The UPA-era scheme MGNREGA had a new avatar under the BJP-led NDA government and in its new reincarnation, the Viksit Bharat-Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Act, 2025, or VB-G RAM-G scheme, is supposed to align rural employment with the long-term vision of Viksit Bharat 2047, while strengthening accountability, infrastructure outcomes, and income security. In its first full month, the new and improved employment guarantee scheme posted a nearly 50% drop in person-days of jobs given and number of households that benefitted from the scheme. In an “I-told-you-so” tone, the Congress reminded the government that the Opposition’s prediction is coming true.
It is not clear what has caused this steep decline. There were serious concerns regarding the roll-out of the new version, as it involved putting in place technology enabled digital systems. Moreover, even the states had to operationalise the administrative system as well. For instance, under the new system, marking attendance in the NREGA Mobile Monitoring System, or NMMS, requires face authentication instead of simple geo-tagged group photographs of the workers at the worksite. The government insists that everything is working fine. The government in its wisdom does not seem to believe in the time-tested axiom - "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". The geo-tagged group photo system was quite effective in curbing fake attendance and corruption relating to ghost beneficiaries.
Under the revamped scheme, there is a provision to pause the scheme during the peak agricultural seasons of sowing and harvesting. To activate the temporary suspension of the scheme, the respective State government must officially notify in advance. Therefore, if the July month’s decline is due to the sowing season, governments should publicise in advance both the notification regarding suspension and how it will affect employment generation, rather than as an afterthought.
Telangana and Andhra Pradesh have been outliers, recording 135% and 54% increase in person-days of employment generated. In contrast, several big states such as Tamil Nadu (74%), Maharashtra (69%), Uttar Pradesh (60%), Kerala (33%), and Rajasthan (27%) reported steep decline. In some eastern and north-eastern states like Odisha, Jharkhand, Nagaland, and Arunachal Pradesh, the decline has been over 80% to 98%.
Given the erratic rainfall in several states, there would be greater demand for employment under the scheme. Government authorities should conduct outreach campaigns so that the rural poor are able to benefit from the scheme. There have been reports from some places of village-level officials facing difficulties in implementation due to absence of clear guidelines. The system is complex, as it involves approval of works, cap on expenditure, and the 60:40 wage to material ratio. On top of it, there are action plans, accountability framework, and web-based geospatial planning. Wherever there are skill gaps, State governments could initiate remedial action in terms of training and capacity building and provision of detailed guidelines and SOPs.
One can expect some teething troubles with regard to the implementation of the scheme at such a mammoth, pan-India scale. More so when it becomes more centralised and adopts a top-down allocation system. The government is reportedly reviewing the preparedness of states but more needs to be done. The government should, if necessary, be open to course correction – especially regarding the deployment of complex technology tools which could become an obstacle in accessing the scheme.