JOIN USGovt may redefine 'household' in MGNREGA to remove ambiguity
The Union government may change the definition of “household” in the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) to do away with scope for misinterpretation by unscrupulous functionaries to deny work to women and joint families.
The Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD) has started consultations with Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Law and has moved a draft Cabinet note seeking amendment to the MGNREGA.
A parliamentary panel recently recommended that the MoRD should take all steps to ensure that the term “household” in the MGNREGA should not only be redefined, but also be made “self-contained and devoid of any ambiguity”.
Though the panel wanted the government to make the necessary amendment in the legislation before the financial year 2013-14 begins, sources in the MoRD said that it would take sometime to complete consultations with other ministries.
The government is also keen on assessing the financial implication of changing the definition before amending the law.
In its latest report to the Lok Sabha, the Committee for Empowerment of Women (CEW) noted with dismay that although the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme was launched in February 2006, no sincere effort had been made to remove the ambiguity in the definition of the term “household” in the Act.
The panel noted that a large number of genuine job-seekers had been denied their legal right to livelihood due to the ambiguity for the past several years.
Section 2 (f) of the Act defines “household” as members of a family related to each other by blood, marriage or adoption and normally residing together and sharing meals or holding a common ration card.
The Operational Guidelines issued by the MoRD later says that “household” will mean a nuclear family comprising mother, father and their children and may include any person wholly or substantially dependent on the head of the family. It also says that “household” would also mean a single member family including ones headed by single women.
According to the CEW, notwithstanding the explanations being issued, “a lot of confusion still prevails about the definition of the critical term, as reports of denial of registration to joint families by gram panchayats of many villages are still coming in.”
Even the provision of work to one person of the household is being allegedly misinterpreted to suit the male head of the family, thus denying women of their rights in some places, it noted.
The committee observed that the implication of operational guidelines issued proved to be inadequate as it might still be misinterpreted.
“Until the definition of household is structured in a clear and comprehensive manner, twist in the interpretations of the term by functionaries having vested interests will continue in the same fashion, denying a large chunk of genuine employment demanding population from their legal right to livelihood,” the panel noted.