MAKING NREGA WORK ON THE GROUND
*Parshuram Ray
The startling ground realities of the implementation of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act have been exposed in a series of studies undertaken by the Centre for Environment and Food Security (CEFS). In the light of these findings, CEFS has approached the Supreme Court to ensure that the systemic deficiencies in the implementation of the Act are rectified and those found guilty of corruption are brought to book. The PIL has already had a significant impact through the interim orders issued by the apex court. Common Cause has extended financial support to this path breaking initiative.
-Editor
The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) is arguably the most progressive, pro-poor, pro-rural legislation in the history of Independent India. However, the realisation of its true potential to unleash economic prosperity and transform the fate and future of rural India will only be possible if the present massive corruption (estimated over 50 per cent in many states) is put a stop to. This will only happen if the in-built oversight mechanisms are properly operationalised, further safeguards found to be necessary in the light of the experience of implementation of the Scheme over the years are put in place and there is a constant citizen intervention and monitoring by beneficiaries to ensure transparency and accountability.
In order to minimize the possibilities of leakage, rent seeking and diversion of funds into the pockets of several layers of power-brokers, the Delhi-based Centre for Environment and Food Security (CEFS) has over the past four years carried out four field studies on the performance of the NREGA in Odisha, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. In these studies, we found massive corruption and irregularities in implementation.
Illustratively, during May-June 2007, CEFS did a rapid assessment of Odisha’s NREGS performance. It covered a hundred villages spread over 6 poorest districts of Bolangir, Nuapada, Kalahandi, Koraput, Nabarangpur and Rayagada. We found that about 67 per cent of the NREGS funds for the period 2006-7 had been siphoned off. The NIRD (National Institute of Rural Development) social audit report reconfirmed almost every irregularity uncovered by CEFS.
Between December 2007 and January 2008, CEFS carried out another survey, this time spread over 125 poorest villages in 5 of the poorest districts of Madhya Pradesh. Again, we found that only about 25 per cent of the NREGS funds had been spent on actual employment; the remaining 75 per cent had been misappropriated by officials responsible for the execution of the scheme via fake job entries in muster rolls and job cards.
The State of MGNREGS in Dalit Villages of Bundelkhand
CEFS carried out another rapid survey on the performance of NREGS in 50 poorest Dalit villages of the Bundelkhand region of Uttar Pradesh ( UP) during 2009 . Over 90 per cent of the sample households in this survey belonged to extremely poor dalits. CEFS came across large numbers of very poor Dalit households, which had either not received even a single day of NREGS work in the preceding four years, or had worked only for a few days. We found massive corruption and very serious irregularities in the implementation of the rural job scheme. Very few villagers had seen any muster rolls. Live muster rolls were never available at the worksites. There was no transparency and accountability in the implementation of the Scheme in Bundelkhand. The grievance redressal mechanism was as good as non-existent. The payment of unemployment allowance was unheard of. Recent Performance Audit of MGNREGS in OdishaOdisha and UP (Bundelkhand) CEFS has recently conducted another round of performance audit of NREGS in UP (July- August 2010) and Odisha (September – October 2010) .
NREGS in Odisha
About 77 per cent of the very poor and needy sample households in Odisha did not get even a single day of the NREGS employment during the preceding one year. The average NREGS employment actually provided to the surveyed households was only about 4 days. Out of 2000 very poor households surveyed in Odisha, only 5 households had received 100 days of job during the previous year .
NREGS in Bundelkhand
Over 52 per cent of the very poor and needy sample households in Bundelkhand did not get even a single day of the NREGS employment during the preceding one year . About 20 days of average NREGS employment was provided to the surveyed households during the previous year. In 2008, immediately after discovering the massive corruption and serious irregularities in the implementation of the NREGS in Odisha and MP, CEFS filed a public interest petition seeking directions from the Supreme Court for a CBI inquiry into the NREGS scams of Odisha and MP, as well as comprehensive orders for ensuring effective and corruption-free implementation of the NREGS all over India. After 17 hearings in the case, the Supreme Court has ordered a CBI probe into the NREGS scam of Odisha and also served notice to the states of MP and UP to explain their position on the CEFS survey reports.
