In 1995, the Committee on Mid-day Meals was formed by the Ministry of Human Resource Development to develop a phased expansion of nutrition support to education, following its announcement in the 1995/96 Union Budget. It was chaired by S. V. Giri, Union Education Secretary, Government of India. Members included K. Venkatesan (Secretary, Department of Expenditure); Sarala Gopalan (Secretary, Department of Women and Child Development); B. N. Yugandhar (Secretary, Department of Rural Development); S. P. Jakhanwal (Secretary, Department of Food Procurement and Distribution); G. Sundaram (Secretary, Department of Consumer Affairs and Public Distribution System); R. C. Tripathi (Adviser-Education, Planning Commission); M. Mohan Ram (Director-in-charge, National Institute of Nutrition); A. R. Banerjee (Additional Chief Secretary, Education Department, Government of Gujarat); D. N. Padhi (Commissioner cum secretary, School/Mass Education Department, Government of Orissa); C. K. Gariali (Secretary, Social Welfare and Nutritional Meal Programme Department, Government of Tamil Nadu); Alok Ranjan (Secretary (Basic education), Government of Uttar Pradesh); and R. V. Vaidyantha Ayyar (Joint Secretary, Department of Education, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India and Member-Secretary).
The committee’s mandate was to operationalize the midday-meal scheme, building on the nutritional support programs already implemented in several states. The key objectives were to enhance child nutrition and school attendance while advancing the government’s Universalization of Elementary Education goals. The committee emphasized integrating nutrition with early childhood care, education, and public health services. It outlined two primary modes of delivery: a daily hot meal amounting to 100 grams of food grains per child for 200 school days or the monthly provision of 5 kilograms of wheat or rice for 10 months as a take-home ration for families. The central government would supply food grains through the Food Corporation of India at subsidized prices, with states handling logistics, transportation, cooking, and distribution.
The committee recommended starting the program in blocks under the Employment Assurance Scheme and focusing on those administrative blocks with low female literacy rates. While ultimately seeking universal coverage for elementary school children, it proposed prioritizing low-literacy regions and areas under the District Primary Education Programme. The committee acknowledged variations in states’ scope and operational capacity, allowing for flexibility in delivery models. States like Tamil Nadu had already implemented successful hot-meal programs, covering 7.4 million children. Other states, such as Gujarat, opted for a combination of hot meals and take-home rations. The committee also highlighted significant nutritional deficiencies among school-age children, noting that 13.89 percent of rural children were severely malnourished. It emphasized the importance of providing 450–600 calories per meal to bridge the average nutritional gap. The program was to be monitored based on school attendance, with states required to meet an 80 percent attendance threshold for food-grain allocations.
To ensure effective implementation, the committee recommended strong linkages between the education and health sectors. It stressed the need for community involvement through Panchayati Raj Institutions, NGOs, and local women’s groups. The committee advised states to avoid large-scale administrative setups and instead use existing resources and local organizations to manage logistics. The program would be rolled out incrementally, with quarterly food-grain allocations and regular monitoring of attendance and food use.
The recommendation of providing hot meals to schoolchildren was accepted, and the Mid-day Meal Scheme was implemented following a Supreme Court ruling in 2001 relating to the right to food. The central government supplies subsidized grains from the Food Corporation of India, while states handle infrastructure and logistics. Community involvement and school health integration were also recommended, with varying success across states. Local bodies and women’s groups have been involved in implementation, though health-services integration remains inconsistent.
The committee was formed to address malnutrition and low school attendance, particularly in regions with low literacy rates, by integrating nutritional support with education. It identified logistical, nutritional, and administrative challenges and proposed phased implementation of hot meals or take-home rations, prioritizing low-literacy areas and leveraging community involvement for effective execution.
