No cash, no card, but the Supreme Court still orders food for millions.

Two years into a pandemic, the Supreme Court asked: where is the food for India’s invisible workforce?

When the Supreme Court of India woke up to the crisis of migrant labourers in 2020, it did not wait for a petition. It acted on its own. By May 2021, as the second wave of COVID-19 ravaged the country, the Court was back in the same courtroom, staring at the same problem. The migrants were still stranded. The rations were still stuck. And the database meant to track every unorganised worker in the country was still incomplete.

In In Re: Problems and Miseries of Migrant Labourers (LL 2021 SC 259), a two-judge Bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan and Justice M.R. Shah issued a set of nationwide directions that cut through bureaucratic inertia. The Court ordered every State and Union Territory to distribute dry rations to stranded migrant workers, to run community kitchens, and to finish building a National Database for Unorganised Workers (NDUW). But it drew a firm line at cash transfers. That, the Bench held, was a policy call for the executive, not a judicial command.

The stakes were raw. Millions of workers, mostly daily-wage earners in construction, manufacturing, and services, had lost their livelihoods overnight. They had no ration cards in the cities where they were trapped. They had no access to the welfare schemes designed for them. And the legal framework meant to protect them — the Unorganised Workers Social Security Act, 2008 — had been quietly repealed and replaced by the Code of Social Security, 2020, a law still in its infancy.

The crisis that forced a court to act on its own

The case began as a suo motu writ petition — the Court took cognisance of news reports and public interest petitions about the plight of migrant workers during the first national lockdown in March 2020. On 9 June 2020, the Court issued its first set of interim directions, asking States to register migrant workers and provide welfare measures. On 31 July 2020, it followed up with more specific orders.

But by May 2021, the situation had not improved. The second wave had hit harder. On 13 May 2021, the Court passed three interim directions specifically for the National Capital Region, ordering distribution of dry rations and other welfare measures. Then, on 24 May 2021, Justice Ashok Bhushan and Justice M.R. Shah expanded those directions to the entire country.

The Court examined compliance affidavits from multiple States and the Union of India. What it found was a pattern of incomplete registration, delayed distribution, and a welfare machinery that simply could not reach the workers who needed it most.

What the Union government told the Court

The Union of India, through the Ministry of Labour and Employment, filed an affidavit detailing its efforts. It pointed to the Atma Nirbhar Bharat Scheme, under which the Centre was supplying dry rations to States for distribution to migrant workers. It also informed the Court about the NDUW portal — a project that had been in the works since at least 2018, when the Supreme Court in SLP (Criminal) No. 150 of 2012 had directed the Ministry to develop and deploy a portal for registration of unorganised workers.

The Union government argued that the NDUW portal was operational but that States had to complete the registration of workers on their end. It also submitted that the Code of Social Security, 2020, which had come into force, now governed the registration of unorganised workers, gig workers, and platform workers under Section 112.

What the States said — and what they didn't

Several States filed affidavits. Some reported progress. Others remained silent. The Court noted that registration of unorganised workers was still incomplete across most States. Without registration, workers could not access the very schemes meant to help them. It was a classic Catch-22: to get food, you needed a ration card; to get a ration card, you needed to be registered; but the registration system was broken.

The Court also noted that the Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996, which had provided some protections for construction workers, stood repealed by the Code of Social Security, 2020. The old legal architecture was gone. The new one was not yet fully operational.

The three directions that changed the game

Justice Ashok Bhushan, writing for the Bench, issued three core directions that every State and Union Territory had to comply with immediately.

First: dry rations for every stranded migrant worker. The Court directed that all States and Union Territories must provide dry rations to stranded migrant workers throughout the country, whether under the Atma Nirbhar Scheme or any other suitable scheme. This direction applied regardless of whether the workers possessed ration cards. The States were told to file affidavits explaining the mechanism they would use to distribute rations to workers without ration cards.

Second: community kitchens must be operationalised. The Court ordered that States and Union Territories must run community kitchens for stranded migrant workers who had lost employment and needed sustenance. The kitchens were to be given wide publicity so that workers knew where to go.

Third: complete the National Database for Unorganised Workers. The Court directed the Union of India to file a detailed affidavit within two weeks about the steps taken to complete the NDUW portal and to register workers under Section 112 of the Code of Social Security, 2020. The Court made it clear that registration was the gateway to all welfare benefits.

THE PLAY: If you are advising a State government or a corporate entity that employs unorganised workers, the message is simple: registration under Section 112 of the Code of Social Security, 2020 is not optional. The Supreme Court has made it a precondition for accessing any welfare scheme. Start the registration process now, or face judicial scrutiny.

The line the Court would not cross

The petitioners and intervenors had asked for a direction for cash transfers to migrant workers. The Court refused.

Justice Ashok Bhushan held that direct cash transfer to unorganised workers is a matter of policy and scheme framed by each State or Union Territory. The Court cannot direct cash transfers to any category of persons unless they are covered by a scheme already formulated by the State or Union Territory. This was a clear statement of judicial restraint. The Court would not step into the executive's domain of fiscal policy.

This distinction matters. The Court was willing to order the distribution of dry rations and the operation of community kitchens — both in-kind benefits that the State could provide through existing infrastructure. But cash transfers required a different level of policy formulation, budgeting, and targeting. The Court left that to the executive.

The monitoring mechanism that could become a template

The Court also directed that there shall be a suitable mechanism to monitor and supervise whether the benefits of welfare schemes reach beneficiaries from grassroots levels to higher authorities, with names and places of beneficiaries. This was an obiter observation, but it carries significant future weight. It creates a template for welfare delivery cases that could be applied in future public interest litigations.

The message is clear: courts will not just issue directions and walk away. They will demand proof of delivery.

Why this judgment matters for every CFO and founder

If you run a business that employs contract labour, construction workers, gig workers, or platform workers, this judgment has direct implications for you. The Code of Social Security, 2020, now requires registration of all such workers. The Supreme Court has made it clear that this registration must be completed at the earliest. Your compliance team needs to be in touch with the State labour department to ensure that your workers are registered on the NDUW portal.

Failure to do so could expose your company to legal action, not just from workers but from the State itself. The Court has set up a monitoring mechanism. The next time a worker goes hungry, the question will not just be about the government's failure — it will be about whether the employer ensured that the worker was registered and could access welfare schemes.

The bottom line

The Supreme Court in In Re: Problems and Miseries of Migrant Labourers (LL 2021 SC 259) has laid down a clear framework: registration under Section 112 of the Code of Social Security, 2020 is the key to welfare access; States must provide dry rations and community kitchens to stranded workers regardless of ration cards; and cash transfers remain a policy choice for the executive. For every advocate, CFO, and founder, the takeaway is this: the era of invisible workers is over. The law now demands that every unorganised worker be seen, registered, and fed.