A

RESEARCH PROJECT REPORT

ON

“EVALUATION OF MAHATMA GANDHI NATIONAL RURAL

EMPLOYMENT GUARNTEE PROGRAM IN ELLENABAD BLOCK OF
BASIRHAT DISTRICT IN NORTH 24 PARGANAS”

Submitted to Department of B.COM

(H)ACCOUNTING & FINANCE at BASIRHAT
COLLEGE UNDER WEST BENGAL STATE
UNIVERSITY In partial fulfillment of

Under the guidance of: Submitted by:

MAMAN MONDAL

REG NO-1092021400157

Teaching Associate Roll No.

B.COM(H)

DEPARTMENT OF B.COM(H) UNDER WEST

BENGAL STATE UNIVERSITY,BARASAT
BASIRHAT COLLEGE
2022-2023
 ANNEXURE-1
SUPERVISOR’S CERTIFICATE

This is certify that Ms. MAMAN MONDAL,a student of “B.COM(H) OF BASIRHAT

COLLEGE under the WEST BENGAL STATE UNIVERSITY , BARASAT has worked under
my supervision guidance for her project work and prepare the project report with the title
“Evaluation the study of Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee
Progamme in Bbasirhat-1 Block North 24 Parganas District in West Bengal” her work is
genuine and original to the best of my knowledge.

Signature:

: Name:

Designation:

Place

Date:
 ANNEXURE-2
STUDENT’S DECLARATION

I hereby declare that the project work in with the title Evaluation the study of Mahatma
Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Progamme in Bbasirhat-1 Block North 24
Parganas District in West Bengal” submitted by me for partial fulfillment of degree of B.COM
(H) under the west Bengal state university,Barasat is original work and no copy it has been
submitted to any other university for the fulfillment of the requirement for any course of study.

I also declare that no chapter of this manuscript is whole or in part has been
incorporated in this report from any earlier work done by others or by me. However, extracts
of any literature which has been used in this report has been duly acknowledged by providing
details of such literature in the references.

Signature:

Name: MAMAN MONDAL

Address: Basirhat
Reg No:1092021400157
Roll No:
Place:
Date:
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

It is a matter of great pleasure to present this project on “Evaluation the study of Mahatma Gandhi
National Rural Employment Guarantee Programme in Bbasirhat-1 Block North 24 Parganas
District in West Bengal”

I take this opportunity to thank our respected principal for giving me an opportunity to work on this
field.
I am very thankful to my supervisor Prof.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
for his full support in completing this project work.

Finally, I am grateful for the support of my family / friends / others and would also like to thank them
for co-operating with me to carry out these research work and help me with the project work by
filling up the questionnaire / report.

(MAMAN MONDAL)
 PREFACE

SR.NO PARTICULARS

Guide certificate
Student declaration
Acknowledgement
1. INTRODUCTION
2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
4. ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
5. FINDINGS & SUGGESTIONS
ANNEXURE
 QUESTIONNAIRE
 BIBLIOGRAPHY
 CHAPTER-1
INTRODUCTION

