Regularisation Can't Be Denied To Casual Workers If Other Similarly Situated Daily Wagers Were Regularized :

Supreme Court Yash Mittal 16 Feb 2026 2:43 PM (5 mins read ) Listen to this Article Applying the principle of parity, the Supreme Court has regularized the services of four sweepers, noting that similarly situated employees cannot be treated differently once regularisation has been granted to others who are similarly situated. A Bench comprising Justices J.K. Maheshwari and Atul S. Chandurkar set aside the Madhya Pradesh High Court's order, holding that it had erred in declining to interfere with the Central Administrative Tribunal's refusal to regularise the appellants' services, despite the appellants having performed work of a perennial nature for more than a decade Also Read - Punjab Regional Town Planning Act | Illegal 'Change Of Land Use' Permission Can't Be Post Facto Legalised : Supreme Court Briefly put, the appellants were engaged between 1993 and 1998 as sweepers and a cook in the Office of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Gwalior. Their engagement followed Employment Exchange sponsorship and interviews, and they continued working for several years on a daily-wage basis. In 2011–2012, the department began outsourcing the same work, following which the appellants' requests for regularisation were rejected. Both the CAT (2015) and the High Court (2019) denied relief, relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Umadevi (2006), on the ground that the appellants had not completed 10 years of continuous service as on 10 April 2006. Also Read - Condonation Of Delay Can't Be Claimed As Matter Of Right; Entirely Court's Discretion : Supreme Court Allowing the appeal, the judgment authored by Justice Atul S. Chandurkar held that the appellants stood on the same footing as other employees whose services had already been regularised by the Supreme Court in Ravi Verma & Ors. v. Union of India (2018), and that the respondent department acted arbitrarily and discriminatorily in denying the appellants the same benefit. “we are of the view that the services of the appellants are liable to be regularized as they are similarly situated as other daily-wage workers in the Income Tax Department, whose services have been regularized pursuant to various orders passed by this Court.”, the court held. Also Read - Why Rules Under Shariat Application Act Not Framed? Supreme Court Seeks Responses Of Union, UP Govt “we find that the present appellants also being similarly situated, they cannot be discriminated from the appellants in the aforesaid two appeals.”, the court added. The Court rejected the department's reliance on Umadevi to justify its decision not to regularise the Appellants. Referring to the recent decision in Jaggo v. Union of India, where the Court clarified that Umadevi was never intended to permanently shut the door on long-serving workers appointed through irregular, but not illegal, processes. Also Read - Know The Law | Principles On Secondary Evidence Production : Supreme Court Explains The Court reiterated that appointments made through Employment Exchange sponsorship, followed by interviews, could not be termed “backdoor” or illegal. Procedural shortcomings at the time of engagement, the Court held, cannot be used to deny substantive rights that have accrued through long, continuous service, as held in Jaggo. “…the Tribunal was not justified in denying relief to the appellants by relying upon the decision in Umadevi (3) and Ors. (supra). The High Court also erred in affirming the decision of the Tribunal. The appellants are entitled to similar reliefs as granted by this Court in Ravi Verma and Ors. (supra) as well as in Raman Kumar and Ors. (supra).”, the court held. “The services of the appellants be regularized from 01.07.2006 on the same terms as made applicable in Ravi Verma and Ors. (supra) as well as in Raman Kumar and Ors. (supra). The benefits be released in favour of the appellants within a period of three months from today.”, the court ordered. Accordingly, the appeal was allowed. Cause Title: PAWAN KUMAR & ORS. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 159 Click here to download judgment Appearance: For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Prashant Shukla, Adv. Ms. Anushree Shukla, Adv. Mr. Kartik Kumar, Adv. M/S. Prashant Shukla Law Chambers, AOR For Respondent(s) : Mrs. Archana Pathak Dave, A.S.G. (Not Present) Mr. K Parameshwar, Sr. Adv. (Not Present) Mr. Vaibhav Dwivedi, Adv. Mrs. Sunita Sharma, Adv. Ms. Vimla Sinha, Adv. Mr. Nidhi Khanna Mr. Ishan Sharma, Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, AOR For interveners Mr. Prashant Shukla, Adv. Mrs. Anushree Shukla, Adv. Mr. Kartik Kumar, Adv. M/S. Prashant Shukla Law Chambers, AOR https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/regularisation-cant-be-denied-to-casual-workers-if-other-similarly-situated-daily-wagers-were-regularised-supreme-court-523280 NON-REPORTABLE 2026 INSC 156 PAWAN KUMAR & ORS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. J U D G M E N T ATUL S. CHANDURKAR, J. 1. 2. Leave granted. