MAHATMA GANDHI NATIONAL RURAL EMPLOYMENT GUARANTEE ACT : A REVIEW – WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO TELANGANA STATE

(This Paper was presented in the " National Seminar on Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Act (MGNREGA) at Dharwad, Karnataka State (India) on 31st Jan. 2017 & 2nd Feb. 2017)

  -* Dr. S. Vijay Kumar

                                                                                                                                          

                 Despite decades of planned development and poverty eradication programs at the national and state levels, poverty continues to persist in India. The National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) has been a subject of lively debate, which aims at the ‘right to work’ enhancing the livelihood security of people in rural areas by guaranteeing hundred days of wage-employment in a financial year to a rural household who volunteer to do unskilled manual work. The National Rural Employment Guarantee Act was approved by the Indian Parliament in September 2005. It was renamed as ‘Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act’ on 2-10-2009. This Act started functioning from 2^nd Feb.2006. Initially it was introduced in 200 districts of the country and later extended to all districts in the country. The main aim of this Act is to enhance the purchasing power of rural people. World Development Report 2014  termed it a "stellar example of rural development" and noted economist Amartya Sen also said it is a good Scheme for employment generation in rural areas, but it has to be reformed. This Paper is an attempt to present a review of the “Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act - With Special Reference to Telangana State.

Objectives of the Study Paper:

·         Aims of MGNREGA 

·         Brief Review of Literature

·         Modus operandi of MGNREGA

·         Different categories of works permissible under MGNREGA & Performance

·         MGNREGA – At a Glance - India & Telangana State

·         Findings, Impact, Criticism, and Suggestions

Methodology:

The study is based on secondary data derived from the website of MGNREGA as well as research studies from different sources - Journals, News-pa­pers etc.

Aims of MGNREGA:

1). To provide at least 100 days of unskilled work on demand per household per annum within 15 days and within 5 KMs radius near to his/her address to all adults who have completed 18 years of age, thus by ensuring economic security to rural people.

2). Equal wages for men and women and preference should be given to women in each work and at least one-third (33%) of persons to whom work is allotted have to be women, thus ensuring women empowerment and social equality.

3). Creation and maintenance of rural assets and environmental protection.

4). Lowering of rural-urban migration.
5). Panchayat Raj Institutions to have a principal role in planning and implementation and each district has to prepare a shelf of projects.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Professor (Associate) & Head (Retd.), Department of Economics, Kakatiya Government (UG&PG) College (NAAC “A” Grade), Ex - Member of Board of Studies, Kakatiya University, Warangal. (Telangana State).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brief Review of Literature: MGNREGA is the catalyst for rural transformation. This programme is encompassing the whole of the rural India and spends a huge budget, when compared to several preceding employment generation programmes. It is the largest wage employment programme in India ever launched with 25% of rural households participating and an annual central government expenditure of about 0.5% of GDP. Many studies are available on MGNREGA which observed that it is the successful scheme of the Government of India to improve the condition of rural life (For example: Bhatia and Dreze 2006 , Puri 2008). Government’s keenness to involve the Panchayat Raj Institutions directly in this Scheme has been highlighted by Patel (2006) in his research paper. Saha Roy (2013), observed from different studies that there is continued illegal presence of contractors and delay in payments is a significant negative factor affecting the availability of work. It has been observed by Goswami (2013) in a study relating to AP that there was a significant development in the implementation of MGNREGA using IT in all stages of work. This Scheme has given an assurance to the rural people 100 days of employment nearer to home but unfortunately works were not provided within 15 days as mentioned under the provision of MGNREGA Act and also failed to provide unemployment allowance. This was pointed by many research works like Chandrashekhar & Ghosh (2005), Dreze Jeans et al. (2006), Rai, (2010), Jha et al. (2012), Datta et al. Many research works have been done on wage system in MGNREGA (For example: Anindita & Bhatia 2010, Vanaik & Siddarth 2008, CAG 2007, NCAER 2009). Under this scheme 60% of funds expended on wages, but though the works has been completed, due to corruption and irregularities wages have not been  paid to the beneficiaries.

