Review of literature

1. Datt (2008) revealed that out of 20.1 million household employed in the MGNREGA,

only 2.2 million (i.e. 10.5%) received the full 100 days’ employment and wages . The

average employment per house hold was 43 days in 2006-07 and 35 days in 2007-08

respectively.

2. Shekhawat (2002) in his study ,on “Impact of employment generation programmes

(Egps) in Jaipur district of Rajasthan”, reported that disbursal of assistance to

beneficiaries was delayed and assistance given under Egps was insufficient, these were

the major problems faced by the respondents in taking advantages f Egps.

3. Datt (2008)reported that main constraints under MGNREGA were lack of professional

staff, lack of proper project planning ,bureaucratic resistance to MGNREGA,

Inappropriate rates of payment ,lack of worksite facilities and lack of transparency and

social audit

4. Mazdoor Kisan Samiti and Nari Shakti Sangathan (2006) studied status of

implementations of NREGP scheme in Jharkhand district. A sample of 36 respondents

(men and women) from 8 Panchayats were taken. The finding of the study revealed that

in village Jilimatanr, out of nine respondents only one reported that Gram Sabha was

organized in which four women and 12 male participated.

5. Sood (2006) studied NREGP challenges in implementation and reported that in Jashpur

block, Chattisgarh, lack of staff is having a negative impact on the working of the

NREGA. Also sub-engineer were being burdened with the task of maintaining job cords

implying that their primary tasks suffered. Such additional appointments are a rare

opportunity to provide employment to the youth in villages and should not be allowed to

be squandered due to administrative hurdles.

6. Central Guarantee Council (2007) reviewed the implementation of MGNREGA in

Burdibeda village Jharkhand district of and revealed that. Job cards were handed over to

the workers only two days prior the visit of the social audit team in the same village. Two

community development works have been sanctioned on the some land owned by the

Pradhan of the Village. Construction of well and a farm pond are both being carried out

on the Pradhan’s land

7. Richard Mahapatra (2010) in his study found that increasing women’s participation in

MGNREGA can be used for effective delivery of its core objective: local ecological

revival. It is now mandatory to have 50 per cent woman panchayat representatives who

have nodal roles in the programme’s implementation, including preparing the village

development plan. So if the supervisory roles in panchayats and the dominant presence as

workers converge, it will be a win-win situation for the programme as well as villages.

8. Richard Mahapatra (2010) in his study revealed that the unique features of the

MGREGA seem to have made it a woman friendly initiative, with more women than men

enrolling in the scheme. In the current fiscal till October, women availed of more than 50

per cent of employment created under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment

Guarantee Act (MGNREGA). The Act also helps women take up this opportunity as

economic freedom. It allows members belonging to the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled

Tribe communities to take up work in their own fields and get paid for that.

9. Richard Mahapatra (2010) in his study further revealed that more than 90 per cent of

woman workers are farm labourers or cultivators. A substantial part of their work is

unpaid because they work in their farms. MGNREGA has changed this. Now parts of

women’s non-paid jobs, like land levelling and digging a pond in their farms, are paid

for. In drought-prone districts, like Warangal in Andhra Pradesh and Ahmednagar in

Maharashtra, community members say this has attracted women to the programme.

10. National Tribunal (2006) studied 100 days programme of NREGP in district of Madhya

Pradesh and reported that tremendous hurdles faced at the first stage of registration and

acquiring of the job cards. Women headed household and joint families are the main

disadvantages in accessing the benefits of the scheme as it is applicable only to the head

of the household. No case was reported here an individual has actually received the work.

11. Kumar (2006) revealed the comparative analysis of performance of NREGA based on

107 sample and found jobs generated for SC (28%), OBCS (50%), ST (20%), for women

(48%) in Uttar Pradesh. In Madhya Pradesh SC (1%), ST (85%), OBC (3%) and women

(39%) found, Maharashtra SC (25%), OBC (42%), ST (33%) for women 58 percent

study found in Chittisgarh SC (37%), ST (15%), OBC (8%) also for women jobs

generated NREGA (53%).

12. Iqubal et al., (2006) stated that Public vigilance can be helpful to minimize corruption in

rural employment guarantee scheme in Rajasthan and Haryana. Study found corruption

being minimized in Rajasthan due to public vigilance leading to more than one and a half

lakh people gaining employment in Dungarpur district. There was massive participation

of rural folk. Tribal women looked forward to seeing their men back home. Also

proactive administration in Rajasthan. Corruption and neglect hindering implementation

of the programme in Haryana.

13. Dreze et al., (2006) found that in Andhra Pradesh minimum wages were not received by

the workers even for a full days’ work, unemployment allowance was observed as low as

Rs. 6 to 13 per day for a full day’s digging work. Measurement of work was not made in

front of the workers. Engineers do not visit the worksite regularly and women often

received lower wages as compare to men for similar work.

