from universal to target based finally. Officially till date all the ration card holders were entitled to get the ration. Henceforth only the beneficiaries selected under the act would get. In addition to about 39 lakh Annapurna, Antyodaya, BPL and SBPL card holders all the 108 lakh APL families too were entitled to get on first come first serve basis. Following implementation of NFSA, the total number of families getting benefit of PDS would be roughly 89.23 lakh (assuming average size of family being five) out of total of 146.8 lakh present card holders. Thus total 60.78% current card holders would the beneficiaries. If we add to this new ration card applicants the percentage would further come down. This coverage is now being projected as expansion of beneficiaries by more than double. Such misleading propaganda is on the basis of figures of assured beneficiaries of BPL/SBPL/AAY/Astha and Annapurna card holders. However, if we look at the allocation of grain under the NFSA as provided in Schedule 4 of the NFSA and compare it with the total allocation in the year 2012-13, we find the increase is just 15.3% from 24.2 to 27.9 lakh tons. In volume it comes to mere 3.7 lakh tons. II: The Implications of Criteria and Process In this section I briefly discuss the implications of the final set of inclusion/exclusion criteria (Table 1) and the process of selection (Table 3) being adopted for selection of beneficiaries under the law especially in the context of the poor and vulnerable. (a) The inclusion criteria leave out many -are exclusionary The criteria are exclusionary for many known categories of poor and vulnerable like low salaried employees in grocery shops, delivery boys of courier services, workers of road side restaurants/ dhabas, tea shops; casual labourers; brick kiln workers; self-employed and homed-based workers like dhobis, potters, bidi rollers, etc; homeless and those living on pavements, slum dwellers in urban areas who have not been enumerated; and so on. This is so because these categories of families are not automatically included i.e. these categories do not find place in inclusion list. It is true that many of them may become eligible under some other criteria. But there is a distinct possibility that many of them would not be eligible under any of the inclusion criteria. These families then by default would become part of the autoexclusion despite not being in the list of exclusion. A letter from the Collector Ajmer and the clarification issued by the state administration provides testimony to this4. Thus in a deft move the state administration has denied benefit to many poor and vulnerable who must have been provided benefit by very implementation design.

(b) The inclusion criteria are extremely limiting leading to auto-exclusion of many in the same category of employment The inclusion criteria include select occupational categories, residential status categories, beneficiaries of schemes/programmes and select backward groups/castes. However many of the occupational categories like bonded labour, construction workers, MNREGA workers have been so defined that many would be filtered out within these occupational category. For example, the released bonded labourers who have received benefits of rehabilitation package are find place in inclusion list for benefit but many times more in number who continue to be under bondage are being denied the ration cards i.e. food entitlements. There are known cases wherein out of a group of identified bonded labourers by social workers/organisations some have been given release certificates and some others have not been. Thus all such bonded labourers who have not been provided release certificates and a large number of those who have not even been identified stand discriminated by the process of identification of beneficiaries adopted by the state government. Similarly, the inclusion criteria also discriminate a large number of construction workers as it provides benefit to only those labourers among the category who have been registered by the labour department for the benefits under construction workers welfare board. Such registered workers are not even ten percent of the total construction workers. A large number of construction workers who are not only deprived of the benefits due to non-registration also are being denied even food cards. They are thus doubly hit- deprived of benefits under the construction welfare board and also under NFSA. The most bizarre category of discrimination in this context relates to workers who have worked under MNREGA. The criteria specified auto-inclusion of all those families who have worked for 100 days under MNREGA year after year since 2009-10 and exclude all others. Thus if a family, cetris baribus, for some reason or other, which may have been beyond their control, worked for only 90 or 85 or even 99-days in one of the reference years, the family in question would not be qualified for benefit under the new food security act. ( c) The inclusion criteria and process legalizes the large inclusion errors The state administration has specified the inclusion and exclusion lists and the process wherein the existing categories of BPL and SBPL (These are the families who were beneficiaries of 1997 BPL Census but were excluded in the 2002 BPL Census and are now getting benefits as State BPL) in addition to Antyodaya and Annapurna are automatically included as beneficiaries. The process specifies that their ration cards already have different colours and therefore they need not do any other formality. The instructions issued by the state administration state that their cards need not be stamped even to make them a beneficiaries of the NFSA. They have separate identifiable cards and are automatically would become legal beneficiaries under the NFSA. It is a universally known fact that the existing lists of BPL beneficiaries have almost half such families who are not entitled to be a beneficiary (In Rajasthan the number of BPL and SBPL are over 29.51 lakhs). All these families who are part of the benefits under existing TPDS ( A little over 38.83 lakhs) have now become legal beneficiaries. Only if someone has raised an objection in writing and that is found correct by the appointed officers that such a family can be denied benefit (See Annexure 1 for application to file objection). Given our social reality

