UPSC Darpan

EconomyGS36 October 2026

Centre Notifies 375 Permissible Works Under VB-G RAM G, Up from 266

Open in the app — quiz, notes, Mistake Vault हिंदी में पढ़ें

The news

New Delhi. Per a PIB release of 6 October 2026, the Ministry of Rural Development has notified a Schedule of 375 permissible works under the Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) [VB–G RAM G] Act, 2025, 41% more than the earlier 266. Permissible works are the only projects on which guaranteed work can be offered. They fall into four groups: water security (128, such as check dams, drip irrigation and ice-stupas); core rural infrastructure (111, such as solar street lights and libraries); livelihood infrastructure (98, such as cold storage and SHG work-sheds), now 26% of the list against 1.1% before; and a new disaster-preparedness group (38, such as flood shelters). Across groups, 181 works serve agriculture, 107 Antyodaya households, and 36 each women and youth. Works are chosen in Gram Sabha-approved Viksit Gram Panchayat Plans and tracked on the Viksit Bharat National Rural Infrastructure Stack.

The chain in one line: MGNREGA (2005) guarantees 100 days but mostly creates earthworks and water assets → a 2025 law replaces it with 125 days and a 60:40 cost share → the 2026 Schedule widens the list to 375 works, tilted towards livelihood and disaster assets → the test is whether villages choose these works and whether money follows

Static syllabus linkage

  1. The 2025 law changed the terms of the job guarantee, not just its name. Per PRS’s summary of the Bill introduced on 16 December 2025, it replaces MGNREGA, 2005 and raises the guarantee to 125 days of wage work per rural household a year. Costs are shared 60:40 between the Centre and States (90:10 for north-eastern and Himalayan States) within a Centre-fixed allocation. Works pause for up to 60 days in peak farm seasons.
  2. Article 41 is the constitutional root of a right to work. Article 41, a Directive Principle, asks the State, within its economic capacity, to secure the right to work, to education and to public assistance in unemployment, old age, sickness and disablement. A statute turns this unenforceable aim into a legal entitlement.

Why UPSC loves this

  1. Rural employment links GS2 and GS3. GS2 covers “welfare schemes for vulnerable sections of the population” and GS3 “inclusive growth and issues arising from it”. The debate has moved from relief to the durability of assets.

Prelims nuggets

  • Article 41, a Directive Principle, directs the State to make effective provision for securing the right to work within the limits of its economic capacity.
  • The VB–G RAM G Act, 2025 replaced the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005.
  • Per PRS, VB–G RAM G costs are shared 60:40 by Centre and States (90:10 for north-eastern and Himalayan States).
  • Under the VB–G RAM G Act, works are planned through Viksit Gram Panchayat Plans approved by the Gram Sabha.

Analysis

  1. Lens — Short-term relief and long-term reform: the list now aims to build an economy, not only to relieve distress. A job guarantee first pays wages in distress; its lasting value is what the work leaves behind. Moving livelihood works from 1.1% to 26% means a cold store or market yard can earn for years, unlike a pond that silts up. But such projects need skills, materials and upkeep and may crowd out unskilled labour.
  2. A longer list helps only if the Gram Sabha really decides. More works mean more choice, which the plan places with the Gram Sabha. In practice, block staff often write the plans and technical works follow whoever has engineers.
  3. Without new money, the new categories may stay on paper. The release is silent on funding. With States paying 40% and anything above the normative allocation falling on them, poorer States with heavy demand may fund only the cheapest earthworks. The equity test is whether the most distressed districts get the budget to use the full list.

Possible Mains question

To what extent can widening the list of permissible works turn India’s rural employment guarantee from a safety net into an engine of asset creation? (15 marks, 250 words)

Model approach

  1. Directive — To what extent. Give a qualified judgement on how far the claim holds.
  2. Introduction — 375 works replace 266 under the 2025 Act. Cite the PIB release: four groups, with livelihood works up from 1.1% to 26%.
  3. The Schedule tilts towards productive, climate-resilient assets. Use the 128 water and 38 disaster works. Diagram: wage → asset → farm or SHG income → less distress migration.
  4. Funding and local capacity set the limit. Value addition: the 60:40 share and Centre-fixed normative allocation (per PRS), material costs crowding out labour, and plans written by block staff.
  5. Conclusion — a menu of works is not an outcome. Fund States by need, tie every asset to a maintainer, and keep wages on demand as Article 41 intends.

Administrator's brainstorm

As a District Collector, how would you stop the new livelihood works from crowding out wage seekers?

I would set a minimum share of unskilled-labour spending in each panchayat plan and check it monthly. Livelihood works such as cold stores would be approved only where an SHG or producer group commits to running them. I would hold special Gram Sabhas so works reflect local demand, and publish works and payments for social audit.