Relevance (UPSC General Studies Paper II: Polity and Governance – welfare schemes, Centre–State relations, rights-based delivery)

Context

For almost three years, Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee work in West Bengal was halted after the Union government stopped funds in March 2022, leading to widespread job loss and migration; a Calcutta High Court order in June 2025 asked the Centre to restart from 1 August 2025, but on-ground work has remained patchy and contested. 

What happened and why it matters

The High Court said a rights-based scheme like this cannot be kept “in cold storage,” and directed resumption with safeguards, even as inquiries into alleged irregularities continue. Later reports pointed out that, despite the order, work had not restarted meaningfully across the state, showing a gap between judicial direction and administrative action. Meanwhile, the Union government also moved the Supreme Court challenging the resumption order, extending uncertainty for workers. This tug-of-war has real costs: families lost a safety net, and distress migration rose. 

The law and framework behind the dispute

• Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005: A rights-based law that guarantees up to one hundred days of wage employment per rural household, time-bound wage payments, compensation for delays, and unemployment allowance if work is not provided within the statutory time.
• Section 27 of the Act: Allows the Union government to withhold or reduce funds to a State for non-compliance or serious irregularities, but action must be proportionate and should not extinguish genuine workers’ rights.
• Court direction: The Calcutta High Court directed resumption with safeguards, balancing the need for inquiry into irregularities with the legal promise of work and wages.
  

What reports and field accounts suggest

• Large numbers of registered workers lost a reliable safety net when funds were stopped; many shifted to casual labour or migrated.
• Panchayats and district offices faced difficulties in restarting quickly because of staff shortages, pending verifications, bank linkage issues, and backlogs in wage processing.
  

Key issues

• Rights versus compliance: The law gives a right to work; the government must enforce compliance and curb misuse. The challenge is to do both together.
• Centre–State coordination: When the Union and the State disagree in courts and in administration, delivery suffers.
• On-ground capacity: Even after orders, worksites, muster rolls, social audits, and bank payments must be ready, or wages do not reach people on time.
  

Important terms

• Rights-based scheme: A programme where the law gives a legal entitlement that people can claim.
• Section 27 action: A legal step to stop or reduce funds to a State for serious non-compliance.
• Unemployment allowance: Money payable when the State fails to give work within the legal time limit.
• Social audit: Community-led checking of works, payments, and records to reduce leakages.
• Job card: An official record of a household’s work demand and days worked.
• Time-bound wage payment: Wages must be paid within a fixed number of days; otherwise, compensation for delay is due.

What can fix this

• Resume with safeguards: Restart work while continuing inquiries in parallel, not instead of work.
• Publish a transparent restart plan: District-wise calendars, worklists, muster rolls, and weekly dashboards for pending and cleared wages.
• Protect genuine workers: Fast-track unemployment allowance and wage arrears; set up help-desks in gram panchayats for job card corrections and appeals.
• Create a Centre–State coordination cell: A dedicated channel to clear objections, reconcile data, and remove technical blocks that stop funds or wages.
  

Exam hook

Use this flow in answers: fund stop using Section 27 (2022) → High Court order to resume (2025) → patchy restart and ongoing legal challenges → worker hardship → practical fixes that balance compliance and rights.

Key takeaways

• The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee is a legal guarantee, not a routine programme.
• Courts tend to favour “resume with safeguards”, but success needs joint problem-solving, clear metrics, and steady payments.
• Delivery improves when Centre, State, and local institutions move in step.
  

UPSC Mains question

“West Bengal’s experience shows the tension between a rights-based guarantee and compliance enforcement. Propose a framework to restart work with safeguards while ensuring timely wages and social audits.”One-line wrap
Restart the work, finish the probes, and pay on time—this is how the law’s promise reaches the worker’s hand.