The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) is an Indian job
guarantee scheme, enacted by legislation on August 25, 2005. The scheme provides a legal
guarantee for at least one hundred days of employment in every financial year to adult members
of any rural household willing to do public work-related unskilled manual work at the statutory
minimum wage of 120 (US$2.18) per day in 2009 prices. If they fail to do so the govt. has to pay
the salary at their homes. The Central government outlay for scheme is 40,000 crore (US$7.28
billion) in FY 2010–11. This act was introduced with an aim of improving the purchasing power
of the rural people, primarily semi or un-skilled work to people living in rural India, whether or
not they are below the poverty line. Around one-third of the stipulated work force is women. The
law was initially called the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) but was
renamed on 2 October 2009.
In 2011, the program was widely criticized as no more effective than other poverty
reduction programs in India. Despite its best intentions, MGNREGA is beset with controversy
about corrupt officials, deficit financing as the source of funds, poor quality of infrastructure
built under this program, and unintended destructive effect on poverty.
Political background
This act was brought about by the UPA coalition government supported by the left parties.
Dr. Jean Drèze, a Belgian born economist, at the Delhi School of Economics, has been a major
influence on this project. A variety of people's movements and organisations actively
campaigned for this act.
The plan
The act directs state governments to implement MGNREGA "schemes". Under the
MGNREGA the Central Government meets the cost towards the payment of wage, 3/4 of
material cost and some percentage of administrative cost. State Governments meet the cost of
unemployment allowance, 1/4 of material cost and administrative cost of State council. Since the
State Governments pay the unemployment allowance, they are heavily incentivized to offer
employment to workers.
However, it is up to the State Government to decide the amount of unemployment
allowance, subject to the stipulation that it not be less than 1/4 the minimum wage for the first 30
days, and not less than 1/2 the minimum wage thereafter. 100 days of employment (or
unemployment allowance) per household must be provided to able and willing workers every
financial year.
Provisions under NREGA
 Adult members of a rural household, willing to do unskilled manual work, are required to
make registration in writing or orally to the local Gram Panchayat
 The Gram Panchayat after due verification will issue a Job Card. The Job Card will bear the
photograph of all adult members of the household willing to work under NREGA and is free
of cost.
 The Job Card should be issued within 15 days of application.
 A Job Card holder may submit a written application for employment to the Gram Panchayat,
stating the time and duration for which work is sought. The minimum days of employment
have to be at least fourteen.
 The Gram Panchayat will issue a dated receipt of the written application for employment,
against which the guarantee of providing employment within 15 days operates
 Employment will be given within 15 days of application for work, if it is not then daily
unemployment allowance as per the Act, has to be paid liability of payment of
unemployment allowance is of the States.
 Work should ordinarily be provided within 5 km radius of the village. In case work is
provided beyond 5 km, extra wages of 10% are payable to meet additional transportation and
living expenses
 Wages are to be paid according to the Minimum Wages Act 1948 for agricultural labourers
in the State, unless the Centre notices a wage rate which will not be less than 60 (US$1.09)
per day. Equal wages will be provided to both men and women.
Note: The original version of the Act was passed with Rs 155/ day as the minimum wage
that needs to be paid under NREGA. However, a lot of states in India already have wage
regulations with minimum wages set at more than 100 (US$1.82) per day. NREGA's minimum
wage has since been changed to 130 (US$2.37) per day.
 Wages are to be paid according to piece rate or daily rate. Disbursement of wages has to be
done on weekly basis and not beyond a fortnight in any case.
 At least one-third beneficiaries shall be women who have registered and requested work
under the scheme.
 Work site facilities such as crèche, drinking water, shade have to be provided
 The shelf of project for a village will be recommended by the gram sabha and approved by
the zilla panchayat.
 At least 50% of works will be allotted to Gram Panchayats for execution
 Permissible works predominantly include water and soil conservation, a forestation and land
development works
 A 60:40 wage and material ratio has to be maintained. No contractors and machinery is
allowed
 The Central Govt. bears the 100 percent wage cost of unskilled manual labour and 75 percent
of the material cost including the wages of skilled and semi skilled workers
 Social Audit has to be done by the Gram Sabha
 Grievance redressal mechanisms have to be put in place for ensuring a responsive
implementation process
History
MNREGA was launched on February 2, 2006 from Anantapur in Andhra Pradesh and
initially covered 200 of the "poorest" districts of the country. The Act was implemented in
phased manner; 130 districts were added from 2007 to 2008. With its spread to over 625 districts
across the country, the flagship program of the UPA Government has the potential to increase the
purchasing power of rural poor, reduce distress migration and to create useful assets in rural
India. Also, it can foster social and gender equality as 23% workers under the scheme are
Scheduled Castes, 17% Scheduled Tribes and 50% women. In 2010–11, 41 million households
were employed on NREGA worksites.
Funding
MGNREGA started with an initial outlay of $2.5bn(Rs 11300cr) in year 2006–07.The funding
has considerably been increased as shown in the table below:
Year Total Outlay(TO) Wage Expenditure(Percent of TO)
2006–07 $2.5bn 66
2007–08 $2.6bn 68
2008–09 $6.6bn 67
2009–10 $8.68bn 70
2010–11 $8.91bn 71

Implementation
The Controller and Auditor General (CAG) of India, in its performance audit of the
implementation of MGNREGA has found "significant deficiencies" in the implementation of the
act. The plan was launched in February 2006 in 200 districts and eventually extended to cover
593 districts. 44,940,870 rural households were provided jobs under NREGA during 2008–09,
with a national average of 48 working days per household. In recent times, NREGA workers
have faced problems due to delays in payment of wages, some of which have been pending for
months. In July 2012, the Government admitted that the programme is plagued with corruption
and it needs to be dealt with meaningfully.
Employment under NREGAS in 2010
Indian Minister of State for Rural Development Pradeep Jain said in a written reply to a question
in Rajya Sabha on Tuesday that As of 30 June, a total of 17,943,189 families in the country have
been provided employment under MGNREGS.