          Keeping in view the role of employment generation in alleviating rural poverty in India, government has initiated various programmes time to time since independence. However these programmes could not create such major impact in rural areas as it was expected to be. There were number of factors responsible, for example - problem of seasonality, lack of proper planning and timely disbursement of funds at lower level of government, poor capacity of local governments etc. Prior to the introduction of MGNREGA, various employment generation Schemes were introduced. They are: Community Development Programme (CDP) in 1952, Rural Manpower Programme (RMP) in 1960, Crash Scheme for Rural Employment (CSRE) in 1971, Intensive Rural Employment Programme (IREP) in 1972, Food for Work Programme (FWP) in 1977, National Rural Employment Programme (NREP) in 1988-89, Rural Landless Employment Guarantee Programme (RLEGP) in 1983-89, Jawahar Rozgar Yojana (JRY) in 1989-89, Employment Assurance Scheme (EAS) in 1993-99, Jawahar Gram Samridhi Yojana (JGSY) in 1999-2003, Sampoorna Grameen Rozgar Yojana (SGRY) in 2001, National Food for Work Programme (NFFWP) in 2004, NREGA 200 districts in 2006, Extension of Phase II-NREGA to additional 130 Districts in 2007,  NREGA Phase III-Extended to cover all rural districts of India in 2008 and NREGA renamed as Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MNREGA) on 2-10-2009 and extended whole country.

Modus operandi of MGNREGA: Union Ministry of Rural Development is the nodal agency for the implementation of the scheme. The shelf of projects has to be prepared on the basis of priority assigned by Gram Sabha. At least 50% of works have to be allotted to Gram Panchayats for execution. A 60:40 wage and material ratio has to be maintained. Contractors and use of labour displacing machinery are prohibited. Provision had been made that at least 60 per cent of the work undertaken in a district in terms of cost under the Act was for creation of productive assets directly linked to agriculture and allied activities.

The Central Government bears the costs on the following items:

a) The entire cost of wages of unskilled manual workers.

b) 75% of the cost of material, wages of skilled and semi-skilled workers.

c) Administrative expenses as may be determined by the Central Government, which will include, inter alia, the salary and the allowances of the Programme Officer and his supporting staff, work site facilities.

d) Expenses of the Central Employment Guarantee Council.

The State Government bears the costs on the following items:

a) 25% of the cost of material, wages of skilled and semi-skilled workers.

b) Unemployment allowance payable by the State Government in case if it cannot provide wage

employment on time.

c) The Act stipulates that the rate of the allowance has to be fixed by state governments in consultation with State Councils. But, it should not be less than one-fourth of the wages for the first 30 days of unemployment and half of the wages beyond this.

d) Administrative expenses of the State Employment Guarantee Council.

Different categories of works permissible under MNREGA:

·         Creation of productive assets directly linked to agriculture and allied activities.

·         Water Conservation and water harvesting.

·         Drought Proofing (including plantation and afforestation).

·         Irrigation canals including micro and minor irrigation works.

·         Flood Control and Protection Works.

·         Minor irrigation, horticulture and land development on the land of SC /ST /BPL/ IAY  and land reform beneficiaries.

·         Renovation of traditional water bodies including desilting of tanks.

·         Land Development.

·         Rural Connectivity.

·         Gram Panchayat Bhawan and Bharat Nirman Rajiv Gandhi Sewa Kendra construction.

Recently, Government has merged Green India Mission (GIM) with the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) Scheme. By merging GIM with MGNREGA Scheme government seeks to increase 10 million hectares of forest cover. Social audits are a requisite tool to monitor and evaluate the works that are being carried out under MGNREGA.

Performance (2015-16): In the financial year 2015-16, Rs.42,084 crore was spent on MGNREGA. Performance indicators to rank the States are: Average days of employment per household, Percentage wages paid within the promised 15 days of enlisting to work, and the work completion rate.

Average days of employment per household: Even though MGNREGA guarantees 100 days of employment, the national average has always been below 50 days. Comparing this value across States, Tripura was able to provide 95 days of employment on average. Manipur reported only 16 workdays of employment, the lowest among all states, followed by Puducherry with 17 days, Goa 18 days and Lakshadweep 22 days. The overall average was 49 workdays in 2015-16.

Percentage Wages Paid: MGNREGA requires that wages be paid within 15 days of closing the muster roll. During financial year 2014-15, only 40 per cent of the wages were paid within the stipulated time of 15 days. Manipur stood out in this case with 82 per cent of wages being paid within 15 days while Meghalaya was only able to pay wages for 4 per cent of the people on time.