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2026 (@ SLP (C) NO.29214 OF 2019) APPELLANT(S) VERSUS RESPONDENT(S) The appellants having registered themselves with the Employment Exchange claim to have worked as casual workers with the Office of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Gwalior for a considerable period of time. Under the expectation that they would be conferred temporary status and their services would be thereafter regularized, the appellants initially made representations to the Income Tax Department. On their request not being accepted, the appellants approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench1 by preferring Original 1For short, the Tribunal Civil Appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.29214 of 2019 Page 1 of 11 Application No.719 of 2012 with a prayer to consider their cases for regularization in service. The Tribunal by its judgment dated 13.05.2015 held that the services of the appellants were not liable to be regularized on the ground that they did not fulfil the basic criteria of regular service for a period of ten years as on 10.04.2006 in terms of the judgment in Secretary, State of Karnataka and Ors. Vs. Umadevi (3) and Ors.2. Being aggrieved, the appellants approached the High Court of Madhya Pradesh challenging the aforesaid decision. By the judgment dated 26.08.2019, the High Court declined to interfere with the aforesaid adjudication and dismissed the writ petition. Not being satisfied by the said judgment, the appellants have come up in appeal. 3. Facts material for considering the case as set-up by the appellants are that appellants No.1 to 3 came to be engaged as casual workers on the post of Sweeper from 01.10.1997, 01.05.1998 and 01.10.1997 respectively. Appellant No.4 was casually engaged on the post of Cook from 27.12.1993. It is their case that their names were sponsored through the Employment Exchange and after being duly interviewed, they were engaged as daily workers. According to them, in terms of Circulars dated 22006 INSC 216 Page 2 of 11 Civil Appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.29214 of 2019 Civil Appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.29214 of 2019 Page 3 of 11 04.07.2011 and 10.01.2012, the Income Tax Department proceeded to outsource the work that was being done by the appellants. They made various representations seeking regularization of their services considering the period of service rendered by them as casual workers. It is further the case of the appellants that services of similarly placed casual workers were directed to be regularized pursuant to the decision of this Court in Ravi Verma and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors.3 vide judgment dated 13.03.2018. In the light of the fact that services of similarly situated casual workers had been regularized by the Office of the Chief Commissioner, Income Tax, the appellants sought similar treatment. Relying upon the decision in Jaggo Vs. Union of India and Ors.4, it is urged that the engagement of the appellants could only be termed as “irregular” and not “illegal”. The fact that the work undertaken by the appellants was sought to be outsourced indicated that the said work was of a perennial nature and that only with a view to deprive the appellants of the benefit of regularization, the outsourcing policy was being implemented. On these counts, the appellants prayed for appropriate relief. 3 Civil Appeal Nos.2795-2796 of 2018 4 2024 INSC 1034 4. According to the Income Tax Department, the services of the appellants are not liable to be regularized since their eligibility in terms of the decision of the Constitution Bench in Umadevi (3) and Ors. (supra) of having rendered continuous service for ten years or more as on 10.04.2006 was not satisfied by them. In absence of any sanctioned post available at Gwalior, their services were not liable to be regularized. The engagement of the appellants was merely of a casual nature and their services were subsequently being engaged through a contractor on contractual basis. It is, thus, the case of the Income Tax Department that the Tribunal and thereafter, the High Court having rightly denied relief to the appellants, there was no reason to interfere with that adjudication. 5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and we have also perused the documents on record. Having considered the matter in detail, we are of the view that the services of the appellants are liable to be regularized as they are similarly situated as other daily-wage workers in the Income Tax Department, whose services have been regularized pursuant to various orders passed by this Court. 6. The appellants in the Convenience Compilation filed by them pursuant to the order dated 02.09.2025 passed in the present Page 4 of 11 Civil Appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.29214 of 2019 proceedings have sought to urge that the appellants are similarly situated as the appellants in the case of Ravi Verma and Ors. (supra) decided on 13.03.2018. Therein, the appellants had been appointed as casual employees with the Income Tax Department in the year 1993-94 after which they were working continuously. Their prayer for regularization having been refused by the Tribunal, the said appellants approached the High Court which, however, dismissed their writ petition. This Court in the aforesaid decision was pleased to note that regularization of similarly situated employees at other places had been undertaken since the year 2006 and that discriminatory treatment had been meted out to the said appellants. It, accordingly, directed regularization of their services from 01.07.2006 alongwith the consequential benefits. 