The passage of the Viksit Bharat—Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Bill, 2025, marks a seismic shift in India’s social security landscape, effectively repealing the two-decade-old Mahatma
Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA). Pushed through both Houses of Parliament within a mere forty-eight hours, the legislation was met with unprecedented turbulence. In the Lok Sabha, the debate stretched past midnight until 1.30 am, while the Rajya Sabha witnessed a walkout by opposition members in the early hours of Friday. The scenes were marked by vociferous protests, with opposition MPs tearing copies of the VB-G RAM G Bill and storming the well of the House, accusing the government of dismantling a landmark rights-based framework.
At the heart of the new bill is an increase in the statutory guarantee of wage employment from 100 to 125 days per rural household. However, this expansion comes with structural changes that the opposition describes as a dilution of the “right to work”. Unlike the original MGNREGA, which was a demand-driven scheme where the Centre bore the entire wage bill, the new mission operates as a centrally sponsored scheme with a 60:40 fund-sharing ratio between the Centre and most states. Furthermore, the bill introduces a “normative allocation” model, moving away from the open-ended funding of its predecessor to a more budget-capped approach aligned with the government’s Viksit Bharat 2047 vision.
A notable and controversial feature is the introduction of a sixty-day “agricultural pause”. This provision allows state governments to suspend public works during peak sowing and harvesting seasons to ensure the availability of farm labour. While the government argues this will stabilise the rural economy and prevent labour shortages for farmers, critics argue it curtails the autonomy of workers to seek employment when they most need it. The mission also shifts focus towards creating durable, high-impact assets through the Viksit Bharat National Rural Infrastructure Stack, prioritising water security, climate resilience, and livelihood infrastructure over simple manual labour tasks.
“Chouhan ji, think again. There is still time to withdraw the law. There is still time… many laws have been withdrawn by the government. Did the government suffer any setback? You withdrew three black laws related to agriculture. If you withdraw this law, you will become a hero,” Rajya Sabha’s Leader of Opposition and Congress chief Mallikarjun Kharge said, addressing Union Rural Development Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan. “Don’t have ‘Ram’ on your lips and a dagger in your hand! You keep saying ‘Ram Ram’ for the poor, but you have a dagger hidden behind your back.”
Chouhan defended the overhaul, asserting that the original Act had become “riddled with corruption” and siphoned funds away from productive asset creation. He countered the opposition’s fury over the removal of Mahatma Gandhi’s name from the title by stating that the government is fulfilling Gandhi’s vision of self-reliant villages through modern, tech-driven governance. Conversely, opposition leaders termed the move a “blow to the poor” and an “insult to the Father of the Nation” warning that shifting the financial burden to states would eventually make the scheme ineffective in poorer regions.