Work Completion Rate: Work completion rate refers to the number of works completed compared to works started, in percentage terms. Mizoram performed best in this case with a 92 per cent work completion rate. Tripura, Haryana, Madhya Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh also had work completion rates of above 80 per cent. Arunachal Pradesh was at the bottom at just 20 per cent work completion rate.

           It is interesting note that two north-eastern States are at either extreme of the ranking: Tripura on top and Arunachal Pradesh at the bottom. Mizoram was a close second. Chhattisgarh, Goa, Meghalaya and Punjab all ranked second from the bottom. Andhra Pradesh and Jharkhand were two major States with a high ranking. West Bengal, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh were major States with a low score. Looking at the macro picture it is not clear why MGNREGA is able to provide below 50 days of employment on average nationally. But, this may be possible due to shortage of funds or due to lack of demand for work due to low wage rates. The reasons could vary across and within States. Tripura was able to generate about 95 days of employment per household. Andhra Pradesh was able to pay 80 per cent of the wages within the promised 15 days of enlisting to work, and Madhya Pradesh was able to achieve 82 per cent work completion rate. The best practices in each of these high-performing States should be documented and shared with the other States, so that the performance of each State can go up. For example, Andhra Pradesh is known for widespread computerization of the processes which reduces corruption and ensures timely transfer of funds.

MGNREGA – At a Glance - India & Telangana State

Table: 1 - MGNREGA (India)  Total No. of Job Cards/Blocks/GPs as on FY: 2016-17

1.Total No. of Districts	682
2.Total No. of Blocks	6,860
3.Total No. of GPs	2,62,249
Job Card
4.Total No. of Job Cards issued (In Cr)	12.51
5.Total No. of Workers (In Cr)	25.5
6.Total No. of Active Job Cards (In Cr)	7.17
7.Total No. of Active Workers (In Cr)	10.84
8.(i)SC worker against active workers (%)	20.7
9.(ii)ST worker against active workers (%)	16.15

   Source: www.nrega.nic.in

Table: 2 - MGNREGA (Telangana)  Total No. of Job Cards/Blocks/GPs as on FY: 2016-17

1.Total No. of Districts	31
2.Total No. of Blocks	438
3.Total No. of GPs	8,831
Job Card
4.Total No. of Job Cards issued (In Lakhs)	55.88
5.Total No. of Workers (In Lakhs)	126.64
6.Total No. of Active Job Cards (In Lakhs)	30.67
7.Total No. of Active Workers   (In Lakhs)	55.91
8.(i)SC worker against active workers (%)	16.79
9.(ii)ST worker against active workers (%)	12.53

    

Source: www.nrega.nic.in

Analysis: When tables 1 and 2 are compared, it is observed that at national level the percentage of active job cards is 61.63, in Telangana State it is 54.88 i.e. 6.75 per cent less than all India level, that is somewhat nearer to the national level. While at national level the percentage of the active workers is 42.5, in Telangana State, it is 44.14 per cent, i. e. higher than national average. The percentage of SC worker against active workers at national level is 20.7,  in Telangana it is 16.79 i. e. nearer to all India level. The percentage of ST worker against active workers at all India level is 16.15, in Telangana it is 12.53. Thus, the overall performance of Telangana State is better when compared with the all India level.

   Table: 3 - Progress of MGNREGA (India) as on FY: 2016-17

Progress	FY 2016-2017	FY 2015-2016	FY 2014-2015	FY 2013-2014	FY 2012-2013
1. Approved Labour Budget (In Cr)	220.9274	239.112	220.67	258.57	278.71
2. Person days Generated so far (In Cr)	155.8623	235.1449	166.21	220.37	230.46
3. % of Total LB	70.55	98.34	75.32	85.23	82.69
4. .% as per Proportionate LB	98.06	0	0	0	0
5. SC person days % as of total  person days	21.93	22.29	22.4	22.81	22.22
6. ST person days % as of total person days	16.95	17.79	16.97	17.52	17.79
7. Women Person days out of Total (%)	56.28	55.26	54.88	52.82	51.3
8. Average days of employment provided per Household	36.45	48.85	40.17	45.97	46.2
9. Average Wage rate per day per person (Rs.)	160.6	154.09	143.92	132.7	121.41
10. Total No of HHs completed 100 Days of Wage Employment	9,33,189	48,47,942	24,92,654	46,59,347	51,73,487
11. Total Households Worked (In Cr)	4.276	4.8132	4.14	4.79	4.99
12. Total Individuals Worked (In Cr)	6.2662	7.2258	6.22	7.39	7.97
13. Differently abled persons worked	3,86,056	4,59,312	4,13,316	4,86,495	4,55,307