Works/Activities
The MGNREGA achieves twin objectives of rural development and employment. The
MGNREGA stipulates that works must be targeted towards a set of specific rural development
activities such as: water conservation and harvesting, afforestation, rural connectivity, flood
control and protection such as construction and repair of embankments, etc. Digging of new
tanks/ponds, percolation tanks and construction of small check dams are also given importance.
The employers are given work such as land leveling, tree plantation, etc. First a proposal is given
by the Panchayat to the Block Office and then the Block Office decides whether the work should
be sanctioned. In Rangareddy district manchal mandal the dry land horticulture and plantation of
trees on the bunds of the fields taken up under MGVN programme is taken up in a big way.
MGNREGA is a poor and those family are provided work in at a time.
Criticisms
Many criticisms have been levelled at the programme, which has been argued to be no more
effective than other poverty reduction programs in India. The program is beset with controversy
about corrupt officials, deficit financing as the source of funds for the program, poor
implementation, and unintended destructive effect on poverty. A 2008 report claimed the state of
Rajasthan as an exception wherein the rural population was well informed of their rights and
about half of the population had gained an income from the entitlement program. However, a
2011 WSJ report claims that the program has been a failure. Even in Rajasthan, despite years of
spending and the creation of government mandated unskilled rural work, no major roads have
been built, no new homes, schools or hospitals or any infrastructure to speak of has resulted from
the program.
At national level, a key criticism is corruption. Workers hired under the MGNREGA program
say they are frequently not paid in full or forced to pay bribes to get jobs, and aren't learning any
new skills that could improve their long-term prospects and break the cycle of poverty. There are
also claims of fictitious laborers and job cards by corrupt officials causing so called leakage in
program spending.
Another important criticism is the poor quality of public works schemes' completed product. In a
February 2012 interview, Jairam Ramesh, the Minister of Rural Development for the central
government of India, admitted that the roads and irrigation canals built by unskilled labor under
this program are of very poor quality and wash away with any significant rains. Villagers simply
dig new irrigation pits every time one is washed away in the monsoons. The completed works do
not add to the desperately needed rural infrastructure.
Another criticism is financial. The MGNREGA programme spent US$ 9 billion in the 2011
fiscal year according to official data. Economists have raised some concerns about the
sustainability of this subsidy scheme – India’s fiscal deficit is expected to reach 5.6 per cent of
GDP this year, compared with 5.1 per cent last year. The MGNREGA program has been found
to distort labor markets and has helped — along with fuel and fertilizer subsidies — to balloon
India's federal fiscal deficit.
Yet another criticism is the unintended effect of MGNREGA in terms of skill growth. A review
published by India in September 2011 conceded that the lack of skilled technicians at almost
every site under MGNREGA program, along with rules banning the use of machinery or
contractors (labour is usually by shovel). Such bureaucratic regulations mean that the labourers
learn no new skill, and that the ponds, roads, drains, dams and other assets built with manual
labour are often of wretched quality. The idea behind MGNREGA program is to create as many
jobs as possible for unskilled workers. But in practice, say critics, it means no one learns new
skills, only basic projects get completed and the poor stay poor — dependent on government
checks.
"We work because there's high unemployment here and the land is less fertile." But he
questioned the point, saying "There's no meaning to it. Instead of this they should build proper
roads."
— Abdul Jameel Khan, a farmer employed by India's MGNREGA entitlement program quoted in
a 2011 article by The Wall Street Journal
A multi-crore fraud has also been suspected where many people who have been issued the
NREGA card are either employed with other Government Jobs or are not even aware that they
have a Job Card. The productivity of laborers involved under NREGA is considered to be lower
because of the fact that laborers consider it as a better alternative to working under major
projects. There is criticism from construction companies that NREGA has affected the
availability of labor as laborers prefer to working under NREGA to working under construction
projects.
It is also widely criticized that NREGA has contributed to farm labour shortage. In July 2011, the
government has advised the states to suspend the NREGA programme during peak farming
periods.
The National Advisory Committee (NAC) advocated the government for NREGA wages linkage
with statutory minimum wages which is under Minimum wages act as NREGA workers get only
Rs100 per day.
Salient Features of the NREGA
During the initial phase the Act was implemented in 200 districts including Sirsa with
effect from February 2, 2006. Later on it extended to 130 additional districts. With effects from
April 01, 2008, the Act covers entire country with the exception of areas having hundred percent
urban population. Accordingly to NREGA Guidelines, 2008, the Act, para 1.4, exhibits
following salient features.
i) Adult members of a rural household, willing to do unskilled manual work, may apply for
registration in writing or orally to the local Gram Panchayat
ii) The Gram Panchayat after due verification will issue a Job Card. The Job Card will bear
the photograph of all adult members of the household willing to work under NREGA and
is free of cost
iii) The Job Card should be issued within 15 days of application.
iv) A Job Card holder may submit a written application for employment to the Gram
Panchayat, stating the time and duration for which work is sought. The minimum days of
employment have to be at least fourteen.
v) The Gram Panchayat will issue a dated receipt of the written application for employment,
against which the guarantee of providing employment within 15 days operates
vi) Employment will be given within 15 days of application for work, if it is not then daily
unemployment allowance as per the Act, has to be paid liability of payment of
unemployment allowance is of the States.
vii) Work should ordinarily be provided within 5 km radius of the village. In case work is
provided beyond 5 km, extra wages of 10% are payable to meet additional transportation
and living expenses
viii) Wages are to be paid according to the Minimum Wages Act 1948 for agricultural
laborers’ in the State, unless the Centre notifies a wage rate which will not be less than
Rs. 60/ per day. Equal wages will be provided to both men and women.
ix) Wages are to be paid according to piece rate or daily rate. Disbursement of wages has to
