Writ petition challenging midday meal contract cancellation is infructuous upon expiry of the statutory allotment tenure.

The petitioner, a Self-Help Group, was appointed on 28.12.2007 to distribute Mid-Day Meals at Primary and Middle School, Devardehi

The petitioner alleged they served without complaint until 26.12.2016, when respondents withdrew the work and allotted it to Respondent No. 5

The petitioner challenged the 2016 order and a subsequent reiteration dated 11.07.2019 [Annexure P/1], contending that the decision was taken by the Sub-Divisional Officer (SDO) alone rather than the mandated Three-Member Committee, and was passed without notice or a hearing

1. Whether the impugned orders withdrawing the Mid-Day Meal work were passed by a competent authority in accordance with the 2012 policy

2. Whether the cancellation of the allotment violated the principles of natural justice

3. Whether the petition remains maintainable or has been rendered academic by the efflux of time

State policy dated 10.01.2012 (as amended on 14.03.2012), which stipulates that allotment decisions must be made by a Three-Member Committee (SDO, CEO of Janpad Panchayat, and Project Officer)

General principle of efflux of time, noting that Mid-Day Meal allotments are for a fixed tenure of three years under existing guidelines

Limits of extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India when a dispute becomes academic

The Court did not rule on the merits of the petitioner’s claims regarding jurisdictional errors or the violation of natural justice. Instead, it focused on the temporal aspect of the allotment.

It reasoned that since the impugned order was passed in 2019 and the standard allotment tenure is three years, any valid tenure the petitioner might have sought would have expired by 2022.

Consequently, the Court determined that adjudicating the legality of the 2016 and 2019 orders in 2026 would be a purely academic exercise, as the period for which the work could have been lawfully allotted had already passed

The Court granted liberty to the State to initiate a fresh allotment process according to law

It further directed that the petitioner is entitled to participate in any such fresh process, provided they meet the eligibility criteria and comply with applicable rules and policies