especially in the rural areas such objections by a third party is a remote possibility. The initial reports suggest that not a single objection has been received in several areas. The criteria and process of the selection thus may lead to inclusion/exclusion errors of 15 to 20 lakhs families or even more. All these families would now be legal beneficiaries. In other words, the large exclusion errors of 1997/2002 BPL survey in rural areas thus get legalized depriving that many poor and needy families benefits under the NFSA. (d)The process discriminates the new and old beneficiaries The process specified clearly violates the fundamental right to equality of the people of Rajasthan, particularly the poor and vulnerable, guaranteed under the Article 14 of The Constitution of India. It specifies that all the eligible households for benefits i.e. falling under inclusion list would have to give affidavit that they do not satisfy any of the exclusion criteria while applying for new ration card or stamping of the cards for availing benefit under NFSA. In other words the process stipulates that barring BPL/SBPL/AAY/Antyodaya/Astha card holders all other eligible beneficiaries who are the part of the same inclusion list would first be screened through the exclusion criteria and then only they would be included as beneficiaries. The screening would be in terms of self-affidavit vetted by one of the specified elected representatives/officials. Thus a family who does not have ration card or has an APL card and owns more than specified land [one to 1.5 hectares of irrigated and 2 to 10 unirrigated] or has income more than one lakh per annum or owns a four wheeler for personal use or satisfy any other exclusion criteria would not be eligible for benefit under the NFSA anywhere in Rajasthan. However if one of the existing BPL or State BPL family owns even ten or more hectares of irrigated land or own a four wheeler or has income of ten lakhs per annum that family would be eligible for benefit automatically. Such families are not required to give any affidavit or self-certification that they do not come under exclusion criteria. Such families can be denied benefit only if third party objects to the fact in writing that they are not eligible (See Annexure 1) and that is found right on enquiry. Sounds crazy! But this is the reality with regard to implementation of NFSA in Rajasthan. (e) The process and criteria are biased in favour of vested interests The Para C and D above clearly suggest that the criteria and the process of selection of the beneficiaries is not part of a sincere effort of the administration to choose the neediest as beneficiaries. Rather an approach has been adopted not to confront the vested interests who have till date cornered the benefits of TPDS at the cost of poor. Such a process suits administration as well. Not only for reasons of it being heavily biased in favour of the rich and powerful but also due to the fact that it reduces the extra work burden. In fact this has been indicated in one of the orders of 24th August giving details of procedure. The relevant Para reads like this:
The ration cards of BPL/SBPL/AAY/Annapurna/Astha are of different colours therefore the colour itself is the indicator of their eligibility for food security. No seal of Food Security Approved Household is to be put on these cards. Such families do not have to reach to Nodal Officers for seal. This should be widely publicized so that there is no unnecessary gathering of crowds(emphasis added). Database is already available of these families. They will get food security benefit as before with immediate effect on the basis of ration cards. (Order at Serial Number 4 in Table 3- point number 5 in original order)