be done on weekly basis and not beyond a fortnight in any case
x) At least one-third beneficiaries shall be women who have registered and requested work
under the scheme.
xi) Work site facilities such as crèche, drinking water, shade have to be provided
xii) The shelf of projects for a village will be recommended by the gram sabha and approved
by the zilla panchayat.
xiii) At least 50% of works will be allotted to Gram Panchayats for execution
xiv) Permissible works predominantly include water and soil conservation, afforestation and land
development works
xv) A 60:40 wage and material ratio has to be maintained. No contractors and machinery is
allowed
xvi) The Central Government bears the 100 percent wage cost of unskilled manual labour and
75 percent of the material cost including the wages of skilled and semi skilled workers
xvii) Social Audit has to be done by the Gram Sabha
xviii) Grievance redressed mechanisms have to be put in place for ensuring a responsive
implementation process
xix) All accounts and records relating to the Scheme should be available for public scrutiny
Role and Status of Gram Panchayat in Implementation
The Gram Panchayat is the single most important agency for implementation of the
works. The Act mandates for a minimum of 50 percent of works in term of costs to be executed
by the Panchayat. This statutory minimum upto 100 percent of work, may be allotted to the
Panchayat in the annual self of projects. The permissible works include:
(i) water conservation and water harvesting;
(ii) drought proofing, including afforestation and tree plantation;
(iii) irrigation canals, including micro and minor irrigation works;
(iv) provision of irrigation facility, plantation, horticulture, land development to land owned
by households belonging to the SC/ST, or to land of the beneficiaries of land reforms, or
to land of the beneficiaries under the Indira Awas Yojana/BPL families
(v) Renovation of traditional water bodies, including de-silting of tanks;
(vi) Land development;
(vii) Flood-control and protection works, including drainage in waterlogged areas;
(viii) Rural connectivity to provide all-weather access. The construction of roads may include
culverts where necessary, and within the village area may be taken up along with drains.
Care should be taken not to take up roads included in the PMGSY network under
 NREGA. No cement concrete roads should be taken up under NREGA. Priority should
be given to roads that give access to SC/ST habitations;
(ix) Any other work that may be notified by the Central Government in consultation with the
State Government
At the village level, the wage seekers are primary stakeholders. Their rights are :
i) Application for registration
ii) Obtaining a Job Card
iii) Application for work
iv) Choice of time and duration of the work applied for
v) Provision of work within fifteen days of application
vi) Provision of crèche, drinking water, first aid facilities on work site
vii) The right to check their Muster Rolls and to get information regarding their employment
entered in their Job Cards
viii) Payment of wages within fifteen days of work done
ix) The right to get unemployment allowance in case employment is not provided within
fifteen days of submitting the application or from the date when work is sought
The Gram Sabha has been given the following rights and responsibilities under the Act
i) It will recommend works to be taken up under NREGS
ii) It will conduct social audits on implementation of the Scheme
iii) In addition, it is suggested that the Gram Sabha be used extensively as a forum for
sharing information about the Scheme.
The Gram Panchayat is the pivotal body for implementation at the village level. Where
Part Nine of the Constitution does not apply, local councils/ authorities as mandated by the State
concerned will be invested with corresponding responsibilities.
The Gram Panchayat is responsible for the following activities:
i) Planning of works
ii) Receiving applications for registration
iii) Verifying registration applications
iv) Registering households
v) Issuing Job Cards
vi) Receiving applications for employment
vii) Issuing dated receipts,
viii) Allotting employment within fifteen days of application
ix) Executing works
x) Maintaining records
xi) Convening the Gram Sabha for social audit
x) Monitoring the implementation of the Scheme at the village level.
Schedule I, Section 10 of NREGA states that it shall be open to the Programme Officer
and the Gram Panchayat to direct any person who has applied for employment to do work of any
type permissible under the Act. The State Government shall delineate clear coordination
mechanisms so that data on work requested and allotted by the Programme Officer and the Gram
Panchayat are properly maintained. This information should be recorded on the Job Card and the
Employment Register. Both the agencies should share information on employment allotted and
works opened.
If some applicants have to be directed to report for work beyond 5 km of their residence,
women (especially single women) and older persons should be given preference to work on the
worksites nearer to their residence.
The work entitlement of 100 days per household per year’ may be shared between
different adult members of the same household. If several members of a household who share the
same Job Card are employed simultaneously under the Scheme, they should be allowed to work
on the same worksite. If unusual circumstances arise whereby members of the same household
have to be allocated work on different worksites, the Gram Panchayat should ensure that the Job
Card is duly processed at both worksites.
If a request for work is made to the Gram Panchayat, it should offer employment on the
works executed (or to be executed) by it. If, under any circumstances, this is not possible, the
Gram Panchayat must inform the Programme Officer. The Programme Officer will issue
directives for the execution of work to an implementing agency competent to execute it and also
ensure that the funds needed for that work are released.
If the Gram Panchayat decides that employment cannot be given under its own shelf of
works, and that employment needs to be given outside the Gram Panchayat, it will inform the
Programme Officer.
 Upon receiving this intimation from the Gram Panchayat, the Programme Officer will
allot work. Such work will be selected from the shelf of projects that include inter Gram
Panchayat works. The Programme Officer will intimate the Gram Panchayat concerned about the
employment allotted so that the employment data is consolidated in the Employment Register at
the Gram Panchayat.
If a request for employment is made to the Programme Officer and the Programme
Officer allots work, he must inform the Gram Panchayat so that the data on works and
employment are coordinated at each level. The Gram Panchayat will also inform the Programme
Officer of the employment allotments made. This information sharing should be done on a
prescribed performa on a weekly basis.
 CHAPTER-2
REVIEW OF LITRATURE

