2 days ago
Why Andhra Pradesh's Rollback of the Doorstep Ration Delivery Project Betrays Adivasi Communities
Menu
हिंदी తెలుగు اردو
Home Politics Economy World Security Law Science Society Culture Editor's Pick Opinion
Support independent journalism. Donate Now
Government
Why Andhra Pradesh's Rollback of the Doorstep Ration Delivery Project Betrays Adivasi Communities
Rahul Mukkera and Chakradhar Buddha
12 minutes ago
The decision to discontinue the system without consultation, field evaluation, or regard for evidence is not only regressive but legally and ethically questionable.
An Andhra doorstep delivery truck. Photo: X/@yeswanth86.
Real journalism holds power accountable
Since 2015, The Wire has done just that.
But we can continue only with your support.
Contribute now
On May 1, 2025, the Andhra Pradesh government officially discontinued the doorstep delivery of ration – a pioneering reform that had once made it one of the few states in India to distribute Public Distribution System (PDS) grains through mobile vehicles directly to citizens' doorsteps.
With this rollback, thousands of vulnerable households – especially Adivasi families living in the remote corners of the Eastern Ghats– now face a steeper and often insurmountable climb to secure their right to food.
For elderly and widowed citizens like Gemmeli Rasmo, who resides in a secluded village in Alluri Sitarama Raju (ASR) district, this is not just a policy shift, it's a direct blow to her food security. The 62-year-old woman, who once relied on monthly doorstep ration delivery, must now travel around 10 kilometres to the nearest ration depot – a difficult journey for an elderly single woman, made worse by poor roads and the lack of transportation facilities. In addressing precisely these kinds of challenges, Section 30 of the National Food Security Act (NFSA), 2013, mandates that Union and state governments devote special attention to vulnerable communities in remote, hilly, and tribal areas to ensure their food security.
Introduced in January 2021 by then chief minister Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy, the doorstep delivery system was launched to address the persistent inaccessibility of ration shops for the elderly, persons with disabilities, and those living in geographically isolated areas. Each Mobile Dispensing Unit (MDU), essentially a mini truck, delivered rations directly to the hamlets of ration cardholders, coordinated by local village volunteers. The system was designed to reduce corruption, improve quality, save time, and ensure no one was left behind.
Trucks and their benefits
Each month, ration stock from ration depots was loaded onto mini trucks that traveled on fixed routes across villages and hamlets. Village or ward volunteers informed residents in advance about the delivery schedule. In tribal areas, the system operated largely offline, there were no biometric authentication requirements. Instead, distribution was based on the physical verification of the ration card. This simplified process ensured that even if the head of the household was absent, a family member or neighbour could collect the ration on their behalf by presenting the card. If any household missed collecting their ration, they could find the mini truck at the village or ward secretariat later that evening.
In summary, the doorstep delivery system provided two layers of access:
Primary: through the MDU delivery at local habitations.
Secondary: from the mini truck parked at the local secretariat later that evening.
This flexibility ensured that no one missed their ration. On several occasions, mini trucks returned a second time in the same month when a significant number of ration cardholders were left out on the first trip. The claim by the government that people were losing access under the doorstep delivery system is simply untrue – if anything, the system expanded access and simplified it.
Although popularly described as 'doorstep delivery,' the mini trucks didn't always stop at individual homes. Instead, they parked within each street or habitation cluster. Even then, it dramatically reduced the distance people had to travel otherwise. In tribal areas – where families often relied on two-wheelers, shared autos, or even horses to reach far-off ration depots – this shift made a significant difference. Travel costs, time away from wage work, and physical strain were all considerably reduced.
Under NFSA, ration depots must remain open throughout the month on all working days, but the doorstep delivery system limited distribution to the first 15 days of a month. However this scenario could be improved instead of scrapping one system. The government could have allowed both systems; ration delivery via mini trucks in the first half of a month and ration depot access for those who missed it in the first instance. This dual system was especially feasible in tribal areas, since ration depots are run by the state-owned Girijan Cooperative Corporation.
Also read: 'Hungry Cannot Wait': Implement Directions On Migrant Workers' Ration Cards, SC Tells Union, States
Access and other implications
The rollback of this doorstep delivery system has profound implications, especially for tribal communities who are constitutionally entitled to differentiated protection and affirmative action.