(f) The income exclusion-criteria discriminate the rural and urban households

The exclusion criteria related to income specify that all the families having annual income of over rupees one lakh would be excluded (See Table 1, Col 2(6) and Col 4(5). The income level is the same across Rajasthan whether one is living in the expensive city of Jaipur or in a backward remote tribal rural areas or remote desert areas of Barmer. The obvious losers are the urban area residents. (g) Unrealistic time-line made the process undeliverable As per the time line set for implementation the process was to begin by 26th August and was to by and large conclude by 20th September (Table 2), the 26th September 2013 being the final date for formal conclusion of the process. Even a cursory reading of the timeline would suggest the impossibility of the completion of the tasks specified rendering the entire action plan suspect. The August schedule specified that the administration was to complete all the work understanding the provisions, printing materials, appointing nodal officers, training implementing officials, preparing the list of scheme based beneficiaries and so on- within five days beginning from 26th August. The lists of the various scheme based beneficiaries were to be prepared on the basis of final set of criteria and made available to local nodal officers by 30th of August and were to be displayed on 2nd September. That the delivery was impossible in the set time-line was obvious given the characteristic of lower bureaucracy in the country, non-availability of data bases and the huge unwieldy task. The government orders itself recognized that data bases for most of the new inclusion categories like small farmers, landless labourers, rag-pickers, single women, rickshawpullers, street venders, domestic workers, and so on were not available at ground level ( See Table 3 Col 4 Sl No 7). In absence of these data bases and lack of mass awareness the preparation of lists of beneficiaries by 2nd September were well neigh impossible. Invariably therefore the lists that were displayed in most of the cases on 2nd September and approved in 12th September local body meeting were confined mainly to existing roughly 39 lakh nonnegotiable auto-beneficiaries in BPL/SBPL/AAY, lists of which are readily available. Reports from the ground suggest that in several places in both urban and rural areas there was a total chaos in the meetings on 12th September. Non availability of forms and ignorance of the process was a general complaint (See Table 4). The above description regarding the timeline and tasks to be accomplished makes it obviously that the intention of the entire exercise was not the proper need-based identification of beneficiaries but somehow launch the NFSA before the state elections are notified. The government was least bothered about the implications of the process for those who needed the food security most. (h) No Awareness and Publicity about the Implementation Plan and Process The entire implementation process has been unusually quite. There has not been any publicity about the process in local news papers for instance. It is interesting to note that for more than a month now in all the local vernacular press every day many advertisements are appearing on the achievements of the state government. Many of them are full page advertisements. However, one failed to find a single publicity matter regarding process, date line and other information of the implementation process. One really is unable to find the logic behind total silence on the part of the state authorities.

About awareness one of the orders said that it would be the responsibility of the district administration to publicize the implementation of NFSO. However there was no mention about the budget provisions. Without financial allocation it in reality amounted to mere lip service.