7. It would be material to note that in the aforesaid appeal, the appellants were Mr. Ravi Verma, Smt. Munni Devi, Mr. Dharam Dev Prasad, Mr. Nagendra Thakur & Mr. Sheshnath Choudhary. The names of the aforesaid appellants alongwith the names of the present appellants can be found in the list of daily-wage workers working in the Office of Income Tax, Gwalior as on 31.10.2005. The said list of daily-wage workers reads as under: Page 5 of 11 Civil Appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.29214 of 2019 Civil Appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.29214 of 2019 Page 6 of 11 LIST OF DAILY WAGES WORKER WORKING CIT CHARGE GWALIOR AS ON 31.10.2005 Sr. No. Name of the worker Catgy Post on which working Date of appointment D.O.B. Edu. Qualification Remark 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 S.C. Shrivastava Gen Stgr 19.08. 83 14.03.61 Graduate 2 Ramswaroop OBC Cook (Guest House) 27.12.93 10.07.62 5th 3 Smt. Munni Devi ST Waterman cum Farras 14.01.94 31.03.70 Illiterate 4 Dharam Dev OBC Photocopy Machine operator 12. 10.94 01 .08.72 5th 5 Ravi Verma OBC copier/Ph otocopy Machine operator 24.10.94 20.08.73 Inter 6 Nagendra Thakur OBC Waterman cum Farras 01.01. 94 08.03. 73 5th 7 Shesnath Choudhary OBC Waterman-cum Farras 24. 1 l .94 01.12.76 High School 8 Pradmod Sharma Gen Driver 06.04.95 15.04.68 8th 9 Manoj Dagore SC Sweeper 01.10.97 08.02.73 5th 10 Pawan SC Sweeper 01.10.97 04.12.74 5th 11 Ramkishan Sen OBC Waterman-turn Farras 01.04.98 06.02.73 8th 12 Manoj SC Sweeper 01.05.98 02.02.76 Illiterate 13 Gaya Prasad SC Waterman 01.06.98 01.01.73 Inter -cum Farras 14 Ashok kr ten OBC Waterman cum Farras 01.02.99 15.04.75 8th 15 Mahendra Singh Kushwah OBC Gardner 25.02.25 17.04.80 Inter chowkidar 17 Mahipal Singh 25.02.05 30.03.71 16 Mohan Rana OBC Gardner 25.02.25 26.02.80 8th SC 18 Bharat Narwaria ----- OBC Cook-cum Farras 25.02.05 05.01.78 8th These names continued to find place in the subsequent lists dated 11.11.2005 and 31.01.2008. It is, thus, clear that in view of the decision of this Court in Ravi Verma and Ors. (supra), the services of five daily-wage workers from the aforesaid list came to be regularized. Undisputedly, the names of the present appellants also find place in the said list dated 31.10.2005, 11.11.2005 and 31.01.2008. The present appellants are, therefore, similarly situated as the appellants in Ravi Verma and Ors. (supra). 8. It is also material to note that subsequently in the case of Raman Kumar and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors.5, this Court referred to the adjudication in the Ravi Verma and Ors. (supra) and on 03.07.2023 directed regularization of services of the appellants 5Civil Appeal No.4146 of 2023 Page 7 of 11 Civil Appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.29214 of 2019 therein. This was for the reason that the Income Tax Department could not have discriminated in the matter of regularizing the services of similarly situated employees. On the same analogy, we find that the present appellants also being similarly situated, they cannot be discriminated from the appellants in the aforesaid two appeals. 9. Besides the aforesaid aspects, we find that the law laid down by this Court in Jaggo (supra) supports the case of the appellants in their prayer for regularization. In paragraphs 13, 20, 21 and 26, it has been held as under: “13. The claim by the respondents that these were not regular posts lacks merit, as the nature of the work performed by the appellants was perennial and fundamental to the functioning of the offices. The recurring nature of these duties necessitates their classification as regular posts, irrespective of how their initial engagements were labelled. It is also noteworthy that subsequent outsourcing of these same tasks to private agencies after the appellants’ termination demonstrates the inherent need for these services. This act of outsourcing, which effectively replaced one set of workers with another, further underscores that the work in question was neither temporary nor occasional. 