Dr. Navneet Seth, Associate Professor, Guru Kashi University, Talwandi Sabo (Pb.)
The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) was not merely a welfare scheme as it has been in existence almost twenty years (since 2026) but it was a legal right. That contract is now re-written.
As of May 31, 2026 the scheme has been refurbished and again launched with a new tag “G-RAM-G” to complete all the unaccomplished tasks remained pending under MGNREGA.
A New era begins. But is it an improvement--or a withdrawal.
The newest Data Broken Promises
We will start with figures. The total pending wage liabilities at MGNREGA as of February 2026 stood at Rs 9,308 crore across states. Uttar Pradesh alone is liable to the tune of more than 1,158 crores. Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, Maharashtra and Assam each carry liabilities exceeding Rs 450 crore.
This does not qualify as a resource problem. In 2025-26, the central government disbursed the sum of 78,004 crore to states. The issue is a failure in accountability. And yet, the government told the Rajya Sabha that 99.81% of the eligible households had been employed. That number speaks volumes more than less. Having worked 20 days is not equal to 100 days. Getting paid in four months does not equal to getting paid in 15 days.
MGNREGA vs. G-RAM-G: Two Philosophies
Subtle, but sweeping change is the most critical of all. MGNREGA was a right to law. If a worker demanded work and did not receive it within 15 days, the state was legally bound to pay an unemployment allowance. That clause was hardly ever enforced--but at least the fact of its existence put the state to the task of proving it.
G-RAM-G, in its turn, is a centrally-sponsored scheme that has a normative allocation. States are given a predetermined budget basing on past expenditure. When demand falls short of that budget - as it usually does in high-poverty districts - the state can only spend more at the expense of bearing 100% of the increment in cost. In the real world, the demand will be suppressed by poorer states. The guarantee is a ceiling rather than a floor.
Where G-RAM-G Does It Right
Speaking honestly, the new scheme targets actual failures. Agonizing delays would be abolished by weekly wage payments, in case they are introduced with the right mindset. Monitoring through satellite images and biometric attendance based on AI could help to eliminate ghost workers. The National Rural Infrastructure Stack (NRIS) will deliver a digital twin of all rural assets.
The guaranteed days have also been increased to 125 days (previously 100 days).
However, technology is not able to counter bad governance. The promise to pay weekly is worthless, unless the money is discharged.
What the Rural Poor Stand to Lose?
The change of the scheme name to the name of Mahatma Gandhi, is not just symbolic. Congress leader Priyanka Gandhi Vadra raised the question why the government would spend crores to rename stationeries in thousands of panchayats. The further implication: names have ethical implications. MGNREGA was enacted following an epic civil society movement which demanded a right, not a mission.
The 60-day work ban in the peak agricultural seasons is also a cause of concern. Paperwise, it enables employees to take care of fields. Practically, it could turn into a seasonal permanent blackout.
The Future: The Future or Doom?
G-RAM-G may work, when three conditions are met. First, normative allocations have to be based on current ratios of poverty, rather than on past expenditure. Secondly, the weekly payment of wages would be enforced by penalties, whereby a statutory interest of 2 per cent per day would be paid to the non-commodity side, which would be the non-government side. Third, the so-called switch-off clause should never be employed. The mere presence of it undermines trust.
The tragedy lies in the fact that reform did not necessarily imply retreat. India might have retained MGNREGA as a right and enhanced payments and tracking. We are instead changing a guarantee to a mission.
When the wages fail to reach in time, when there is no work, when the panchayat declares that it has nothing left, the rural poor will know that a mission is not a right.
The guaranteed days have also been increased to 125 days (previously 100 days).
However, technology is not able to counter bad governance. The promise to pay weekly is
worthless, unless the money is discharged.
What the Rural Poor Stand to Lose?
The change of the scheme name to the name of Mahatma Gandhi, is not just symbolic. Congress
leader Priyanka Gandhi Vadra raised the question why the government would spend crores to
rename stationeries in thousands of panchayats. The further implication: names have ethical
implications. MGNREGA was enacted following an epic civil society movement which
demanded a right, not a mission.
The 60-day work ban in the peak agricultural seasons is also a cause of concern. Paperwise, it
enables employees to take care of fields. Practically, it could turn into a seasonal permanent
blackout.
The Future: The Future or Doom?
G-RAM-G may work, when three conditions are met. First, normative allocations have to be
based on current ratios of poverty, rather than on past expenditure. Secondly, the weekly
payment of wages would be enforced by penalties, whereby a statutory interest of 2 per cent per
day would be paid to the non-commodity side, which would be the non-government side. Third,
the so-called switch-off clause should never be employed. The mere presence of it undermines
trust.
The tragedy lies in the fact that reform did not necessarily imply retreat. India might have
retained MGNREGA as a right and enhanced payments and tracking. We are instead changing a
guarantee to a mission.
When the wages fail to reach in time, when there is no work, when the panchayat declares that it
has nothing left, the rural poor will know that a mission is not a right.