14. In Kanta toil village the team found that payments have no made for work that began a

month before the team visit, as result workers have stopped going for work. One of the

labour informed the team that he worked only for 6 days on a particular work but the

entries on the job cards indicated that he had worked for 48 days.

15. In a study on NREGA Ensure Security Against Hunger in Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh

found that the wages are paid either to the entire group and divided among the group by

the leader, or they are paid directly to the individual workers. The mode of payment can

have different effects on the workers on the whole payment of wages to the group leader,

chances of corruption and non- payment increased when wages were paid to group

leaders (Mistry, 2007).

16. Mangasi (1999) reported that the problem faced by DWCRA women were, lack of

awareness , social and community pressure, and suggestion are training and adequate

supply of information and resources.

17. Ramalakshmi (1998) pointed out that inadequate working capital is the most serious

problem restricting the performance of many DWCRA groups and also the group

members needed training for skill enhancement, especially for items like pottery,

readymade garments, foot-wear, etc.

18. According to Hardikar (1998) the average additional employment generated for IRDP

beneficiaries was 77.7 person days while that for DWCRA beneficiaries was 60.30

persons days. He further pointed out that average additional income generated by IRDP

was Rs. 2046/- while DWCRA scheme had generated additional income of Rs. 880/- per

beneficiaries.

19. Dwaraknath (2001) in a study on “Self Employment Generation under DWCRA”

reported that women had gained knowledge through DWCRA programme in various

income generation activities such as weaving industry, animal husbandry hosiery, candle,

bamboo and plastic items etc.

20. Bishnoi (2007) in his study on “Awareness of DWCRA programme among rural women”

reported that several entrepreneurial activities were promoted through DWCRA

programme after conducting training like fruit preservation, carpet weaving ,spice

grinding, buffalo rearing, handicraft, making and mat weaving.

21. Rathore (2000) revealed that the economic contribution from dairy and livestock

enterprise perceived by the beneficiaries of SGSY programme was 84.88 percent of the

gross income from all sources.

22. Annonymous (2009) The first phase of the audit in Bhilwara district has revealed

irregularities and corruption relating to the use of sub-standard materials, the use of

machinery instead of manual labour and the non-issuance of job cards, needed to ensure

that the right people are being paid.

23. Ameta (2000) observed in his study that the extent of knowledge of beneficiaries about

general aspects of JRY, funds JRY, workers and wages under JRY and planning and

execution of work JRY was 70.46, 72.07, 72.66, 79.16 percent respectively.

24. A research done by Rao (2000) reported in his study that awareness about the programme

like IRDP, JRY EAS TRYSEM , DWCRA etc. Out of 32 families only three families (10

%) worked few years back for school building construction taken up under JRY, but they

were ignorant of the programme under which the construction work was made except for

telling that it was a government work executed by the gram panchayat .Even through the

employment at the village level is seasonal they migrated during such period. Awareness

on DWCRA was poor among agriculture labour families.

25. In a study on “Comparative Study of Knowledge, Attitude and Impact of DWCRA

Programme on Tribal and Non-Tribal Beneficiaries of Udaipur District” Upadhyay

(2000) mentioned that majority of the tribal respondents (83.33%) possessed poor

knowledge and 10 percent women had very poor knowledge while a few (6.66%) were in

the category of average knowledge. None of them had good and very good knowledge

about various aspects of DWCRA programme among non-tribal respondents more than

half of the women (53.33%) possessed average knowledge and one third respondents

(33.33%) had poor knowledge about DWCRA progarmme. Whereas a few non- tribal

(7.77% had very poor knowledge.

26. Antwal and Wangikar (2002) in their study on “Awareness and Participation of

Beneficiaries in Urban Basis Services Programme for poor” found that 48.73 percent

beneficiaries had medium level of awareness whereas 33.09 percent beneficiaries had low

level of awareness. High level of awareness was observed in 18.18 percent beneficiaries.

27. Chethan (2004) in her study revealed that the overall awareness of the women

beneficiaries about SGSY show that more than one third (38.33%) of the beneficiaries

were highly aware about the existence and function of the SGSY followed by one –third

(33.33%) of them who were only partially aware of the scheme and less than one- third

(28.33%) of them who were reasonably aware about the scheme. It was observed that

65.33 percent of the women beneficiaries were aware of the existence of SGSY for the

upliftment of rural women followed by 43.33 percent of them who were aware of the

implementing agency of SGSY.

28. According to Phulikken and Wankhade (2005) in their study revealed that majority of

beneficiaries of Jawahar Well Scheme (JWS) advance sanctioned amount of loan

sanctioned and its disbursement, procedure prescribed for getting installment, sharing of

expenditure and concession available for construction of new and repair to old wells.

However the majority of beneficiaries farmers know little about eligibility requirements

for becoming beneficiaries , document required to attached with the application and areas

prescribed for well construction. It has also worth while to note that majority of the

beneficiaries 12-67 percent were not aware about selection of beneficiaries under the

scheme.

29.