20. It is well established that the decision in Uma Devi (supra) does not intend to penalize employees who have rendered long years of service fulfilling ongoing and necessary functions of the State or its instrumentalities. The said judgment sought to prevent backdoor entries and illegal appointments that circumvent constitutional requirements. However, where appointments were not illegal but possibly “irregular,” and where employees had served continuously against the backdrop of sanctioned functions for a considerable period, the need for a fair and humane resolution becomes paramount. Prolonged, continuous, and unblemished service performing tasks inherently required on a regular basis can, over the time, transform what was initially ad-hoc or temporary into a scenario demanding fair regularization. In a recent judgement of this Page 8 of 11 Civil Appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.29214 of 2019 Court in Vinod Kumar and Ors. Etc. Vs. Union of India & Ors. 5, it was held that held that procedural formalities cannot be used to deny regularization of service to an employee whose appointment was termed "temporary" but has performed the same duties as performed by the regular employee over a considerable period in the capacity of the regular employee. The relevant paras of this judgement have been reproduced below: “6. The application of the judgment in Uma Devi (supra) by the High Court does not fit squarely with the facts at hand, given the specific circumstances under which the appellants were employed and have continued their service. The reliance on procedural formalities at the outset cannot be used to perpetually deny substantive rights that have accrued over a considerable period through continuous service. Their promotion was based on a specific notification for vacancies and a subsequent circular, followed by a selection process involving written tests and interviews, which distinguishes their case from the appointments through back door entry as discussed in the case of Uma Devi (supra). 7. The judgement in the case Uma Devi (supra) also distinguished between “irregular” and “illegal” appointments underscoring the importance of considering certain appointments even if were not made strictly in accordance with the prescribed Rules and Procedure, cannot be said to have been made illegally if they had followed the procedures of regular appointments such as conduct of written examinations or interviews as in the present case…” 21. The High Court placed undue emphasis on the initial label of the appellants’ engagements and the outsourcing decision taken after their dismissal. Courts must look beyond the surface labels and consider the realities of employment: continuous, long-term service, indispensable duties, and absence of any mala fide or illegalities in their appointments. In that light, refusing regularization simply because their original terms did not explicitly state so, or because an outsourcing policy was belatedly introduced, would be contrary to principles of fairness and equity. 26. While the judgment in Uma Devi (supra) sought to curtail the practice of backdoor entries and ensure appointments adhered to constitutional principles, it is regrettable that its principles are often misinterpreted or misapplied to deny legitimate claims of long serving employees. This judgment aimed to distinguish between “illegal” and “irregular” appointments. It categorically held that employees in irregular appointments, who were engaged in duly sanctioned posts and had served continuously for more than ten Page 9 of 11 Civil Appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.29214 of 2019 years, should be considered for regularization as a one-time measure. However, the laudable intent of the judgment is being subverted when institutions rely on its dicta to indiscriminately reject the claims of employees, even in cases where their appointments are not illegal, but merely lack adherence to procedural formalities. Government departments often cite the judgment in Uma Devi (supra) to argue that no vested right to regularization exists for temporary employees, overlooking the judgment's explicit acknowledgment of cases where regularization is appropriate. This selective application distorts the judgment's spirit and purpose, effectively weaponizing it against employees who have rendered indispensable services over decades.” 10. The aforesaid observations are sufficient to hold that the Tribunal was not justified in denying relief to the appellants by relying upon the decision in Umadevi (3) and Ors. (supra). The High Court also erred in affirming the decision of the Tribunal. The appellants are entitled to similar reliefs as granted by this Court in Ravi Verma and Ors. (supra) as well as in Raman Kumar and Ors. (supra). 11. For all the aforesaid reasons, the judgment of the High Court dated 26.08.2019 in M.P. No.3460/2018 is set aside. The services of the appellants be regularized from 01.07.2006 on the same terms as made applicable in Ravi Verma and Ors. (supra) as well as in Raman Kumar and Ors. (supra). The benefits be released in favour of the appellants within a period of three months from today. Page 10 of 11 Civil Appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.29214 of 2019 12. The applicants in Interim Application No.42233/2020, who were impleaded as party respondents in view of the order dated 15.03.2021 are also entitled to the aforesaid reliefs. 13. The Civil Appeal stands allowed in aforesaid terms with no order as to costs. 14. Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of. ..………………………..J. [ J.K. MAHESHWARI ] .…..………………………..J. [ATUL S. CHANDURKAR] NEW DELHI, FEBRUARY 13, 2026. Page 11 of 11 Civil Appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.29214 of 2019