Specifically, Tribal Sub-Plan (TSP) funds – now part of the umbrella Scheduled Tribe Component (STC) – are earmarked to ensure targeted welfare and development of Scheduled Tribes. Doorstep ration delivery in tribal areas aligns directly with the objectives of TSP by improving last-mile service delivery, reducing exclusion errors, and safeguarding the right to food among communities historically left out of mainstream development.
Rolling back a system that demonstrably improved access, especially in tribal belts, undermines the very purpose of these constitutional and policy commitments. It calls into question the state's adherence to inclusive governance in Scheduled Areas.
The government's justification for the rollback, that people were missing their rations due to the doorstep delivery system, does not withstand scrutiny. Although this is speculation at present, but such a decision smacks of having been influenced by a powerful lobby of ration depot owners, particularly from non-tribal areas, who felt threatened by the increased transparency and decentralisation introduced by the doorstep delivery system.
Traditionally, these depot operators have wielded significant local clout and often enjoy close ties with bureaucrats, giving them both influence and immunity. In contrast, MDU operators – frequently from Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe, Backward Class, and minority communities – operated with limited institutional backing but greater public accountability. It is important to note that in Scheduled Areas, it is the Department of Tribal Welfare that runs the PDS ration depots. Yet, the interests of dominant depot owners from outside these regions appear to have prevailed, sidelining the more inclusive and effective system that was benefiting remote tribal hamlets.
What tribal people feel
More disturbingly, the return to the ration depot model revives a pattern of exploitation that the doorstep delivery system had significantly curtailed. In many areas, depot owners routinely pressure ration cardholders to purchase soap, oil, or other groceries alongside their rice. These purchases are made under duress – driven by the fear that refusal may result in the denial of rations. The doorstep delivery system helped break this coercive cycle. With the distribution occurring closer to people's homes, citizens received their rightful entitlements without harassment or manipulation.
Data from a recent study by LibTech India, based on interviews with 790 Adivasi respondents in the Paderu ITDA region, strongly supports this:
75% said that instances of missing rice grains are higher in the ration depot system.
65% said they were more often forced to buy additional items along with rice in the ration depot system.
83% preferred doorstep delivery system over the ration depot model.
92% reported a reduction in travel distance in the doorstep delivery system.
90% said they needed fewer trips to collect their ration in the doorstep delivery system.
75% said they received less than their entitlement more frequently under the ration depot system.
Under the ration depot system, many beneficiaries had to queue for hours, only to be turned away due to overcrowding or arbitrary excuses. A day's wages were often lost just to collect a few kilos of grain. Grievance redressal mechanisms were virtually non-existent.
In contrast, the doorstep delivery model created a more humane interface and brought essential services closer to people's homes. For daily wage earners, the elderly, and persons with disabilities, this wasn't just a welfare scheme, it was a lifeline.
The decision to discontinue the system without consultation, field evaluation, or regard for evidence is not only regressive but legally and ethically questionable. Food security isn't just about stock availability or logistics. It's about making sure that entitlements are actually accessible to those who need them the most.
If public welfare is the goal, the path forward must involve strengthening and expanding systems like the doorstep delivery, not scrapping them.
Rahul Mukkera and Chakradhar Buddha are associated with LibTech India which is a centre at Collaborative Research and Dissemination. Views are personal.
The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
Make a contribution to Independent Journalism
Related News
Andhra: N. Chandrababu Naidu and His Ministers – Including 8 First-Time MLAs – Take Oath
Andhra Pradesh: Amid War of Words in Alleged Liquor Scam, Governance Takes a Backseat
Tears, Queues and a Never-Ending Search for Kagaz: The Real Story of Aadhaar
Former IAS Officer Claims Andhra Unduly Favoured Varun Group in Tourism Push; Govt Denies Wrongdoing
Senior Journalist in Andhra Pradesh Arrested Over Talk Show Panelist's Remarks; Triggers Political Uproar
Andhra's U-turn on Appealing Tuni Arson Verdict Spotlights Clout of Kapu Community
AP: Reports of Govt's Planned Incentives for ArcelorMittal-Nippon Steel Reveal Its True Priorities
One Year, Five U-Turns: How Modi 3.0 Was Forced to Bend to Coalition Pulls & Opposition Pressures
Uttar Pradesh Govt Tightens Rules for 'Out of Town' Marriage Registrations
About Us
Contact Us
Support Us
© Copyright. All Rights Reserved.