Various articles appeared in journals/magazines on different aspects of MGNREGA but they are
restrictive in nature and do not give a comprehensive picture. A brief review of some of the
relevant literature is as under:
Sood (2006) studied NREGP challenges in implementation and reported that in Jashpur block,
Chhattisgarh, lack of staff is having negative impact on the working of the NREGP. Also sub
engineer were being burnded with the task of maintaining job cords implying that there primary
task sufferded. Such additional appointments are a rare opportunity to provide employment to the
youth in village and should not be allowed to be squandered due to administrative hurdles the
status of implementation of NREGP scheme in Jharkhand district.

Central Guarantee Council (2007) revealed that Job card were handed over to the worker only
two days prior the visit of social audit them in the same village. Two community development
works have been sanctioned on the some land owned the Pardhan of the village. Construction of
the well and a farm pond are both being carried out on the Pardhan land.

Mehrotra (2008)worked in implementation of these scheme, believes that 4 percent of

programme costs now allocated to administrative costs and profession support is still quit low
and not recognize in fact that a programme of the scale of the NREGA require series profession
support. If 2 percent per annume agriculture growth rate is to be reversed, the rain fed areas that
the constitute 60 percent of the agriculture cropped area in the century have to raise their land
productivity ;they have to move from one crop per year to preferable two if not three crops per
year. The evidence from watershed development programme in the past has demonstrated that
such programme can repay the investment on them many times quickly. Therefore, if NREGA
continoues existing manner, the programme runs the risk of going the way of most privies wage
employment programmes. On the other hand, if its design weakness as well as the flaws in the
design of its implementation is addressed, it can raise the stage nating rural wages push up
productivity.
Singh (2009) stated that MGNREGA generates much needed productive infrastructure for
poverty alleviation on a sustained basis. This path-breaking legislation is known as paradigm
shift in teams of legal entitlements, public accountability and participative management. It
provides for a multitier structure of administrative and institutional arrangement for
implementation and monitoring with specific responsibilities. The structure of implementation is
this, both elaborate and complex which needs further elaboration.

Khera (2009) found that the successful implementation of the MGNREGA in Patti block in
Orissa state goes beyond the ability of its resident to claim their right. This is out of brought by
the high level of engagement with the program in term of planning implementation and
monitoring. A part from it is immediate aim of being a form of social security for the rural poor,
by providing them local employment, it was expected that the MGNREGA would contribute to
activating Gram Sabah’s, empowering women and developing rural area. In this sense, the
organization studied by the author Madhya Pradesh as fully imbedded the spirit of NREGA,
where it is looked upon as an opportunity to promote the overall development of the village as
well as the balance of power in the village society.

Kumar (2010) revealed the comparative analysis of performance of MGNREGA based on 107
sample and found jobs generated for SC (28%), OBC (50%), and ST (20%), for women (48%),
in Utter Pradesh SC (1%), ST (85%), OBC (3%), and women (39%) found, Maharashtra SC
(25%), OBC (42%), and ST (33%), for women (58%) studied found in Chhattisgarh SC (37%),
ST (15%), OBC (8%)also for women jobs generated NREGA (53%).

Sinha (2010) found that a developing economy like India is often characterized by a labour
market with demand and supply of labour and a wage that even if competitively determined may
not be adequate for the poor household to reach their target income; what they consider as means
of a decent living. Envisaging situations like these, the Indian government has implemented the
Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) in recent past, to
complement the income of the poor by providing them employment for certain number of labour
days in a year.
Solinski (2012) argued that MGNREGA’s limited impact partly stems from a misconception of
labour migration – as a poverty ‘problem’ and as merely a product of ‘push-and-pull’ economic
factors. It contends that this view wrongfully casts ‘rural’ livelihoods and ‘urban’ society as
somehow separate, and assumes that farming is what ‘the poor’ really want, thus establishing
poverty as chiefly a rural problem to be tackled by rural development. Accepted explanations for
NREGA’s relative failure do not account for the
 CHAPTER-3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research Methodology is a way to solve the research problem systematically. It may be

understood as a science of studying how research is done scientifically. In it we study the various
steps, the research processes that are generally adopted to study the research problem & basic
logic behind them.

Objectives of the Study

 To study the impact of MGNREGA on rural migration
 To study the income women empowerment
 To evaluate the performance of MGNREGA in selected research area.

Research Design and Methodology

The research consisted of two stages. In the first stage a survey was conducted to collect
the data from the workers who have worked under MGNREGA Scheme in Ellenabad and Sirsa
region. Second stage involved the analysis of the data collected in the first stage.

Sample Size- A sample of 100 respondents was taken.

Geographical Area- Ellenabad Region of district Sirsa

Research methodology is prepared to describe not only the research procedure and method
adopted for the achievement of the project but also the logic behind the use of this method so that
result can be capable of being evaluated by the others, its main is keep the research on the right
track. It includes research design, sampling procedure, and method of data collection and
analysis procedure pertaining to the project.

Data Collection

Data has been collected both from primary as well as secondary sources.
Primary sources- Primary source of data was questionnaire filled respondents in Sirsa &
Ellenabad Region. Simple well drafted questionnaire was circulated among all respondents. Full
freedom was provided to an individual to answer the questions. After the collection of data it was
arranged tabulated and graphically and thereafter it has been interpreted.

Secondary sources- the secondary sources of data were various websites and magazines.
These sources help in gaining the knowledge about industry. These sources are listed in the
references.

Data Analysis: -
Data has been analyzed by using table, bar diagrams and pie charts in the form of graphs
for data analysis.

Limitations of the Study

 Study was limited to Sirsa and Ellenabad region, study in wider area can yield better results

 Some respondents were unwilling to respond over the queries

 Access to the respondents of remote areas difficult

 Time and financial constraint

 CHAPTER-4
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

TABLE 1. Age of the respondents.

S.No. Age No. of respondent Percentage (%)

1 21-30 year 35 35
2 31-40 year 26 26
3 41-50 year 20 20
4 Above 50 year 19 19
Total 100 100

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

21-30 31-40 41-50 above 50

INTERPERTATION:

Along with its graphical presentation depicts that out of the 100 respondents, most of the
35 respondent are under the age in 21-30 year and 26 respondent are under the 31-40 year and
20 respondent are under the 41-50 and 19 respondent are above the 50 year age in the under the
MGNREGP get the work .
 TABLE.2. Sex wise distribution of the respondents.