Encouraged by the favourable interim orders of the Supreme Court, CEFS has decided to pursue the NREGA writ petition to its logical conclusion. In addition to seeking comprehensive orders from the Supreme Court to ensure corruption-free implementation and effective monitoring of the NREGS, CEFS will urge exemplary punishment and deterrent action against all the delinquent functionaries of the implementing agencies. The Supreme Court has indicated that it would take stern action against the guilty officials of Odisha, which should serve as an example to the functionaries of implementing agencies in other states. The Court has also directed the state governments to recover the misappropriated NREGS funds, because the tax payers’ money cannot be allowed to be misappropriated by corrupt officials and functionaries. However, these are only the immediate concerns and objectives of the NREGA PIL. Its ultimate objective is to ensure that critical safeguards and correctives, such as transparency, proactive disclosure of information, accountability, effective grievance redressal mechanism and social audit, get institutionalized in the implementation of the NREGS, so that the poor and the marginalized communities are empowered to hold the erring implementing authorities to account and the culture of corruption and venality in the delivery of poverty alleviation schemes comes to an end.
Bottlenecks in the NREGA
1. Operational Guidelines of MGNREGA
The Operational Guidelines for MGNREGA (2008) prepared by the Central Government provide a detailed blue-print for the effective operationalisation of the Act. However, the Ministry of Rural Development (MORD) has not yet made the guidelines mandatory. The state governments and their implementing agencies are not complying with the provisions of the Guidelines, which are ineffective and toothless. Without strict compliance of the provisions of the Guidelines, the effective implementation of the Act is not possible.
2. Social Audit
In-built provisions of transparency and public accountability are integral to the effective implementation of the MGNREGA. The mandatory provision of Social Audit by the Gram Sabha is central to the MGNREGA. To the best of our knowledge, most states have not even framed detailed rules for the proper conduct of social audit. In the absence of social audit rules, they can hardly claim to have conducted social audit of all the MGNREGA works. Except for Andhra Pradesh, no state government has so far institutionalized a participatory, independent and transparent Social Audit by Gram Sabhas. As shown by CEFS surveys, in most of the states, social audit is being conducted only on paper and not on the ground. The social audit information posted on the MGNREGA website is sketchy, misleading and mostly false.
3. Transparency
Despite the transparency provisions of the MGNREGA and the Right to Information (RTI) Act, citizens are still facing tremendous resistance from government officials in getting access to muster rolls and other MGNREGA related documents and information. Most information seekers are either bluntly turned away or have to wait for months and even years. This constitutes a blatant violation of the two laws.
4. Grievance Redressal Mechanism
The counter-affidavit of MORD in the PIL pending in the Supreme Court states that the Ministry had directed all the state governments to prosecute the erring executing officials under the relevant provision of the Indian Penal Code, apart from taking disciplinary action against them. However, except the state governments of Andhra Pradesh and Chhattisgarh, hardly any other state government is prosecuting or taking disciplinary action against the erring officials. On the contrary, in the states of Odisha and Madhya Pradesh, the state governments are trying to protect the guilty officials.
In its counter affidavit, the MORD has given state-wise details of the complaints of serious irregularities lodged by public-spirited people, including MPs, MLAs, ex- Ministers and ex- Chief Ministers. However, there has hardly been any action against the officials and functionaries. This shows that state governments have not put in place a credible grievance redressal mechanism to address NREGA related grievances.
The MORD through a circular dated November15, 2007 asked all the state governments to establish a grievance redressal mechanism for the effective implementation of the NREGA. However, only 6 states, namely, Haryana, Kerala, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Sikkim and UP, and the Union Territory of Andaman and Nicobar Islands have done so.