Vanished lives

Hundreds of people are going missing in the State annually, leaving their dear ones depressed and puzzled, and the investigators searching for leads. While some may return, others stay unseen, never to return. Mithosh Joseph talks to friends and family members of a few such persons and investigators to get into the core of the complex issue

1 of 3

A newly printed photograph of Thomas John, a 42-year-old farmer, hangs on the wall of Pazhamchirayil House, a small concrete residence at Kavumkudi, near Alakode, in Kannur district.

Simi, his wife, and their three children are yet to come to terms with the sudden loss that has befallen them. She’s yet to overcome the grief caused by the loss of her husband. The thoughts of her life partner, who went missing in November last year, only to be found dead near a river, still haunt her.

“We approached the local police station within a few hours of confirming his disappearance. As he was upset over the repayment of debt in the preceding weeks, we were worried when he just vanished,” recalls Simi, who nurses a grievance that the police refused to consider her complaint seriously. “Had the police responded quickly, he would have been among us now,” she says.

Simi complains that the police delayed the search on the reported grounds that they couldn’t track his mobile phone location. “They said the search could be launched only after waiting for at least 24 hours. Because of their indifference, we searched with the support of residents. Sadly, we found him, dead, the same day,” she wails.

The latest figures with the police confirm that the State is seeing a surge in the number of cases related to missing persons over the past five years. Official data show that cases of 8,742 missing persons were registered in 2020. It increased to 9,713 in 2021 and to 11,259 in 2022. Next year, it was 11,760 and 11,897 in 2024.

“Despite the high number of missing persons, Kerala maintains a relatively high success rate in tracing them. Timely reporting of the cases and the proactive approach of the police are making the difference,” claims a senior police officer with the Anti-Human Trafficking Unit (AHTU) in Kerala.

The uneven trends in the number of missing cases become clear in the district-level data compiled by the State Crime Records Bureau. In the rural areas of Thiruvananthapuram district, the number of missing cases showed an increasing trend in the past few years. The total number of cases which was 630 in 2022 almost doubled and reached 1,177 in 2023. But there was a slight fall in 2024.

The rural areas of Ernakulam district also witnessed an increasing trend from 508 in 2020 to 892 in 2023. Later, the numbers dropped slightly to 648 in 2024. In Idukki, the police registered over 1,000 missing cases in 2023. In northern Kerala, districts such as Kannur (rural) and Kasaragod witnessed comparatively lower figures, say police sources.

Missing children

The child disappearance cases also remain a concern for the law enforcement agencies.