S.No. Sex No. of respondent Percentage (%)

1 Male 57 57
2 female 43 43
Total 100 100

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Male Female

INTERPERTATION:
Along with its graphical presentation depicts that out of the 100 respondents, most of the
57 respondent male and 43 respondents are female.
TABLE.3. Education level

S.No. Education level No. of respondent Percentage (%)

1 Illiterate 26 26
Literate(below
2 primary) 14 14
Primary (class V
3 20 20
completed)
Upper Primary
4 (Class Viii 27 27
complete )
Secondary (Class
5 13 11
X complete)
High School
(Class XII
6 2 2
complete)

Above High
7 0 0
School
8 Total 100 100
 30

25

20

15

10

0
IlliterateLiteratePrimary Upper Secondary High School Above High
below prim(class
Primary
V (Class Viii complete
(Class X complete)
) (Class XII School
completed) complete)

INTERPERTATION:

Along with its graphical presentation depicts that out of the 100 respondents most
number of respondents having upper primary class level and none of the respondents having
above high school education.
TABLE.4. Marital Status

S.No. Marital Status No. of respondent Percentage (%)

1 Married 59 59
2 Unmarried 21 21
3 Divorced 3 3
4 Widowed 17 17
5 Total 100 100

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Married Unmarried Divorced Widowed

INTERPERTATION:
Along with its graphical presentation depicts that out of the 100 respondents, most of the
59 respondent are married and 21 respondent are unmarried and 3 respondent are divorced and
17 respondent are widowed.
TABLE. 5. Category

S.No. Category No. of respondent Percentage (%)

1 ST 25 25
2 OBC 20 20
3 SC 38 38
4 Other 17 17
Total 100 100

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

0 ST OBC SC OTHER

INTERPERTATION:

Along with its graphical presentation depicts that out of the 100 respondents, most of the
25 respondent are ST and 20 respondents are OBC and 38 respondent are SC and 17 respondent
are under the other category in under this scheme.
TABLE. 6. Sources of Awareness

S.No. Sources No. of respondent Percentage (%)

1 Radio 12 12
2 TV 10 10
3 Panchayat Office 53 53
Government
4 15 15
awareness program
5 Other 10 10
Total 100 100

60

50

40

30

20

10

Radio TV Panchayat Government Other

Office awareness program

INTERPERTATION:

Along with its graphical presentation depicts that out of the 10 Radio, most of the 10 TV
and other and 50 Panchayat office are government awareness program 10 are under the other
category in under this scheme.
TABLE. 7. If MGRGEP gives regular work

S.No No. of Respondent Percentage (%)

1 Yes 53 53
2 No 47 43
3 Total 100 100

54

53

52

51

50

49

48

47

46

45
Yes No
44

INTERPERTATION:

Along with its graphical presentation depicts that out of the 100 respondents, most of the
25 respondent are ST and 20 respondents are OBC and 38 respondent are SC and 17 respondent
are under the other category in under this scheme.
TABLE. 8. Occupation of the Respondent

S.No. Occupation No. of Respondent Percentage (%)

Self employment in
1 Agriculture 2 2
2 Agriculture labour 65 63
3 Other labour 33 33
Total 100% 100

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

Self employment in Agriculture labour Other labour

Agriculture

INTERPERTATION:

Along with its graphical presentation depicts that out of the 100 respondents, most of the
65 respondents are Agriculture labour and 33 respondents are other labour, 2 respondents having
self employment in agriculture.
TABLE. 9. Job on the family member

No. of
S.No. Job Card Percentage(%)
Respondent
1 1 member 5 5
2 2 member 66 66
3 3 member 12 12
4 4 member 10 10
5 5 member 7 7
Total 100 100

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

1 member 2Member 3Member 4Member 5Member

INTERPERTATION:

Along with its graphical presentation depicts that out of the 100 respondents most of the
66 respondent are 2 member and 12 respondent are 3 members, 10 respondents are 4 members, 7
respondents are 5 members and 5 respondents are 1 member.
TABLE. 10. Price job card is free on MGNREGP

S.No. Job card No. of Respondent Percentage (%)

1 Free 97 97
2 Paid 3 3
3 Not Give 0 0
4 Total 100 100

4.5

3.5

2.5

1.5

0.5
Free Paid Not Give
0

INTERPERTATION:

Along with its graphical presentation depicts that out of the 100 respondents most of the
97 respondent are free, 3 respondents are paid.
TABLE 11. After how many days of registration you get work under MGNREGP

S.No. Time Lag No. of Respondent Percentage(%)

1 0-7 Days 12 12
2 7-15 Days 25 25
3 16-30 Days 63 63
Total 100 100

70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0-7 Days
7-15 Days
16-30 Days

INTERPERTATION:

Along with its graphical presentation depicts that out of the 100 respondents, most of the
respondents responded that they got the work under MGNREGP after 16-30 days of registration,
on the other hand, there were 31 respondents who got work in 7-15 days and only 12 respondents
got work in 7 days.
TABLE. 12. Payment of wages

S.No. Days No. of Respondent Percentage (%)

1 Daily 17 17
2 Weekly 83 83
3 Total 100 100

DailyWeekly

INTERPERTATION:

This pie chart shows that, out of the 100 respondents most of the 83 respondent are
weekly and 17 are daily.
TABLE. 13. Do you have bank account?

