Calcutta High Court Issues Notice To State On PIL Against Non-Implementation Of Centre’s ‘CSC 2.0’ Scheme In Bengal, No Interim Relief

The Calcutta High Court today issued notice to the West Bengal government on a PIL by Dr Sukanta Majumdar, President of State BJP, challenging the non-implementation of the Central Government’s Common Services Centres, E-Governance Committee scheme 2.0 (“CSC”) in West Bengal which formed part of the Digital India Mission.

Petitioner argued that due to non-implementation the CSC, funds granted for various purposes, such as scholarships under Central government schemes, had been allegedly siphoned off, and that the State government had subsequently launched a similar program known as Bangla Sahayata Kendra (“BSK”) under its aegis.

A division-bench of Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya orally remarked,

Petitioner’s grievance is that the CSC which provides for social justice, and access, is not being implemented in the state of West Bengal, which is a matter of great concern, and therefore he prays for appropriate directions. It is not clear as to what are the services available in the BSK, and what was the reason behind the State government issuing a notification stating that all public services would rendered through the BSK, and no service shall be rendered through CSC. Such a notification in our prima facie view, speaks of schemes and services offered by the Govt of WB, and these do not cover schemes available through the CSC. Therefore we direct the State, to show-cause as to why the direction sought for by the petitioner, should not be issued to forthwith implement the CSC 2.0 in WB….no interim orders can be granted at this stage.”

It was submitted by the petitioners, that Centre had introduced the CSC 2.0 for setting up in Gram Panchayats all over the country, each having a common-service centre, through a public-private partnership model implemented by local persons. (“VLEs”)

Petitioner argued that in 2015, the Government of WB had partnered with the Union government for implementation of the national e-governance plan, laying down a set of guidelines for smooth functioning.

It was submitted that thereafter, the aforesaid partnership was abruptly cancelled, in 2020, when the State introduced services of the BSK under its aegis.

Petitioner argued that while he did not dispute the presence of the BSK, or its role, thousands of private individuals and workers, who had been empanelled for implementing the CSC scheme had been rendered jobless by virtue of the 2020 notification.

It was pointed out that after closure of the CSCs in West Bengal, no economic survey was conducted in West Bengal since the same would require to be done through the CSC.

Upon hearing these arguments, the Bench orally remarked, “Why should the petitioner raise these queries in Court? He is there in the Parliament. He can raise these issues and bring them to notice during the parliamentary session.”

Petitioner’s counsel replied that the urgency in the issue was that funds allotted by the Ministry of Minority Affairs for students from backward classes had to be allocated through biometric security screening, in a time-bound manner, by the CSC’s, and that if this was not done within the stipulated time, then the students may lose out on their scholarships.

It was finally submitted that along with National Legal Services Authority (“NALSA”), the CSC’s had launched a tele-law service, in order to provide effective legal aid to those unable to access it.

ASG Ashok Kumar Chakrabarti, appearing for the Union of India, submitted that when a scheme is notified by the Central government, along with empanelment of around 29 ministries, the State Government could not stop the scheme due to the mandate of Article 256 and 257 of the Constitution, which makes directions of the centre in particular matters, binding on the State.

Court noted,

“CSC’s are the access points for delivery of various digital services to citizens mainly in rural India, thereby contributing to a digitally and financially inclusive society. CSC’s are enablers of community participation and collective action for engendering social change through a bottom-up approach with key focus on rural citizens. IT provides a centralised framework for delivery of services to citizens, besides ensuring sustainability. CSCs are positioned as change agents promoting rural entrepreneurship and livelihoods. They deliver services such as agriculture, legal, education, healthcare, social welfare schemes, etc. apart from B2C services in remote areas of the country. Such a scheme was implemented by the State, but thereafter in 2020, it was disbanded. In our prima facie view, the services offered by BSK do not cover those available in CSC.”

Case: Dr Sukanta Majumdar v State of WB

Coram: Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya