G RAM G | Centralised control, devolved responsibilities
The repeal of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s NDA government and its replacement with the Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission Gramin (G RAM G) Act is not merely a policy change. It strikes at the constitutional promise of the right to work and undermines India’s federal structure. A law that protected the livelihoods of crores of rural families for nearly two decades has been dismantled and replaced without consultation with state governments, and without the scrutiny such a far-reaching decision demanded. This manner of law-making reflects a disregard for common people and cooperative federalism that has come to define the Modi government’s 11 years in power.
MGNREGA was one of independent India’s most important pro-people legislations. Introduced in 2005 by Manmohan Singh’s UPA government, it was shaped through wide public consultations, parliamentary debates and standing committee scrutiny before being passed unanimously by both Houses of parliament. It gave real meaning to Article 41 of the Constitution by transforming employment from charity into a legal right. The law empowered rural workers, reduced distress migration and enabled large-scale participation of women. During the Covid pandemic, when livelihoods collapsed nationwide, MGNREGA became the rural poor’s last line of defence against hunger and debt, and spared the Union government a far deeper humanitarian and global embarrassment.
What made MGNREGA fundamentally different from earlier schemes was its demand-based nature. Any rural household could seek work locally and the government was legally bound to provide employment within a fixed time, failing which compensation was payable. There was no pre-fixed cap decided in Delhi; funds were meant to follow people’s demand for work. This legal obligation gave MGNREGA its strength and credibility.
The new G RAM G law dismantles this foundation. Employment is now based on pre-determined allocations decided by the Union government. The Centre will decide the scale and geography of employment under the scheme. Once the allocation is exhausted, work stops—even if people remain unemployed and willing to work. An enforceable right has thus been converted into a rationed programme controlled from Delhi. This shift from enforceable rights to centralised discretion reflects the RSS’s long-standing discomfort with rights-based welfare and decentralised power.
The claim that the new law increases employment to 125 days is mere headline management. Even under MGNREGA, where the right to work existed in law, the NDA government failed to provide even 70 days of work on average over the years. Budgets stagnated and wage payments were routinely delayed. A higher number without legal enforceability offers no real protection.
The new law also allows a pause of around 60 days during peak agricultural seasons. This undermines one of MGNREGA’s key achievements—strengthening workers’ bargaining power—and weakens rural wages and the minimum wage framework by removing an alternative source of income when it matters most.
This change also strikes at the foundations of cooperative federalism. Nearly 40 percent of the financial burden is shifted onto states, while authority over coverage, allocations and norms remains with the Centre. Control is centralised, while responsibility and consequences are devolved.
The implications are already clear for Karnataka. For 2025-26, the Union Budget estimated around ₹2,000 crore for MGNREGA works in the state based on projected demand. Under the new law, there is no obligation on the Centre to respond to such demand. Even if Karnataka receives work worth ₹2,000 crore, the state will have to bear nearly 40 percent of the cost from its own resources. This Act thus follows a familiar pattern under the NDA government, where control and credit lie with the Centre while funding responsibility is pushed onto states.
The experience of West Bengal offers a warning. The Union government suspended MGNREGA funds in an opposition-ruled state for years, denying wages and work until courts intervened. By institutionalising discretion through allocations and notifications, the new law creates a real risk of similar disruptions being repeated elsewhere, including in Karnataka.
The removal of Mahatma Gandhi’s name from this law is not a minor symbolic change. MGNREGA embodied Gandhian values of dignity of labour, decentralisation and village self-reliance. Erasing Gandhi’s name while dismantling the law reflects RSS-BJP’s ideological hostility to these values.
The consequences of this repeal will fall most heavily on women, Dalits, Adivasis, landless workers and the poorest OBC communities.
This moment calls for collective resolve. The Congress Working Committee, of which I am a part, has resolved to launch a nationwide ‘MGNREGA Bachao Andolan’ from January 5 to defend the right to work and demand restoration of employment guarantee.
Through this law, the BJP and the RSS may believe they have struck at a Congress legacy, the rights of working people and Mahatma Gandhi’s values. I have formally written to the Prime Minister placing on record serious constitutional and federal concerns and urging reconsideration through dialogue with states. This struggle is larger than one law; it concerns the future of India’s democracy and the right to work, and it will be pursued with resolve until justice is restored.
Siddaramaiah | Chief Minister of Karnataka
(Views are personal)