S.No. No. of Respondent Percentage (%)

1 Yes 78 78
2 No 22 22
3 Total 100 100

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0 Yes No

INTERPERTATION:

Along with its graphical presentation depicts that out of the 100 respondents most of the
78 respondent are Yes and 22 respondents are No.
TABLE. 14. Annual Income in Under MGNREGP

Annual
Income Before
S.No. MGNREGP After
No. of No. of Percentage
Respondent Percentage Respondent (%)
Less Then
1 Rs.5000 2 2 0 0
Rs.5000-
2 10000 14 14 5 5
Rs.10001-
3 15000 19 19 15 15
Rs.15001-
4 20000 25 25 30 30
Rs.20001-
5 25000 8 8 11 11
More than
6 Rs.25000 32 32 39 39
Total 100 100 100 100
 40
35
30
25
20
15
10

Before
After

5
0

INTERPERTATION:

Along with its graphical presentation depicts that out of the 100 respondents most of the
respondents having more than Rs.25000 before and after minimum respondents are less than Rs.
5000 annual income.
TABLE. 15. Monthly expenditure pattern of MGNREGP.

Monthly
expenditure Before
S.No. (in Rs) After
No. of Percentage No. of Percentage
Respondent (%) Respondent (%)
Less than Rs
1 500 1 1 0 0
2 Rs.500-700 10 10 4 4
3 Rs.701-800 14 14 11 11
4 801-1000 35 35 26 26
More then
5 1000 40 40 59 59
Total 100 100 100 100

60
50
40
30
20
10
Before
After

0
After
Less than Rs
Before
500Rs.500-700 801-1000
More then
1000
INTERPERTATION:

Along with its graphical presentation depicts that out of the 100 respondents most of the
respondents having more than Rs.1000 expenditure before and after and minimum respondents
are less than Rs. 500 expenditure.

TABLE. 16. Saving Status under MGNREGP

S.No. Saving Before After

No. of Percentage No. of Percentage
Respondent (%) Respondent (%)
Less than
1 Rs.25000 47 47 37 37
Rs 25001-
2 50,000 25 25 30 30
Rs 50001 –
3 75000 13 13 12 12
Rs 75001-
4 1,00,000 15 15 21 21
Rs 1,00,001-
5 1,25,000 0 0 0 0
Total 100 100 100 100
 BeforeAfter

37 12
30 21

47 13
25 15

INTERPERTATION:

Along with its graphical presentation depicts that out of the 100 respondents most of the
respondents having more than Rs.25000 saving before and after minimum respondents are less
than Rs. 100000 saving.
TABLE. 17. MGNREGP in restriction of family member.

No. of
S.No. Respondent Percentage (%)
1 Migration 9 9%
Non-
2 Migration 91 91%
3 Total 100% 100%

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

Migration Non-Migration

INTERPERTATION:

Along with its graphical presentation depicts that out of the 100 respondents most of the
91 respondents are non-migration and 9 respondents are migration.
TABLE. 18. Reason for MGNRGP

S.No. Reason No. of Respondent Percentage(%)

Supplementary
1 Income 7 7
To meet family
2 expenditure 53 53
3 Medical expenses 10 10
Repayment of old
4 debts 14 14
5 Children education 16 16
6 Total 100 100

53

7
10 14 16
INTERPERTATION:

Along with its graphical presentation depicts that out of the 100 respondents most of the
respondents having to meet family expenditure and minimum number of respondents having
supplementary income and medical expenses

No. of registered household in 2007-08 to 2011-12 report on the sirsa.

SIRSA

Year No. of Registered household

2007-08 2407
2008-09 28227
2009-10 28494
2010-11 29526
2011-12 30948
 CHAPTER-5
FINDINGS AND SUGGESTIONS

Study transpire that most of the respondents responded that they are satisfied with this scheme,
on the other hand, there were 31 respondents who were not satisfied with the scheme.
Study further enunciates that most of the respondents responded that they got the work under
MGNREGP after 16-30 days of registration, on the other hand, there were 31 respondents who
got work in 7-15 days and only 12 respondents got work in 7 days. It has also came into notice
during the study that out of the 100 respondents, most of the respondents i.e. 34 responded that
they got 90 rupees per day and 26 respondents got only 50-60 rupees per day and only 19
respondents got Rs. 80-90. most of the respondents i.e. 34 responded that they got 90 rupees per
day and 26 respondents got only 50-60 rupees per day and only 19 respondents got Rs. 80-90.
Most of the respondents i.e. 32 responded that their annual income increased more than
Rs. 25000 and 25 respondent’s income increased between 15000 to 20000. Most of the
respondents i.e. 40 responded that their annual expenses have more than Rs. 1000 and 35
respondent’s expenses increased between 1000.
A person who is not gainfully employed is called unemployed. In India, the problem of
unemployment has become very serious as around 9 percent of the labour force is unemployed.
Not only there is open unemployment is structural in nature. In urban areas, unemployment is
mainly industrial and educational in nature. In rural areas, it is seasonal and disguised in nature.
Thus various causes responsible for high incidence of unemployment in India are growing
Population, in appropriate technology, faulty education system and failure of growth process in
generation appropriate and adequate jobs.
This approach seeks solution to the unemployment problem not through emphasizing
any particular pattern of resource allocation technological choice but through special
employment schemes especially rural public works like Mahatma Gandhi National rural
Employment guarantee programme (MGNREGP). This approach regards the regular
development process as being incapable of alleviating the problem of unemployment and under
employment in the foreseeable future. The objectives are to analyze the socio-economic
conditions of the percentage of population benefits under the scheme to find out the income level
of beneficiaries, to find out how this programmed is being successful in the study area in this
programme.