III: Conclusions The break-neck speed with which the state administration moved is nothing sort of historic feet in implementation of a legal right. This is so despite the fact that Section 10 of the Act clearly spells out that the process of identification is to be completed within 365 days from the date of the commencement of the law. Why such hurry then? So much so that basic safety norms and constitutional provisions, as discussed above, were violated. It is obvious that Government of Rajasthan implemented the order without any preparations. The data bases were not ready for many categories of individuals/families in inclusion nor were any time given for preparation of the lists. The state by implementing the all important legislation in record time has attempted something which was wrong on one hand and impossible on other. In the process they over-ruled all the objections, ignored suggestions and compromised on criteria as well as process affecting the access to NFSA of poor and vulnerable adversely. The reports reaching from the fields testify this. A small survey done by the office of the Advisers of street venders, domestic workers, rag-pickers suggest that many are not aware of the law or the fact that it is under implementation. The implementation is based on distorted methods and processes which are exclusionary, discriminatory and in favour of vested interests. The earlier problems of inclusion/exclusion continue to plague the beneficiaries. To realize the objectives even the institution of local bodies has been manipulated to give some sort of legitimacy to the otherwise indefensible anti-people process of identifying beneficiaries. The criteria and time line very clearly indicates towards that. Indeed nothing happens without a motive. In implementation of NFSA ensuring the food security of the deserving people was not the agenda is obvious. Rolling out the NFSA prior to state election notification and keeping the local vested interests in good humour were perhaps the unstated objectives of the entire exercise which have been accomplished. Maintenance of the status quo in relation to existing regular beneficiaries is the main final outcome of the current process. The other outcome is manipulation by and promotion of corrupt practices among the local level officials and elected representatives. Many deserving continue to be deprived of the benefit of the food security. One is not sure when they would be covered or would they benefit at all. Behind the implementation of NFSA is not the food security but vote politics There are possibly several political and administrative reasons behind the decision but two political ones are quite obvious. One, the state elections are round the corner. Sometime during the fourth week of September 2013 state election notification is likely to come out. After the notification launch may not be possible. The NFSA being seen as a game changer the reason for hurry is obvious. Political gain at forthcoming elections is more than obvious. Second related reason is the keeping the powerful vested interests happy. In elections the local level sarpanches/councilors, lower level bureaucracy and others have quite an important

role to play. Reviewing the list of BPL or State BPL would have been politically disastrous for the ruling party. Moreover such a process makes the implementation much easier as the scope of selection process stood reduced substantially. One may argue that the expected gain to the present ruling congress party are likely to be limited given the fact that raise in overall allocation would be not more that about 15% of current allocation. Price gain is not going to be there as in Rajasthan the current rate is highly subsidized at rupees one per kg for the BPL/SBPL/AAY. Even for present APL beneficiaries the benefits would be much the same as currently the APL get wheat flour at Rs Five per kg. And APL families are getting some benefit. On the contrary, many APL families who are getting 10 kg of wheat flour at a highly subsidized rate may actually be out of any benefit affecting the prospects of the congress adversely. In spite of this scenario, the ruling party is looking for substantial gain. It is true that from the current universal PDS, after the NFSO the PDS has become TPDS in real sense of the term. Ironically, in my understanding one of the important gain lies in the process of this transition from the universal PDS to TPDS simply because what was uncertain and relatively little universal benefit would now be definite and a little larger benefit though the coverage would be less. The uncertainty was also responsible for leakages which now should be plugged. There are going to be problem in this though given the new format wherein the entitlements are per person and not per family. One thing is for certain, many poor and vulnerable who need food security would continue to be deprived. They would now have no access at all with closure of universal access. How this vote-politics in the name of food security would finally benefit the ruling party would be known only after about three months when the results of the assembly elections would be known. For the poor however the struggle for food security is Hobsons choice- fight or forgo.
The NFSA provides three entitlements in main- supplementary nutrition to children and mothers, maternity benefit and cereals. The present report relates to only one but major entitlement related to TPDS. The other are universal though with riders. 2 Two task forces related to criteria for rural and urban areas, one to supplementary nutrition for children and one to the implementation processes at district level. The task forces related to criteria were headed by principal secretary rural development and urban development; the nutrition one was headed by the principal secretary women and child development and the last consisted of three district collectors. 3 Presuming that the annual compounded growth rate of population in rural Rajasthan is two percent. 4 On 5th September District Collector (Rasad) vide his letter number jee.ra.a./kha.su.a./2013 to state food department seeking directions about a group of casual labourers who have applied for benefit under the NFSO but are neither fall under inclusion nor exclusion criteria. Replying to this the Additional Food Commissioner wrote vide letter number 13(10)(6) kha.vi./kha.su.a./2013 dated 5/09/2013 that ..concerned labourers fall under the unorganized category who are not in the inclusion category. Therefore their applications cannot be accepted.
1

