• Dr. Satyendra Kumar

The BJP-led Central Government’s proposed Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) (VB–G Ram G) Bill represents a grave assault on one of the most transformative legislations enacted in independent India — the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 (MGNREGA). By repealing MGNREGA, the government is not merely altering an employment scheme; it is dismantling a legally enforceable right to work and replacing it with a discretionary, budget-driven arrangement. This move strikes at the core of economic justice, social security, and the constitutional promise made to India’s rural poor.

MGNREGA stands as a historic achievement of the UPA government, born out of sustained struggles by workers, civil society organisations, and progressive political forces. For the first time, the Indian State accepted a statutory obligation to provide employment on demand to rural households. This principle — that the right to livelihood is a democratic entitlement and not an act of charity — is what made MGNREGA a pillar of inclusive growth and rural resilience. Over the past decade, the BJP-led NDA government has systematically weakened this landmark law. Budgetary allocations have been curtailed, payments delayed, and procedural hurdles multiplied. The VB–G Ram G Bill represents the culmination of this systematic erosion. It seeks to hollow out the right to work while projecting an illusion of reform under the banner of ‘Viksit Bharat’.

Rewriting History, Undermining Rights

The attempt to erase the legacy of MGNREGA is evident even in the naming of the proposed Bill. The BJP has consistently sought to deny credit to earlier governments for transformative social legislation. MGNREGA, identified in the public imagination with the UPA and the leadership of the Indian National Congress, is particularly resented because of its enduring popularity and proven impact.

Instead of strengthening this historic law, the government has chosen to overwrite it through a rechristened programme infused with ideological symbolism. This effort to replace a rights-based, secular framework with political branding reflects a deeper disregard for democratic continuity and institutional memory.

From Employment Guarantee to Budgetary Control

At the heart of MGNREGA lies its demand-driven character. Employment demand determines expenditure, and the Central Government is legally bound to provide the necessary funds. This framework empowered workers and held the State accountable.

The proposed ‘VB–G Ram G Bill’ abandons this principle entirely. It authorises the Central Government to impose ‘normative allocations’ on states, thereby capping employment generation irrespective of actual demand. Any expenditure beyond these limits is shifted onto state governments. In effect, the legal guarantee of employment is replaced by a conditional promise, constrained by arbitrary fiscal ceilings.

This reversal legitimises what was previously unlawful — denial of work due to insufficient central funding. It fundamentally alters the relationship between the citizen and the State, weakening accountability and undermining federalism.

Curtailing Employment, Serving Rural Elites

The Bill further weakens the right to work by prohibiting employment during so-called peak agricultural seasons. Justified as a measure to ensure labour availability for agriculture, this provision in reality serves the interests of landlords and wealthy farmers.

With increasing mechanisation and agrarian distress, agricultural employment has become highly irregular. MGNREGA has played a crucial role in supplementing incomes, stabilising wages, and enhancing workers’ bargaining power. Suspending public employment during peak seasons ensures a supply of cheap labour for private agricultural operations, directly harming the economic security of rural workers.

Wage Suppression and the Erosion of Dignity

Wages under MGNREGA have always been a matter of dignity as much as income. The existing law contains a clear principle, linking wages to statutory minimum wages. While implementation has been flawed, the legal foundation remains progressive.

The ‘VB–G, Ram-G’ Bill removes even this safeguard. It grants the Central Government unchecked authority to fix wages without linking them to minimum wage laws, inflation, or the national floor wage. This opens the door to wage suppression at a time when rural households are already reeling under rising prices and stagnant incomes. Parliamentary committees have repeatedly highlighted this crisis. In its May 2025 report, the Standing Committee on Rural Development recommended raising wages to at least `400 per day, noting that existing rates fail to meet basic living costs. Expert committees such as the Mahendra Dev Committee and the Anoop Satpathy Committee have made similar recommendations. The government has ignored them all.

Burdening States, Undermining Federalism

The proposed scheme significantly increases the financial burden on state governments. While MGNREGA places primary responsibility on the Union Government, the new Bill mandates a 60:40 cost-sharing ratio for most states and makes states solely responsible for unemployment allowances.

In the Post GST Era, states already face acute fiscal stress due to reduced revenue autonomy and delayed transfers. This additional burden will weaken implementation, discourage the registration of work demand, and disproportionately harm poorer and high out-migration states. The Bill thus undermines both cooperative federalism and social justice.

Centralisation at the Cost of Democracy

MGNREGA is also a powerful instrument of grassroots democracy. Gram Sabhas play a central role in planning and monitoring works, in line with the 73rd Constitutional Amendment. This decentralised structure ensures that development priorities reflect local needs.

The VB–G Ram G Bill dismantles this democratic architecture. Planning is centralised through nationally defined infrastructure priorities aligned with flagship schemes, marginalising Gram Sabhas and Panchayati Raj Institutions. The Centre even reserves the right to decide where the scheme will operate, casting doubt on the universality of the employment guarantee. Claims of increasing guaranteed employment to 125 days are largely rhetorical. Even under MGNREGA, with year-round eligibility, average employment has remained below potential due to administrative constraints. Under a budget-capped and restrictive framework, meaningful expansion of employment appears implausible.

Technology as a Tool of Exclusion

The Bill entrenches technological mechanisms such as biometric authentication, Aadhaar-linked payments, and digital attendance systems. Experience under MGNREGA has shown that these tools often exclude the elderly, women, migrant workers, and those in remote areas.

Instead of correcting these failures, the proposed legislation institutionalises them, creating a regime of surveillance and exclusion that undermines the very objective of employment guarantee.

Defending a Constitutional Promise

The VB–G Ram G Bill has been introduced without meaningful consultation with workers, trade unions, or state governments. It represents a decisive shift away from a rights-based framework towards a discretionary scheme that favours rural elites and corporate interests.

For the Indian National Congress, the defence of MGNREGA is inseparable from the defence of the Constitution’s commitment to social and economic justice. The right to work is a cornerstone of inclusive development and democratic citizenship.

Agricultural workers, rural labourers, and the rural poor will not accept the dismantling of this hard-won right. The struggle to defend MGNREGA is a struggle to uphold the idea of India enshrined in the Constitution — an India that stands with its workers, respects federalism, and places human dignity above ideological posturing.

The author is an Associate Professor in Kirori Mal College, University of Delhi