Source: www.nrega.nic.in

Table: 4 - Progress of MGNREGA (Telangana) as on FY: 2016-17

Progress	FY 2016-2017	FY 2015-2016	FY 2014-2015	FY 2013-2014	FY 2012-2013
1. Approved Labour Budget (In Lakhs)	1000	1356.63	1308.71	0	0
2. Person days Generated so far (In Lakhs)	795.48	1417.04	1032.06	0	0
3. % of Total LB	79.55	104.45	78.86	0	0
4. .% as per Proportionate LB	105.49
5. SC person days % as of total person days	22.36	24.2	24.17	0	0
6. ST person days % as of total person days	19.09	17.05	18.18	0	0
7. Women Person days out of Total (%)	59.78	60.76	61.1	0	0
8. Average days of employment provided per Household	34.21	55.28	42.42	0	0
9. Average Wage rate per day per person (Rs.)	136.61	127.09	114.92	0	0
10. Total No of HHs completed 100 Days of Wage Employment	62,133	4,17,602	1,60,281	0	0
11. Total Households Worked (In Lakhs)	23.25	25.63	24.33	0	0
12. Total Individuals Worked  (In Lakhs)	39.57	45.71	43.5	0	0
13. Differently abled persons worked	54816	64125	61743	0	0

Source: www.nrega.nic.in

Note: Figures might not available for FYs 2012-13 and 2013-14 due to bifurcation of AP State in to Telangana.

Analysis: The tables 3& 4, reveals that at all India level, the approved labour budget is decreased  from Rs. 278.71 crore in 2012-13 to 220.92 crore in 2016-17 (so far). This is the same in case of Telangana also, except in 2015-16. The person days (The amount of work done by one person in one working day) is also decreasing at the national level from 230.46 in 2012-13 to 155.86 in 2016-17 (so far) baring 2015-16. However, at the national level the percentage of total labour budget is increasing from Rs. 82.69 crore in 2012-13 to Rs. 98.34 crore in 2015-16 which is a welcome sign. SC person days % as of total  person days at national level is almost stable at 22%. It is the same in case of Telangana also. ST person days % as of total person days at national level is decreasing from 17.79 in 2012-13 to 16.95 in 2016-17 so far. But, in case of Telangana it is increasing from 18.18 in 2014-15 to 19.09 in 2016-17 so far, which is good for STs of Telangana. When we see, women Person days out of Total (%) at India level is increasing from 51.3 in 2012-13 to 56.28 in 2016-17 so far. This clearly shows that women work participation is increasing. But, in Telangana it is slightly decreased from 61.1% in 2014-15 to 59.78% in 2016-17 so far. At India level, average days of employment provided per Household is decreased from 46.2 in 2012-13 to 36.45 in 2016-17 so far, in case of Telangana also the situation is same. Average Wage rate per day per person (Rs.) at national level is increased from Rs. 121 in 2012-13 to Rs. 161 in 2016-17. In Telangana, it is increased from Rs. 115 in 2014-15 to Rs. 137 in 2016-17, which is less than national average. Several Chief Ministers wrote letters to the Prime Minister that the present MGNREGA wage is less than the minimum wage rate of their respective States, hence it should be hiked to minimum Rs. 300 per day. At present, Haryana State is paying Rs. 259 per day, which is the maximum MGNREGA wage in India followed by Chandigarh Rs. 248/day. Bihar, Chattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh paying minimum of Rs. 167/day.  Total No of HHs completed 100 Days of Wage Employment at national level is 51,73,487 in 2012-13 has fallen to 48,47,942 and  9,33,189 in 2015-16 and 2016-17 (so far) respectively. In Telangana, it is increased from 1,60,281 in 2014-15 to  4,17,602 in 2015-16, but decreased to  62,133 in 2016-17 so far.