5. Acknowledgement / receipt for job application
According to clause 5.4.5 of the NREGA Operational Guidelines 2008, “A dated receipt for the application for work must be issued to the applicant.” However ,in most of the states, the implementing authorities refuse to issue dated acknowledgement/ receipt for the job application given by workers with the mala fide intention to ensure that in case the latter are not provided work within 15 days , they would have no documentary proof of the denial of their right to work, which entails the payment of unemployment allowance. This is absolutely illegal and defeats the very purpose of the rights-based approach of MGNREGA, which distinguishes it from other discretionary welfare measures.
6. Unemployment Allowance
According to provision 7.3.1 of the NREGA Operational Guidelines 2008, “ If a worker who has applied for work under NREGA is not provided employment within 15 days from the date on which work is requested , an unemployment allowance shall be payable by the State Government at the rate prescribed in the Act . This entitlement comes into effect as soon as the Act is notified in a particular District or area.”
Further, as per provision 7.3.4 of the Guidelines “The payment of unemployment allowance shall be made no later than 15 days from the date on which it becomes due for payment (NREGA, Section 7(5)). In the event of any delay, the recipients shall be entitled to compensation based on the same principles as wage compensation under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 . Compensation costs shall be borne by the State Government”. The provision of unemployment allowance is part and parcel of the MGNREGA but most of the state governments are denying the same on one or the other pretext.
7. Delayed and unfair payment of wages
According to provision 7.1.5 of the NREGA Operational Guidelines 2008, “It is essential to ensure that wages are paid on time. Workers are entitled to being paid on a weekly basis, and in any case within a fortnight of the date on which work was done (NREGA, Section 3(3)). In the event of any delay in wage payments, workers are entitled to compensation as per the provisions of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936(NREGA, Schedule II, Section 30). Compensation costs shall be borne by the State Government.”
However, in most of the states there are inordinate delays in the payment of wages and the due compensation is not being paid to the workers. Moreover, in many states, the workers are not being paid a fair wage, because the effective wage is much lower than the prevailing minimum wage rate in the state. For example, in Rajasthan, NREGA workers have been paid a daily wage rate as low as Rs 1 to Rs 10. Such an un-remunerative effective wage rate not only defeats the objectives of the Act, but also violates the workers’ fundamental right to life and livelihood.
Final Prayers in the NREGA writ petition in the Supreme Court
The final prayers made in our writ petition, which are reproduced below, address all the major systemic deficiencies that have come to light in the course of five years of civil society oversight of the implementation of the MGNREGA and the specific experience of CEFS. It is hoped that the reliefs that are eventually granted by the apex court will go a long way in ensuring that the objectives of this revolutionary legislation are realized not only in the periodical returns filed by the implementing agencies, but also on the ground, leading to a palpable amelioration in the lives of the intended beneficiaries.
OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES
> The Ministry of Rural Development (MORD) be directed to declare the Operational Guidelines of NREGA (2008) as mandatory.
SOCIAL AUDIT
> The MORD and all the state governments be directed to ensure strict compliance to the following provisions of the NREGA Operational Guidelines 2008, pertaining to social audit:
> Provide advance notice of the date of the Social Audit Forum (at least a month in advance), and stick to an annual schedule in terms of the months in which these are held.
> Use both traditional modes of publicity (such as informing people through the beating of drums) as well as modern means of communication (such as announcements on microphones and websites).
> Circulate announcements through notices on notice boards, through newspapers (at least 4 inch into 4 inch advertisement in one of the two largest circulated local vernacular Newspapers) and pamphlets, etc.
> All the relevant documents, including complete files of the works or copies of the same, be made available for inspection at the Gram Panchayat office at least 15 days in advance of the Social Audit Forum. There should be free and easy access to these documents for all residents of the Gram Panchayat during this period, and no fees should be charged for inspection. During this period, copies of the documents be provided at cost price, on demand, within one week of the request being made.