Inclusion 1 1.BPL families as per 2003 Urban BPL Census survey

Table 1: Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria Urban area Exclusion [Seven criteria] Inclusion 2 1.All families having a member as income tax payer 3 1. BPL families The families affected by Uttrakhand disaster The families affected by Uttrakhand disaster as per the 2002 BPL Census 2. All the State bpl family

Rural area

4 1.All family having a member as income tax payer

2. All the State bpl families

2. All families having a member as government employee, semi government employee, or having a pension of more than one lakh a year

3. All the Antyodaya families

3. All family having a four wheeler excluding those family who owns a four wheeler for earning their of livelihood 4. Family having a pucca house of more than 1000 square feet in the Municipal area 5. Family having a house of more than 1500 square feet in the nagar palika area

3. All the Antyodaya family

4. All the Annapurna family

4. All the Annpurna family

2. All family having a member as permanent employee in government/ semi government/local-self institutions or getting a pension of more than rupees one lakh a year 3. All family having a four wheeler excluding those family who owns a four wheeler (Tractor) for earning their source of livelihood 4. All the family having land holding more than the average of small farmer 5. Family having an income of more than one lakh in a year

5. The list of family which are not in the above mentioned categories but are part of the following schemes/categories a. Chief ministers senior citizen yozana [old age pension] b. Indira Gandhi national old-age pension scheme c. Chief minister single women pension yozana d. Indira Gandhi national widow pension yozana e. Chief minister disabled pension yozana f. Indira Gandhi national disabled pension yozana g. Chief minister life protection fund* beneficiaries h. All residents of the government hostels** i.All single women j. Chief ministers dependent resettlement yozana k. Sahariya and Kathori tribal families l. Families of legally rehabilitated bonded labour m. Construction labor registered with labor department n. All the registered orphanages and old-age homes

6. Family having an income of more than one lakh in a year 7. All the families having land holding more than the limits of small farmer

5. The list of family which are not in the above mentioned categories but are part of the following schemes/categories a. Chief ministers senior citizen yozana [old age pension] b. Indira Gandhi national old-age pension scheme c. Chief minister single women pension yozana d. Indira Gandhi national widow pension yozana e. Chief ministers disabled pension yozana f. Indira Gandhi national disabled pension yozana g. Chief minister life protection fund* beneficiaries h. All residents of the government hostels** i.All single women j. Family completed 100 days work in MNREGA in the years from 200910 till date k. Chief minister dependent resettlement yozana l. Sahariya and Kathori tribal families m. Families of legally rehabilitated bonded labour n. Construction labor registered with labor department

o. All the surveyed families of slums

p. Rag-pickers families q. All domestic workers r. All the nongovernmental safaikarmchari s. Street vendor t. The families affected by Uttrakhand disaster u. Cycle Rickshaw pullers v. Porters (coolies)

o. All the Family having classified under Chief minister disabled yozana- repeat of e p. The families affected by Uttrakhand disaster q. Landless farmers r. Small and marginal farmers s. Cycle Rickshaw pullers t. Families of rag-pickers u. Porters (coolies)

Table: 2: Time Line for Implementation of NFSO Sl No Task details August 2013 1 Meeting of district/sub-division/tehsil/local urban officials to discuss NFSO implementation 2 Appointment of nodal officers by at Gram Panchayat level by Block Development Officers and at ward level by Commissioner/CEO under directions of Collector 3 In concerned posts are vacant than appointment of other appropriate official 4 Training of nodal officers at Panchayat Samiti or urban local body level 5 Printing of Forms/Registers/Seals 6 List of beneficiaries of different schemes to be made available at Gram Panchayat/Ward level September 2013 1 Display of lists of beneficiaries at Rajiv Gandhi Seva Kendra/Fair Price Shops/Ward 2 Submission of Objections by individuals/organisations 3 Approval of families about whom there is no objection by Gram Sabha/Urban local body and putting seal of food security [except BPL/SBPL/AAY/Astha cards] 4 Nodal officer to dispatch all objections to Tehsildar/Naib Teshsildar/SDO 5 Special meeting of Gram Sabha/Urban bodies for approval of beneficiaries 6 Disposal of objections by Tehsildar/Naib Teshsildar/SDO 7 Special meeting of Gram Sabha/Urban bodies for approval of beneficiaries 8 Approval list of rejected objections by Gram Sabha/Urban local body and putting seal of food security [except BPL/SBPL/AAY/Astha cards]

