In Re: Problems and Miseries of Migrant Labourers
Background
This is a continuing suo motu case (originally taken up during the COVID-19 pandemic) monitoring the welfare of migrant and unorganised labourers across India. The Union of India filed a further status report showing that out of a target of about 38.37 crore migrant/unorganised workers, 28.86 crore had registered on the government's "eShram" portal, which assigns them a Universal Account Number to help deliver welfare benefits. The report showed that of about 28.60 crore eShram registrants, only 20.63 crore were also registered in ration card data, meaning several crore registered workers still lacked ration cards, and petitioner's counsel pointed out that over 10 crore persons remain deprived of National Food Security Act benefits partly because ration card eligibility is still based on outdated 2011 census figures.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court appreciated the scale of the eShram registration exercise as commendable but flagged the gap between eShram registration and actual ration card coverage as a serious welfare concern, since lack of a ration card can deprive migrant workers and their families of benefits under the National Food Security Act and other schemes. The Court held that, as a welfare state, it is the duty of the concerned States/Union Territories, who now have access to eShram registrant data via the Data Sharing Portal, to proactively reach out to registrants who still lack ration cards and get them registered and issued cards, including through the office of the District Collector and with wide publicity. The Court gave the States/UTs a further three months to carry out this exercise and directed the Union of India to file another status report, listing the matter for further hearing on 3 October 2023.
Lesson Learnt
Government welfare registration drives (like eShram) are only as effective as the follow-through that converts registration into actual benefits (like ration cards); the Supreme Court can and does use continuing supervisory orders to push both the Union and State governments to close such implementation gaps for vulnerable groups.