Q11. Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Program, MGNREGA was earlier known as National Rural Employment Scheme, NREGA. It is an Indian Social Welfare Program that aimed at fulfilling the “Right to Work” provisions made in the Constitution. MGNREGA was launched in 2006 under Rural Employment Sector by the Ministry of Rural Development.
Main objective of the program is to give legal guarantee of wage employment to the adult members of rural households who are willing to do unskilled manual labour work subject to a maximum of 100 days per year for every household. Every rural household has the right to register under the scheme, job card is issued to the registered. Job Card holder can seek employment. State Government shall pay 25% of minimum wage for the first 30 days as compensatory daily unemployment allowance to the willing families and of wage for remaining period of 90 days. MGNREGA work was undertaken by various Gram Panchayats.
You have been appointed as Administrator Incharge of the District. You have been given the responsibility of monitoring MGNREGA work undertaken by various Gram Panchayats. You are also given the authority to give technical sanctions to all MGNREGA works.
In one of the Panchayats in your jurisdiction, you notice that your predecessor has mismanaged the Program in terms of:
- (i) Money not disbursed to actual job-seekers.
- (ii) Muster Rolls of the Labourers not properly maintained.
- (iii) Mismatch between the work done and payments made.
- (iv) Payments made to fictitious persons.
- (v) Job Cards were given without looking into the need of person.
- (vi) Mismanagement of funds and to the extent of siphoning of funds.
- (vii) Approved works that never existed.
(a) What is your reaction to the above situation and how do you restore the proper functioning of MGNREGA Program in this regard?
(b) What actions would you initiate to solve the various issues listed above?
(c) How would you deal with the above situation?
Answer - The case presents an abhorrent situation of an official indulging in malafide practices in management of such a benevolent scheme like MGNREGA brought in to alleviate millions of needy people out of poverty. Presence of such officials is one of the biggest hurdles in ushering equitable development in the country.
(a) My reaction and restoration of proper functioning
The situation reflects serious corruption, mismanagement, and denial of rights to the poorest citizens. As District Administrator, my first duty is to uphold constitutional provisions of the Right to Work and restore credibility of MGNREGA. My immediate reaction would be of utter shock and concern for the betrayal of public trust, followed by determination to rectify systemic failures through transparency, accountability, and strict enforcement of rules.
I would attempt to restore the proper functioning by clearly indicating that I would not tolerate the continuation of any such frivolous practices and that I have zero tolerance towards corruption. Further, I would try to engage constructively with the general public and assure them that the administration is there to help and empower them.
(b) Actions to solve the listed issues
- Money not disbursed to actual job-seekers: Conduct social audit with participation of beneficiaries. Digitise wage payments through Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT) into Aadhaar-linked bank accounts.
- Muster rolls not properly maintained: Shift to e-muster rolls with online attendance and geo-tagging of worksites. Surprise inspections to verify ground realities.
- Mismatch between work done and payments: Introduce third-party monitoring and satellite/geo-tagged photos of projects. Conduct quarterly surveys in different Gram Panchayats to establish linkages between the work and payments.
- Payments to fictitious persons: Aadhaar-based verification and biometric attendance at worksites. Investigate the owners of such fictitious accounts and unearth their links with officials.
- Job cards issued without need assessment: Re-verify job cards through Gram Sabha; cancel fraudulent ones.
- Mismanagement and siphoning of funds: Initiate vigilance inquiry, fix responsibility, and recommend departmental/criminal action against guilty officials.
- Approved works that never existed: Physical verification of at least 50–75% approved projects, blacklist contractors/firms involved.
(c) Dealing with the situation
My approach would combine corrective, preventive, and punitive measures:
- Corrective: Immediate disbursement of pending wages, restoring trust of genuine beneficiaries.
- Preventive: System reforms like digitisation, social audits, community monitoring and DBT. Grievance redressal through complaint monitoring with complaint boxes, helplines, and participative governance.
- Punitive: Action against corrupt officials, ensuring accountability under law. Submit evidence to vigilance department despite potential pushback.
X-Factor: Virtues like courage, wisdom, integrity and honesty can be discussed in the conclusion. Gandhian trusteeship, social justice, and good governance can also be mentioned for this case study.