Date by which to be completed 26th August 2013 27th August 2013

27th August 2013 29th and 30th August 2013 30th August 2013 30th August 2013

2nd September 2013 2nd September to 8th September 2013 11th to 18th September 2013

9th and 10th September 2013 10th September [later changed to 12th September 2013] September 11th to 18th 2013 20th September 2013 September 21st to 26th 2013

Table: 3 : Summary of Select Office directions/orders issued by Food Department regarding Implementation of NFSO/NFSA in Rajasthan Sl Number and date Subject Main Provisions Comments N o 1 F13(10)kha.vi./kha.su.a./201 Regarding Printing of all forms and binding 3 dated 24/8/13 to all preparing/printin of registers to be completed by Divisional commissioners g of objection 30th August and collectors application, registers, food security seals 2 Number as above Dated 24- About tasks Seven point procedure related 8-13 to all the District regarding NFSO, tasks- 1. Arrangement for Supply Officers 2013 procedure collectors, help in publicity, meet expenses; 2. Reimburse printing costs; 3.Estimate and arrange for printing and disbursement of application forms 4. Made available form for training 5. Get ration application and get them printed 6. Collect and make data bases of final beneficiaries 7. Redress problems in consultation with headquarters 3 Number as above dated Appointment of 1- Under the guidance of 24/8/13 to all Divisional nodal officers Collector- NO to be appointed by commissioners/collectors (NO) and their 27th; training to be done on 29th and director, local self tasks reg NFSO and 30th; material and list of department beneficiaries to be ready by 30th;display the lists of beneficiaries by 2nd September 2-NO to receive no objections from 2nd September and give receipt, make entry in register, and deliver all to concerned officer after last date-8th September 3--for families with no objection food security seal to be put after approval from local body [barring 38.83 lakh old tpds beneficiaries] 4-get application from eligible heads of no-ration card families and forward the same to BDO/CEO etc

Number as above dated 24/8/13 to all Divisional commissioners and collectors

Detailed order about the process and tasks

1-Provide lists of beneficiaries and receive objections 2-NO to sit at Rajiv Kendra/Gram Panchayat/place decided by CEO etc to receive objections and applications for new ration cards from eligible 3- Data based to be prepared of objections and objections to be disposed off 4-No seal of food security on BPL/SBPL/AAY/Annapurna and Astha cards 5-Data base of final beneficiaries to be prepared for putting in public domain in pursuance of Sec 11 of the NFSA 6- Collectors would implement timeline issuing detailed orders Clarification issued that there is no need for application for ration card to be attested by notary and revised application attached (Annexure 2) The casual labourers who are not included in either of the two lists that is they are neither in inclusion list nor in exclusion list are not to be given benefit

It is obvious that the existing beneficiaries become autobeneficiaries under the NFSA

F13(10)kha.vi./kha.su.a./201 3 Dated 30-8-13 to all the collectors

Regarding attestation from notary public

Number as above dated 5/9/2013 to all collectors

Clarification about casual labourers

Number as above dated 10/9/13 to all Collectors and District Supply Officers

Regarding action to be taken in second phase about those families who are in inclusion criteria but their data base in not available

The condition of attestation of application form from notary public as stipulated in directions issued on 28th August stands withdrawn and a revised application form is enclosed with the letter.

