Deleted PDS beneficiaries can appeal for inclusion

Kolkata: Beneficiaries whose names have been struck off or are deleted in the ongoing verification exercise from the public distribution system (PDS) in Bengal can appeal for inclusion, a senior state govt official said on Thursday.The area inspector concerned will upload a copy of the appeal or application in the department portal and mark the ration card to remain active, following which it will be reviewed for further action.The state food and supplies department has started verification and deletion of ineligible PDS beneficiaries based on the outcome of the SIR exercise.A recent notification issued by the department stated that ASDD (absent, shifted, dead and duplicate) electors in the draft roll who were subsequently not included in the final list, unmapped cases identified during SIR where individuals concerned were rejected after the hearing process, deletion in the second list after publication of the draft roll, deleted after adjudication and electors found to be ASDD during distribution of voter slips during the assembly polls will not get PDS benefits.The notification triggered a controversy, with many alleging that the order was arbitrary and illegal.Refuting the allegations, a senior official said per the National Food Security Act, the state govt is solely responsible for identifying eligible households. “The act also empowers the state govt to update beneficiary lists periodically to ensure that only genuine beneficiaries can get subsidised foodgrains,” he said.

The official clarified that PDS beneficiaries, whose names have been excluded from the electoral lists and have filed an appeal before the SIR tribunal or submitted an application under CAA, may continue to remain active till disposal of the appeal.In a post on X on Thursday, national convener of BJP’s IT cell Amit Malviya said: “The objective of the order is straightforward: protect the integrity of the PDS, eliminate leakages and ensure that every kilogram of subsidised food reaches the rightful beneficiary. Opposing such a clean-up amounts to defending a system that allows diversion and misuse of food meant for the poorest.”