As per the Crime Records Bureau data, over 10,000 child missing cases have been reported in Kerala over the past five years, though most children were traced. The police and the families are clueless about over 500 missing children about whom nothing is known after their disappearance. Family disputes, relationship and financial issues, and the influence of social media are the contributing factors for their disappearance, say police officers.

Jurisdictional constraints

“Delayed reporting of the incidents, lack of an integrated real-time database, and jurisdictional constraints often affect investigation in the early stages,” says S. Muraleedharan, a retired police officer who had worked with the AHTU squad.

With the number of missing person cases going up, there is a need for early registration of complaints, improved data-sharing mechanisms, coordination between government and law enforcement agencies, and greater public awareness, he points out.

Police officers with regional crime squads concede that delayed reporting is one of the most important obstacles in missing person investigations. In many cases, families are advised to wait for some time before lodging a complaint, especially when an adult goes missing. This practice, investigators feel, could delay the investigation.

“Investigation during the first few hours of the disappearance of a person is often critical in collecting digital evidence, tracing their movements, and identifying potential witnesses,” notes S. Ranjith, a police officer with the High Tech crime inquiry cell. He points out that delays can result in the loss of mobile phone data, surveillance footage, and other time-sensitive information, crucial in the investigation.

A substantial number of missing person cases in Kerala involve adolescents and young adults. Data from districts such as Kozhikode, Ernakulam, and Thiruvananthapuram show that individuals aged between 16 and 25 years account for a major share of the reported disappearance cases.

“Many of these cases eventually turn out to be instances of elopement, voluntary departure or temporary estrangement from families,” says a senior woman police inspector involved in the probe of a few such cases in Kozhikode. She observes that cyber interactions, exposure to unknown networks, and impetuous decision-making often end up in family conflicts, provoking youngsters to leave home.

“Girls account for a high number of reported missing cases. Many girls leave their homes due to failed personal relationships or family disputes. They are vulnerable to sexual exploitation, trafficking or other forms of abuse,” says a former member of the Child Welfare Committee. She says instances of missing children from various shelter homes under government control need to be seriously looked into.

A. Nireesh, former coordinator of a helpline for children, says that the factors that trigger the disappearance of people, especially children, need to be looked into. There shall be programmes for long-term protection, counselling, and rehabilitation of such persons, he suggests.

Rights activists also observe that there could be involvement of criminal elements at least in a few cases of disappearance of persons. The missing case of K. Hemachandran, a Wayanad native temporarily residing in Kozhikode city, is one such case.

Hemachandran, who ran a private chit fund in the city, went missing in August 2023. It was after 16 months that the police succeeded in solving the mystery that shrouded the disappearance of the businessman. The police found out that he had been murdered and the body buried.

“Hemachandran was abducted and murdered following some financial disputes. His body was recovered from a forest area at Cherambadi in Tamil Nadu, where it was buried,” says a senior police officer who was part of the investigation team.

Hemachandran’s family members say a leaked telephone conversation of one of his abductors helped crack the case. They, however, maintain that a focussed probe would have helped in solving the case.

In contrast, there are many high-profile cases that still remain mysterious. There is no clue yet about the disappearance of a prominent realtor Mohammed Attoor, alias Mami, from Kozhikode in 2023. The two-year-long probe, initially by the local police and later the Crime Branch, could not solve the mystery. Despite extensive interrogation covering nearly 200 individuals linked to Mami, and other investigations, a breakthrough has remained elusive.

P. Rajeevan, a friend of Mami, fears that he might have been abducted. He accuses the police of failing to pursue the case with alacrity.

Incidents of substance abuse have also been found contributing to the increasing number of missing cases. It was after a five-year-long probe into the disappearance of 35-year-old Vijil from Elathur that the police were able to establish it as a case of death due to a drug overdose. His friends allegedly buried him to cover up the incident rather than report it to the police.

Police officers feel that narcotics-induced deaths are an under-recognised factor in missing person cases. They point out that it often involves concealment driven by fear and misinformation.