This means that the state government created another auto-exclusion list of all those who are not part of the declared inclusion/exclusio n lists The order confirms that there is no data base for several categories like domestic and construction workers, rikshawpullers, single women, street venders, bonded labour, ragpickers, safaikarmacharies, landless labourers, small and marginal farmers

Number as above dated 10/9/13 to all Collectors and District Supply Officers

Regarding NFSO - action to be taken in urban areas regarding inclusion categories for which no data base is available

A letter of 5-9-13 No P 15(kh)/PD/DLB/khasua/13/1783 1-36 from Local Self Department to all the Regional Deputy Directors, Local Self Department is forwarded. The letter reproduces the time schedule sent vide even number letter dated 30 -8-13

The time schedule was: Application from no-data base families to be received from 2-913 to 8-9-13 and scrutinized between 9-9-13 to 13-9-13 and objections received and disposed off between 14-9-13 to 19-9-13 and beneficiaries list to be approved in the special meeting of the urban board scheduled for 20th September

Table 4: Evidences from the field regarding problems in implementation of NFSA Despite orders to contrary (Table 3 Sl No 5) applicants were asked to submit application on stamp paper duly certified by the notary at several places - Kota, Jaipur, Dungarpur and Baran. For instance, Mr Mohan of Manav Seva Sansthan, Samaraniya, Baran district has got hundreds of forms filled-in of Sahariya families from five gram-panchayats of Shahabad. The Panchayat secretary flatly refused to accept the applications without Rs 50/- bond. In Jaipur, Ms Mewa Bharti of Domestic Workers unions got the Xeroxed form filled in from hundreds of domestic workers. But they were not accepted by the office of the Councilor on the ground that they are not on stamp paper duly notarized. The other common problem related to availability of prescribed application forms. The forms were to be available by 2nd September but were not available even by date of first local body meeting on 12th at several of the places. Application for new ration cards who qualify under inclusion criteria like rag-pickers, Banjara, gadariya, domestic workers, Sahariya etc was not accepted/taken despite clear instruction vide para 7 of order dated 24th August 2013 by the food department. For instance, one Dr Mahajan of Mahak Welfare Sanstha, Kota took initiative and spent money to get the forms Xeroxed and between 13 to 16th September helped around seven hundred families most of whom do not have ration cards and satisfy inclusion criteria residing in slums areas of Durga basti, Ghoda basti and Saji dehda basti, Banjara basti etc. These applications were not accepted because they were not on prescribed printed forms. Also applications for new ration cards were not being accepted. This was reported by the active social workers from the districts of Baran and Jaipur as well. The directions suggest that applications can be taken even on plain paper in handwriting. The awareness about the implementation criteria and process was lacking even among the social workers was crystal clear during interactions of the author with various NGOs on 12th and 13th in Bara and Kota districts. On 5th September meeting was organized in Jaipur slums and people were not aware. Data bases were not available even by 12th of September in all the places monitored by the office of the adviser to SCC. Adviser SCC attended a Gram Sabha meeting at Kelwara, Baran district on 12th and no data base were available there including that of Sahariya families who awaiting new ration cards. The nodal officer there reported that the list of landless and small farmers to be provided by the Tehsildar is still awaited. In five Gram Pnachayas of Shahbad in Baran district the lists of beneficiaries were not displayed even up to 15th September. The Adviser to SCC reported the matter to District collector vide his letter dated 17-9-13.

Annexure 1

Objection Application Form Against

Identified Family/Beneficiaries under NFSO, 2013
Nodal Officer Concerned Gram Pnachayat/Ward ------------------------------------------------------------------Name of person objecting Date of birth Caste Current address with mobile/phone number Date of filing of objection Name and address of person against whom objection is submitted Concerned person (against whom objection is raised) is beneficiary of which scheme and what is the serial number What is the reason/basis of objection Brief description of objection If there is any document/evidence about objection is to be attached Any other information, if available

Applicants Signature

Receipt
Received with thanks from Shri--------------------------------- son of -------------------------------caste-----------resident of ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------on------------------------and registered at (number)-------------------------------------

Signature and name of Nodal Officer Concerned Gram Panchayat/Ward