The Supreme Court of India praised the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) as a “good, effective scheme” while hearing a petition concerning delayed wage payments under the now-defunct programme, according to The Hindu. The remarks were made by a three-judge bench. The petition also seeks to have the right to work recognised as a fundamental right under the Constitution.
What happened
The Supreme Court made the comments during oral arguments in a public interest litigation filed by social organisations and activists seeking direction for timely payment of wages under MGNREGA and recognition of the right to work as a fundamental right. The bench, comprising Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and Justices P.S. Swaminathan and A.M. Khanwilkar, heard arguments on Tuesday regarding the petition filed in 2022.
The petitioners argued that delayed wage payments have caused severe hardship for rural households dependent on MGNREGA income for their daily needs. They submitted that the scheme’s suspension in 2023 after the central government withdrew funding left thousands of workers without guaranteed employment. The petitioners further contended that Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees the right to livelihood, which encompasses access to guaranteed employment.
The court’s observation that MGNREGA was “neither a freebie nor exploitation” directly counters government narratives that characterized the scheme as populist expenditure without productive value. The bench noted that the scheme provided both livelihood security and created durable assets across rural India.
Why it matters
The court’s endorsement comes at a critical juncture as the Bharatiya Janata Party government prepares for the 2024 general elections. The ruling represents a significant judicial pushback against the ruling party’s characterization of MGNREGA as wasteful spending, particularly after the scheme received minimal central funding in recent years.
The petition’s core demand—that the right to work constitute a fundamental right—could fundamentally reshape India’s constitutional framework if accepted. Currently, the right to work receives limited protection under Article 41, which guarantees the right to livelihood but does not mandate employment. A ruling recognizing work as a fundamental right would create enforceable obligations for the state to provide employment to all citizens.
Political analysts note that the court’s praise for MGNREGA arrives amid criticism of the government’s economic policies and rural development strategies. The scheme historically employed over 50 million people annually during peak seasons, making it one of the world’s largest public employment programmes. Its suspension has left a significant gap in rural livelihood support, particularly in states with limited alternative employment opportunities.
Background and context
MGNREGA was enacted in 2005 during the United Progressive Alliance government, replacing the earlier Mahatma Gandhi Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. The legislation guaranteed 100 days of employment per household annually, with wages paid directly to bank accounts. The scheme aimed to provide a social security net while creating rural infrastructure such as roads, irrigation systems, and watershed management structures.
The programme faced criticism from some government officials and economists who argued it discouraged private sector employment and created dependency. After coming to power in 2014, the BJP initially continued MGNREGA with reduced central allocation before effectively suspending it in 2023. Recent data shows the scheme received only 0.1 percent of the total central allocation in 2022-23, compared to over 1 percent during its peak years.
The petitioners include prominent civil society organisations such as the National Campaign on Democratic Governance and the All India Democratic Teachers’ Association. They have challenged the government’s approach through multiple legal forums, arguing that delayed wage payments violate constitutional guarantees of equality and non-discrimination.
The court’s observation that MGNREGA created “durable assets” contradicts government claims that the scheme lacked productive outcomes. Independent assessments have shown that MGNREGA work contributed significantly to rural infrastructure, including 2.4 million farm ponds, 350,000 km of rural roads, and substantial water conservation structures between 2015 and 2020.
What to watch next
The Supreme Court is expected to deliver its verdict on the petition within the next few months. The ruling could establish important precedents regarding the enforceability of employment guarantees and the state’s obligations under constitutional law.
Political observers anticipate that a favorable judgment for the petitioners could pressure the government to restore MGNREGA funding or introduce alternative employment guarantee schemes. The court may also direct states to implement their own employment guarantee programmes if the centre withdraws funding.
The election-year timing adds complexity to potential outcomes. While the court typically avoids intervening in electoral politics, its recognition of work as a fundamental right could influence campaign rhetoric and policy proposals from opposition parties. Several opposition parties have already pledged to restore MGNREGA if elected to power.
Economic experts note that any court direction regarding employment guarantees would require careful consideration of fiscal implications and implementation mechanisms. The Centre’s recent focus on alternative schemes such as the Pragati scheme and Mera Bhartiya Kamyaab Abhiyan reflects shifting priorities in rural employment policy.
The petition also raises questions about the relationship between state and central governments in implementing social welfare programmes. States such as Kerala, Tamil Nadu, and West Bengal have continued to allocate state funds for MGNREGA-like programmes despite the centre’s withdrawal of support.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s characterization of MGNREGA as a “good, effective scheme” represents a significant judicial endorsement of large-scale government employment programmes. The ruling challenges prevailing narratives about populist welfare measures and underscores the constitutional importance of livelihood security.
The petition’s demand for recognition of work as a fundamental right remains pending, but the court’s observations signal judicial sympathy for the principles underlying MGNREGA. As India approaches its national elections, the case highlights the tension between different visions of development, governance, and social justice.
The outcome will likely influence not only MGNREGA’s future but also broader debates about the state’s responsibility to ensure employment and economic security for its citizens. The court’s approach to balancing constitutional obligations with fiscal realities will set important precedents for future social welfare litigation in India.
Sources
The Hindu, https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/supreme-court-lauds-scrapped-mgnrega-scheme-calls-it-neither-freebie-nor-exploitation/article71373402.ece
Corrections
If you believe this article contains an error, contact Herald Express with the source URL and supporting evidence.
Story synopsis gathered from: The Hindu – National — source