Findings of the Paper:

·         At the national, the percentage of total labour budget is increasing from Rs. 82.69 crore in 2012-13 to Rs. 98.34 crore in 2015-16 which is a welcome sign.

·         SC person days % as of total  person days at national level is almost stable at 22%. It is the same in case of Telangana also.

·         ST person days % as of total person days at national level is decreasing from 17.79 in 2012-13 to 16.95 in 2016-17 so far. But, in case of Telangana it is increasing from 18.18 in 2014-15 to 19.09 in 2016-17 so far, which is good for STs of Telangana.

·         Women Person days out of Total (%) at India level is increasing from 51.3 in 2012-13 to 56.28 in 2016-17 so far. This clearly shows that women work participation is increasing. This is a welcome step. But, in Telangana it is slightly decreased from 61.11% in 2014-15 to 59.78% in 2016-17 so far.

·         At India level, average days of employment provided per Household is decreased from 46.2 in 2012-13 to 36.45 in 2016-17 so far, in case of Telangana also the situation is same.

·         Average Wage rate per day per person (Rs.) at national level is increased from Rs. 121 in 2012-13 to Rs. 161 in 2016-17. In Telangana, it is increased from Rs. 115 in 2014-15 to Rs. 137 in 2016-17, which is less than national average.

·         Total No of HHs completed 100 Days of Wage Employment at national level is 51,73,487 in 2012-13 has fallen to 48,47,942 and  9,33,189 in 2015-16 and 2016-17 (so far) respectively. In Telangana, it is increased from 1,60,281 in 2014-15 to  4,17,602 in 2015-16, but decreased to  62,133 in 2016-17 so far.

Impact of MGNREGA:

·         Reduction in migration.

·         Financial Inclusion increased.

·         Women participation increased and equal wages on par with men.

·         Reduction in hunger.

·         Relief from village money lenders.

·         Improvement in rural environment and sanitation.

·         Rural asset creation.

·         Children enrollment in schools increased as rural economic empowerment is increasing.

·         Participation of SCs and STs increased.

·         Increase in average wages and employment.

Criticism:

·         Fake bills and mustered rolls were generated and payments significantly late.

·         There is a criticism that in some states, low wages are paid than the stipulated by the Act. According to the Supreme Court judgment this comes under ‘forced labour’.

·         Controller & Auditor General of India in its report has mentioned that funds are being misutilized in some states.

·         Public Works like land development works, afforestation, irrigation works, construction roads, flood control etc. are being carried out by wealthy sections of the society thus betraying poor sections for whom this Act. is meant.

·         At some places, it is observed that the workers have to wait months together for their wags and they have to pay up to Rs.50/- as bribe for their job card.

·         It is also noticed that most of the works are confined to papers only and quality is not being maintained.

·         The Supreme Court Bench headed by Chief Justice K .G. Balakrishnan, Justice Deepak Varma and Justice B.S. Chowan has commented that there is lack of uniform policy in case of MGNREGA and they have further commented that the funds are not reaching the eligible beneficiaries, except in some states.

·         8,50,000 differently abled enrolled for work, but only 19% of these people were actually given work.

·         Some so called groups popped up, especially the local political groups who are having strength and power in the village . These groups grabbed majority of the job cards issued under MGNREGA.

Suggestions:

·         To prevent leakages in the MGNREGA programme, the government is planning to introduce the system of electronic transfer of wages to the beneficiaries from 1^st  January 2017 in Kerala. But, this should be extended to the entire country at an early date.

·         Government must avoid delay in releasing the outstanding funds of MGNREGA. Recently, Centre released its share of funds to the tune of Rs 12,230 crore to the states for the rural job flagship scheme MGNREGA, only after the Supreme Court rapped it for not releasing adequate funds for the scheme. The apex court said it was extremely unfortunate that the government had no provision for providing compensation to the workers, and it was regrettable that it cleared the pending wage bill for 2015-16 only during the pendency of the case. It ordered the Centre to release all outstanding funds for MGNREGA to the states and directed it to pay compensation for delayed wages to farmers in drought-hit areas. The court further directed the Centre to ensure that the Central Employment Guarantee Council is immediately constituted under provisions of the MNREG Act within a maximum period of 60 days and asked it to proactively request state governments to establish the State Employment Guarantee Council within 45 days.