> Summaries of muster rolls and bills be prepared in advance for presentation at the Social Audit Forum. These summaries be displayed on charts on the day of the Forum, and at the Gram Panchayat office during the preceding 15 days.
> Social Audit Forum Proceedings be conducted in a transparent and non-partisan manner, where the poorest and most marginalized can participate and speak out in confidence and without fear. Care has to be taken that the Forum is not manipulated by vested interests.
To this end:
> The Social Audit Forum must select an individual to chair its meetings who is not part of the Panchayat or any other Implementing Agency. The meeting must not be chaired by the Panchayat President or the Ward Panch.
> The Secretary of the Social Audit Forum must also be an official from outside the Gram Panchayat.
> The person responsible for presenting the information should not be a person involved in implementing the work. The vigilance committee members or a school teacher for instance, could be considered for the purpose of reading aloud the information as per the required format.
> Minutes must be recorded as per the prescribed format , by a person from outside the Implementing Agencies, and the minutes register must be signed by all participants at the beginning and at the conclusion of the meeting (after the minutes have been recorded).
> The ‘action taken report’ relating to the previous Social Audit Forum must be read out at the beginning of each Forum.
> CEFS prays that the entire proceedings of the Social Audit Forums/ Public Hearings be videographed to ensure integrity and credibility of the process and unedited copy of the same should be accessible to every Indian citizen for scrutiny.The copy of the detailed social audit report must be posted on the Gram Panchayat Module of the NREGA website within 1 month of the social audit forum.
> In case of non-compliance to the above provisions of Social Audit, the District Collector(DC)/ District Programme Coordinator and Block Development Officer (BDO)/Programme Officer be held jointly accountable and they must face disciplinary action and also be punished for the same .
TRANSPARENCY
> The MORD and all the state governments be directed to ensure that the following provisions of the NREGA Operational Guidelines 2008, pertaining to transparency, be complied with in letter and spirit :
> The Right to Information Act be followed both in letter and in spirit in all matters relating to NREGA. Section 4 of the Act, which concerns proactive disclosure of information; be strictly complied with at all levels.
> Requests for copies of NREGS-related documents submitted under NREGA be complied with within seven days. No request should be refused under any circumstances. In particular, no information should be withheld by invoking Clause 8 of the Right to Information Act. All NREGArelated information is in the public domain.
> Key documents related to NREGA (such as muster roll, all bills and vouchers, measurement book, all financial transactions, all documents on sanction of works and orders/decisions regarding NREGA and its implementation) be proactively disclosed to the public, without waiting for anyone to ‘apply’ for them.
> Public access to key records and key information be ensured at all levels. Updated data on demand received , registration, number of job cards issued, list of people who have demanded and been given /not given employment , funds received and spent , payments made , works sanctioned and works started , cost of works and details of expenditure on it, duration of work , person-days generated, reports of local committees, and copies of muster rolls be made public in a pre-designated format outside office of all agencies involved in implementing NREGS, and also be placed by the Gram Panchayat before the Gram Sabha once in every quarter .
> NREGS-related accounts of each Gram Panchayat be proactively displayed and updated twice a year. Summary accounts be displayed through various means, including painting on walls at the Panchayat Bhawan, postings on notice boards and publication in Annual Reports available at cost price.
> Report Cards on local works , employment and funds be posted by the Gram Panchayat on its premises, and by the Programme Officer at the Intermediate Panchayat/ Programme Officer’s office , and for the whole District by the District Programme Coordinator at the District Programme Coordinator/District Panchayat Office .
> In case of non-compliance to the above provisions of Transparency at the Gram Panchayat, Block and District level, Sarpanch (Panchayat President)/ Panchayat Secretary, Programme Officer and District Programme Coordinator respectively be held accountable and be punished for the same.
