Akhilesh Kumar
The political standoff in parts of West Bengal regarding the inclusion of eggs in school lunches has reopened an old wound in India's welfare governance. What should have been a straightforward discussion on public health and child nutrition quickly devolved into a bitter tug-of-war over ideology and cultural identity.
This controversy forces a fundamental question upon us: Who decides what an undernourished child should eat — the objective principles of nutritional science or the polarising politics of identity?
This question carries immense weight because the midday meal scheme — rebranded as PM POSHAN — is not a routine state handout. It is the world’s largest school feeding initiative, providing daily sustenance to nearly 111 million children across more than a million schools. For students from economically depressed families, this school lunch is not just an incentive to attend class; it is the only wholesome, square meal they receive all day.
Nutritionists globally recognise eggs as an incredibly cost-effective, nutrient-dense superfood, packed with high-quality protein, essential amino acids, vitamins, and minerals vital for growing bodies. While plant-based alternatives like pulses and soya hold merit, policy frameworks must prioritise nutritional density, cost, and regional feasibility rather than symbolic, majoritarian sentiments.
The objective of PM POSHAN is to ensure balanced nutrition for children, and every state's menu should ultimately be evaluated against that objective. The midday meal scheme also embodies constitutional values. The Right to Education under Article 21A cannot be realised if children are too hungry to learn. Likewise, the Directive Principles of State Policy call upon the State to improve nutrition and public health. School meals are therefore more than a welfare benefit; they represent the State's commitment to equality, dignity, and equal educational opportunity.
If India seeks a successful model, it need not look beyond Tamil Nadu.
Tamil Nadu's leadership in school feeding predates independent India itself. The roots of the programme can be traced to the Madras Presidency, where a publicly funded school meal initiative was introduced in the 1920s to improve attendance among poor children.
The underlying principle was remarkably modern: education cannot succeed unless hunger is addressed first. Over time, successive governments in Tamil Nadu strengthened this vision rather than abandoning it. The programme expanded significantly under Chief Minister K Kamaraj, who viewed education as the foundation of social transformation.
By reducing the economic burden on poor families, school meals encouraged enrolment and regular attendance. The next major milestone came under Chief Minister MG Ramachandran, who launched the Nutritious Meal Programme in 1982. By prioritising child nutrition and public health over school enrolment, MGR transformed it from a simple educational incentive into a comprehensive social welfare intervention.
What distinguishes Tamil Nadu is not simply the inclusion of eggs in school meals. It is the consistency of political commitment across decades. Governments changed, but the commitment to children's nutrition remained largely bipartisan. Rather than becoming an ideological battleground, the midday meal scheme evolved into an institutional commitment to human development. This continuity enabled improvements in menu diversity, administrative capacity, monitoring, and public trust.
First, welfare programmes succeed when they are treated as investments rather than expenditures. A nutritious school meal improves learning outcomes, reduces classroom hunger, enhances attendance, and contributes to healthier adults. The economic returns far outweigh the financial costs.
Second, evidence must prevail over ideology. Public policy should be informed by nutritional science, expert recommendations, and the needs of beneficiaries. States may legitimately adapt menus to local food cultures, but nutritional standards must remain non-negotiable. The objective is not to promote a particular dietary identity but to ensure that every child receives an adequate and balanced meal.
Third, political continuity matters. Tamil Nadu demonstrates that successful welfare programmes require long-term institutional commitment rather than policy reversals driven by electoral or ideological considerations. Governments should treat child nutrition as a shared public responsibility instead of a partisan issue.
The recent developments in West Bengal should therefore be viewed as a reminder of the broader challenges confronting welfare governance. Similar debates have emerged in different states over menu choices, budgetary priorities, implementation gaps, and the role of private or religious organisations in delivering public welfare.
These debates are legitimate in a democracy, but they must never lose sight of the programme's primary purpose: improving children's nutrition and educational outcomes. The midday meal scheme has another often overlooked contribution. It creates a shared public space where children from different castes, religions, and economic backgrounds sit together and eat the same meal. In a society historically marked by social exclusion and discrimination around food, this everyday act carries profound democratic significance. School meals are not only about nutrition; they are also about equality, inclusion, and the idea of citizenship.
India today faces the dual challenge of improving learning outcomes and reducing child malnutrition. Neither objective can be achieved if nutrition becomes hostage to political symbolism. The future of the midday meal scheme should be shaped by scientific evidence, constitutional values, and the lived realities of children — not by ideological contestation.
Tamil Nadu's century-long experience demonstrates that when governments treat school meals as an investment in human capability rather than an ideological battleground, the benefits extend far beyond the classroom. Better nutrition leads to better learning, healthier citizens, and a more equitable society.
At a time when India seeks to harness its demographic dividend, Tamil Nadu reminds us of a simple but powerful truth: feeding children well is not merely an act of welfare — it is an investment in the nation's future.
Akhilesh Kumar is a PhD Research Scholar at Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi, and an independent writer