·         The average days of labour used was only 50 days as against 100 days stipulated per annum by MGNREGA. Hence, it is advised to encourage the rural people to to utilize stipulated 100 days of labour.

·         There are complaints from different States that low wages are paid than the stipulated by the Act. Hence, there should be proper check and punishment for those who violates the rules.

·         Earlier, Controller & Auditor General of India in its report has mentioned that funds are being misutilized in some states. Hence, utmost care must be taken to avoid misutilization of funds.

·         In earlier case, the Supreme Court Bench headed by Chief Justice K .G. Balakrishnan, Justice Deepak Varma and Justice B.S. Chowan has commented that there is lack of uniform policy in case of MGNREGA and they have further commented that the funds are not reaching the eligible beneficiaries, except in some states. For example, different wages are paid in different States. Hence, due care must be taken to follow the uniform policy in case of MGNREGA and see that funds are reached to the eligible beneficiaries.

·         It has been observed from different studies that (for example, Saha Roy 2013) there is continued illegal presence of contractors and delay in payments. Hence, this should be avoided.

·         In all stages, Information Technology (IT) should be used for better implementation of MGNREGA.

·         There is a provision under MGNREGA that States should provide employment within 15 days, if they failed to do so, they have to pay 25% of wage as unemployment allowance for the first 30 days of unemployment and half of the wages beyond this. But, several States failed to provide unemployment allowance. This was pointed by many research works like Chandrashekhar & Ghosh (2005), Dreze Jeans et al. (2006), Rai, (2010), Jha et al. (2012), Datta et al. Hence, States should take necessary steps in this direction.

·         Under this scheme 60% of funds expended on wages, but though the works has been completed, due to corruption and irregularities wages have not been  paid to the beneficiaries. Hence, State Governments must take initiative in this direction.

·         At some places, it is observed that the workers have to wait months together for their wags and they have to pay up to Rs.50/- as bribe for their job card. Hence, States must punish such people who indulge in such activities.

·         It is also noticed that most of the works are confined to papers only and quality is not being maintained. Hence, in any case quality must not be compromised in works.

·         The best practices in each of these high-performing States should be documented and shared with the other States, so that the performance of each State can go up. For example, Andhra Pradesh is known for widespread computerization of the processes which reduces corruption and ensures timely transfer of funds.

            To conclude, though there are some shortcomings like misappropriation of funds at some places, yet this Act is really a boon for the rural people. If this Act is implemented transparently and corruption free, it certainly enhances the standard of living of the rural people.

References:

The Economic Times Dated: 10-10-2013

Bhatia, Bela and Dreze, Jean, “Employment Guarantee in Jharkhand: Ground Realities”, Economic and Political Weekly, XLI (29). 3200-3202. July, 2006.

Patel, Amrit, “ Role of PRIs in Implementing Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme”, Kurukshetra, 54(10), 24-25, August,2006.

Saha Roy, Chhanda, “Right Based Approach in Accessing Social Sector Services – A Case Study of MGNREGA”, Global Research Methodology Journal, Feb-Mar-April, II (8). 2013.

Goswami, H. K. , NGRGA Implementation in Andhra Pradesh. The Assam Tribune, October15.

Chandrasekhar C. P. and J. Ghosh, Social Inclusion in the NREGS, Business Line (India), January 27. 2005.

Dreze, J., Khera, Reethika and Sidharth, NREGA in Orissa: Ten loopholes and the silver lining; Interim survey report (mimio), Survey conducted by G.B Pant Science Institute. 2007.

Adhikari, Anindita and Kartika Bhatia, NREGA Wage Payments: Can We Bank on the Banks? Economic & Political Weekly, 5 (1). 30-37,2010.

Vanaik and Siddarth, “Bank Payments: The End of Corruption?” Economic & Political Weekly, 43(17). 33-39, April, 2008.

Comptroller and Auditor General, “Performance Audit of Implementation of National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 (NREGA)”, Draft Report, New Delhi. 2007.

NCAER-PIF, “Evaluating Performance of National Rural Employment Guarantee Act”, Project Report. 2009. 

www.nrega.nic.in

The Hindu: 31-05-2016

Vijay Kumar S, “Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act - A Review”, Kurukshetra, A Journal of Rural Development, Govt. of India, Vol. 59, Jan.2011 pp 10-12.