Tamil Nadu’s mid-day meal scheme under scanner

The big controversy around one recommendation of the Chandru Committee report.

Tamil Nadu’s midday meal scheme, a pioneering initiative that has served as a model for similar programs across India, aims to enhance nutrition and boost school attendance among children.  | Photo Credit: M_PRABHU

A group of academics, economists, and activists have sent a letter dated August 19, 2024, to Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.K. Stalin asking the State government not to implement one recommendation by the Chandru Committee which submitted its report on June 18, 2024. The committee was set up to study caste violence in educational institutions.

Having found that many students are encouraged by their families to avoid eating breakfasts or mid-day meals cooked by Dalit women in the school kitchens, and having also noted the drop in quality and nutritional value of the meals provided to the students, the Chandru Committee has recommended that the on-site school meal preparation be replaced by centralised kitchens at the Block level.

Tamil Nadu’s midday meal scheme, now including breakfast as well, is a pioneering initiative that has served as a model for similar programmes across India and aims to provide nutrition to children and thus boost school attendance. The Chandru Committee proposal has sparked a debate and comes on the back of centralised kitchens in some States refusing to serve eggs, onions, and garlic to students who are used to eating these items in their regular diet.

The letter, signed by prominent figures including economist Jean Drèze and the Congress Member of Parliament from Tiruvallur Sasikanth Senthil, lists several other concerns about central kitchens.

“Some of us have interacted with Justice Chandru earlier and we are pleased that he was tasked with the issue of examining caste in educational institutions. The report is proactive and pro-children, which we support. However, we take serious objection to one recommendation that all schools have centralised kitchens. For the past several years, we have submitted numerous memorandums to the government to reclaim even the existing midday meal schemes from centralised kitchens,” said Sylvia Karpagam, doctor, public health researcher, and a signatory.

“The experience with centralised kitchens in other States is quite sobering,” the letter states, citing issues such as reduced public scrutiny, increased transportation costs, and potential food spoilage. It warns that “food transported from centralised kitchens to schools tends to get cold and is less palatable to children”.

The other issue raised is about the potential involvement of private contractors. The letter warns that such contractors “are more interested in making profits” and may also impose “irrational restrictions on the menu”. Karpagam has visited many government schools across Karnataka and found that when food is prepared on-site children eat better and the food is more nutritious.

“Centralised kitchens, particularly those run by organisations like Akshaya Patra, come with ideologies. They classify nutrient-dense foods as “tamasic”, including meat, eggs, onion and garlic,” she said. Centralised kitchens refuse to use these ingredients even though they are part of the midday meal guidelines. Even when the government said it would provide the eggs, Akshaya Patra did not comply, Karpagam said. According to her, the contractors “use religion, making it difficult to question them,” and are “essentially a corporate-caste nexus”. “We would like Justice Chandru to retract that recommendation,” she said.

Responding to the petition, Justice K Chandru said: “My report is only recommendatory. It is for the government to accept it, either partially or fully.”

On the question of quality raised in the letter, Justice Chandru said: “I have recommended the establishment of centralised kitchens at the Block level. The petitioners’ letter does not deal with mass pilferage, false attendance, and the lack of quality and nutritional levels in the food supplied. The mid-day meal and the breakfast scheme are done by two different agencies. Further, there is a dual control in the school system; the mid-day meal workers are controlled by the social welfare department, while the educational matters are dealt with by the school education department. The teachers are reluctant to get involved in the supervision of the mid-day meal scheme. In the same establishment, there cannot be two different control systems dealing with matters relating to the children.”

The letter raises concerns about the potential job loss for thousands of women currently employed in school kitchens. “On-site decentralised kitchens employ large numbers of poor women as cooks and helpers, 27 per cent of whom are Dalit or Adivasi women in Tamil Nadu,” the letter notes. The Chandru Committee report, however, does not seek the retrenchment of these workers but suggests that they be redeployed in work relating to Panchayats, Panchayat Unions, Municipalities, and Corporations. Moreover, the report states that while recruiting staff for each Block-level kitchen, “the government must follow the rules of Reservation”.

On the issue of students rejecting food cooked by Dalit cooks, the petitioners argue that the centralised kitchen approach “would do more harm than good” and “amount to caving in”. They propose a more direct method to combat discrimination: “Experience shows that a better approach is to insist on the right of Dalit women to cook midday meals. When the administration stands firm, opposition tends to fizzle out.”

The Tamil Nadu government has not yet acted upon the recommendations of the Chandru Committee. The petitioners point out that “Tamil Nadu has a good record of pioneering and implementing school meals. Replacing on-site cooking with centralized kitchens would be a step backward.”

In response, Justice Chandru said: “Till date there has been no social audit of the scheme although it is four decades old. There is nothing wrong in the government trying out my suggestion at least in one Block and getting feedback on the same. My sole concern is that the children must get good quality and nutritious meals and that should be guaranteed at any cost. Can the petitioners vouchsafe for these concerns?”