Suggestions
 More awareness campaigns should be launched to impart awareness among the rural
people to associate with MGNREGA
 Lots of anomalies have been recorded, due to which, some people have lost their faith
in the scheme, so such incidences should not happen again.
 Scheme should be implemented in wider area.
 Zero tolerance to the corrupt practices should be implemented.
 The government has to ensure the benefits are justified and reached.
 Awareness committee can be formed consisting of educated youth who would bring
communication effectiveness of village building initiatives at district /block level.
 Increasing infrastructure provision like create water, and first aid box.
 Low level of instructions of receiving wages
 Peoples all are participated in the Grama Sabha meeting.
 Remove the corruption problem
 To include new ideas of the job
QUESTIONNAIRE OF MGNREGP:

1. Age
a. 18-30 ( )
b. 31-40 ( )
c. 41-50 ( )
d. Above 50 ( )
2. Sex
a. Male ( )
b. Female ( )
3. Education Level
a. Illiterate ( )
b. Literate Below Primary ( )
c. Primary (class V completed) ( )
d. Upper Primary (Class Viii complete ) ( )
e. Secondary (Class X complete) ( )
f. High School (Class XII complete)
g. Above High School( )
4. Marital Status
a. Married( )
b. Unmarried ( )
c. Divorced( )
d. Widowed( )
5. Category
a. SC ( )
b. ST ( )
c. OBC ( )
d. OTHER ( )
6. Sources of awareness
a. Radio( )
b. TV( )
 c. Panchayat Office( )
d. Government awareness program( )
e. Other sources( )
7. If MGNREGP gives regular work
a. Yes ( )
b. No ( )
8. Occupation of the respondent
a. Self employment in agriculture ( )
b. Agriculture laboure ( )
c. Other labour ( )
9. Job card on the family member
a. 1 Member( )
b. 2 Member( )
c. 3 Member( )
d. 4 Member ( )
e. 5 Member( )
10. Price job card is free in MGNREGP
f. Free ( )
g. Paid ( )
h. No give( )
11. After how many days of registration you get work under MGNREGP
a. 0-7 days ( )
b. 8-15 days ( )
c. 16-30days ( )
12. Payment of wages
a. Daily ( )
b. Weekly ( )
13. Do you have bank account
a. Yes ( )
b. No ( )
14. Annual income in under MGNREGP
 Before After

a. Less than 5000 ( ) ---------- ----------

b. 5001-10000 ( ) ---------- ----------
c. 10001-15000 ( ) ---------- ----------
d. 15001-20000 ( ) ---------- ----------
e. 20001-25000 ( ) ---------- ----------
f. Above 25000 ( ) ---------- ----------
15. Monthly expenditure

Before After

a. Less than 500 ---------- ----------

b. 500-700 ---------- ----------
c. 701-800 ---------- ----------
d. 801-900 ---------- ----------
e. 901-1000 ---------- ----------
16. Saving status under MGNREGP
a. Less than 25000 ( )
b. 25000-50000( )
c. 50001-75000 ( )
d. 75001-100000( )
e. Above 100000
17. MGNREGP in Restriction of family
a. Migration
b. Non-Migration ( )
18. Reason for joining MGNREGP
a. Supplementary Income( )
b. To meet family expenditure( )
c. Medical expenses( )
d. Repayment of old debts( )
e. Children education ( )
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Anil Padmanabhan & Elizabeth Roche (February 2, 2012). "Jairam Ramesh - We are now
looking at MGNREGA 2.0". Live Mint & The Wall Street Journal.

2. Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act. Nrega.nic.in. Retrieved on

2011-12-26.

3. Govt gives NREGA the Mahatma Gandhi tag. webdunia.com. 2 October 2009

4. "Indian rural welfare - Digging holes". The Economist. 5 November 2011.

5. Right to Work (RTW) – SWRC. Video.google.com. Retrieved on 2011-12-26.

6. ''States fail to provide 100-day employment to all under MGNREGA''. Hindu.com (2009-08-
06). Retrieved on 2011-12-26.

7. "Corruption plaguing implementation of MGNREGA: Govt". 14 July 2012.

8. India Provides Employment to 18 Million Households Under the MGNREGA in 2010. ABC
Live. 15 May 2011

9. Disa Sjoblom and John Farrington (2008) The Indian National Rural Employment Guarantee
Act: Will it reduce poverty and boost the economy? Overseas Development Institute

10. James Fontanella-Khan and James Lamont (29 February 2012). "Rural India enjoys
consumption boom". The Financial Times.

11. Sajan Singh (2006) Special employment guarantee and poverty alleviation programme (New
century publication) New Delhi.

12. Richard Mehrotra (2008) The Design or rural development,” the Thomas hooking university
press, London
13. Uday Bhanu Sinha (2010) “National Rural Employment Guarantee Act- 2005”,
Government of Kerala, Trivandrum

14. Thomas Solinski (2012) The Design or rural development,” the Thomas hooking
university press, London