GRIEVANCE REDRESSAL MECHANISM
> Every state government be directed to frame, notify and post on the NREGA website Rules for Grievance Redressal Mechanism at the Block level and the district level for dealing with any complaint by any person in respect of implementation of the Scheme and lay down the procedure for disposal of such complaints.
> In case of failure to do so , the Chief Secretary and Principal Secretary of Rural Development of the concerned state be jointly held accountable and they must face disciplinary action and be punished for the same .
> The Programme Officers through the state governments be directed that they shall enter every complaint in a complaint register maintained by them and shall dispose of the disputes and complaints within seven days of its receipt and in case it relates to a matter to be resolved by any other authority it shall be forwarded to such authority under intimation to the complainant.
> The person registering the grievance be given a receipt with number and date so that he/she can follow up the status of disposal of his /her grievance from a counter in the office of the Programme Officer and over the Internet using the receipt number.
> The person registering the grievance in the office of the Ombudsman( highest grievance redressal authority for the NREGA in the district being appointed by an order of the MORD in every district) also be given a receipt with number and date so that he/she can follow up the status of disposal of his /her grievance from a counter in the office of the Ombudsman and over the Internet using the receipt number .
> Once a grievance has been disposed of, the date and nature of disposal be communicated to the petitioner. These details be made available over the Internet.
> Grievance redressal performance of all authorities under the Act and the Guidelines be posted on the Internet on a weekly basis.
> Grievance redressal performance of Ombudsman too be posted on the Internet on a weekly basis.
> In case of non-compliance to the above provisions of Grievance Redressal, the Programme Officer at the Block level and the District Programme Coordinator at the district level be held accountable and be punished.
> The MORD be directed to empower Programme Officer, District Programme Coordinator and Ombudsman to impose direct penalty on functionaries who contravene the provisions of the NREGA.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT/RECEIPT FOR WORK APPLICATION
> All state governments and their implementing agencies be directed to issue dated acknowledgement/receipt for every work application . The denial of the same be treated as a serious offence and stern action be taken against the responsible functionaries like Sarpanch/ Panchayat Secretary and Programme Officer.
> The MORD and all state governments be directed to install video camera in the office of every Gram Panchayat to record work demanded by workers and /or devise and facilitate a work application mechanism through mobile phone and sms-based instant acknowledgement of the same to the job applicant as an automatic and irrefutable proof of job application.
UNEMPLOYMENT ALLOWANCE
> All the state governments be directed to ensure that the provision of unemployment allowance is implemented in letter and spirit .
> In case of denial of unemployment allowance to any eligible person, the Programme Officer be held guilty and be punished.
PAYMENT OF WAGES
> The MORD and all the state governments be directed to ensure that the daily wage under the NREGA is under no circumstances lower than the prescribed minimum wage in the states.
> The disbursement of daily wages be made on a weekly basis or in any case not later than a fortnight after the date on which such work was done.
> The Programme Officers be directed through the state governments to ensure prompt and fair payment of wages to all labourers employed under the NREGA within the Block.
> All states be directed to make payment of compensation under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 for each worker whose wages have been delayed beyond prescribed 15 days. > For the non- compliance to the above provisions of wage payment, the Programme Officer be held accountable and be punished.
CENTRAL NODAL AGENCY
> The MORD be directed to constitute a Central Nodal Agency to oversee and ensure proper, effective and corruption-free implementation of the NREGA .The Agency must ensure strict compliance to the Hon’ble Court’s orders in this regard and it must submit periodic compliance reports to the Hon’ble Court . The Agency may be headed by a former head of the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) and it may have Secretary, MORD, one nominee of CAG and Mr K B Saxena, (ex-Secretary, MORD) as members. The Nodal Agency must be vested with sufficient powers to ensure effective implementation of the NREGA.
* Dr. Parshuram Ray, Director, Centre for Environment & Food Security, has been in the vanguard of the campaign for eliminating corruption in the implementation of welfare schemes.