“When missing persons move from one location to another, their tracking becomes difficult for want of coordination between the agencies based at different locations. The absence of a unified real-time missing persons tracking system often results in the generation of fragmented information,” says an IT expert with the police cyber cell. He also points out that shortage of hands, heavy workload, and the growing number of cybercrime limit the operational capacity of the police force.

Shift in approach called for

Meanwhile, professional counsellors, who often deal with the rehabilitation of missing persons, believe that there should be a shift in the approach to handling the persons. According to them, the police often look into procedural aspects of the case first when they come across a complaint, rather than understanding the complainant’s concerns and the need for prompt intervention. A fast-track investigation should be ensured with all supporting agencies to trace the missing person. A proactive intervention is often needed to help the victims come back to society, they feel.

Psychologists A. Dhanya and P.V. Jincy say there should be interventions to remove the procedural and technical hurdles involved in tracking the missing persons and rehabilitating them.

Investigation during the first few hours of the disappearance of a person is often critical in collecting digital evidence, tracing their movements, and identifying potential witnesses

S. Ranjith,

High Tech police crime inquiry cell

The Hindu ePaper | Daily News and Current Affairs https://share.google/NoJzhGUMJF8hKZxz7

‘Higher education is key to eliminating inequality and powering economy’

Higher education is key to eliminating inequality and powering economy’ At the inaugural session of The Hindu Tech Summit 2026, jointly organised by The Hindu Group, VIT, and Sify Technologies, VIT Founder and Chancellor G. Viswanathan points out that as India’s economy grew, inequality widened. Only education can help to curb this situation, he says 1 of 2 Tech focus: G. Viswanathan, Founder and Chancellor, Vellore Institute of Technology; N. Ram, Director, The Hindu Group; Suresh Nambath, Editor, The Hindu; L.V. Navaneeth, CEO, The Hindu Group; and Raju Vegesna, chairman and managing director, Sify Technologies, at the inauguration of The Hindu Tech Summit 2026 in Chennai on Thursday. B. Velankanni Raj The Hindu Bureau CHENNAI Providing quality education and increasing college and university enrolment hold the key to improving the economy of the country and curtailing inequality, G. Viswanathan, Founder and Chancellor, Vellore Institute of Technology (VIT), said in Chennai on Thursday. At the inaugural session of The Hindu Tech Summit 2026, organised by The Hindu Group, Vellore Institute of Technology, and Sify Technologies, he said that in the past 20 years or so, India had grown to become the fourth largest economy, overtaking Japan in 2025. Inequality had grown too, with only about 70 lakh people declaring themselves as belonging to the higher income group. ‘Policy needed’ “They say India is the most unequal country in the world, next only to Russia. Unless we provide education, this cannot be curtailed. It requires government policy,” Dr. Viswanathan said. For this, education should reach all children belonging to poor families and the middle class. He said Japan’s per capita income was 12 times that of India. While India’s per capita income stood at $2,900, Japan’s was $36,000. While some government officials exuded confidence that India could overtake Germany in a few years, it should be borne in mind that Germany’s per capita income was $58,000, 20 times that of India. “In the year 2000, there were only nine billionaires in the country. Now, we have grown beyond 300,” he said. The National Education Policy’s thrust on improving the gross enrolment ratio from the present 28% to 50% in the next 15 years would mean the number of students in colleges and universities must be doubled. This, Dr. Viswanathan said, meant someone had to pay for them. In the present scenario, the burden of higher education was mostly on the learner; the government spent barely 3% to 4% of the GDP, though the Kothari Commission in the 1960s had recommended an expenditure of at least 6% of the GDP. Owing to the lack of spending, only four crore children out of 14 crore eligible for higher education were in colleges and universities. Similarly, if India were to compete with developed countries, the spending on research and development should be increased manifold from the present 0.7%. Tracing the history of VIT, Dr. Viswanathan said that what started in 1984 with 180 students had grown to accommodate 1 lakh students from all Indian States and 75 other countries. Role of AI “AI is not a disruptor; AI is an evolution,” said Raju Vegesna, chairman and managing director, Sify Technologies, in his keynote address. “Just as the Internet enabled us to reach places and share knowledge, we will get all those benefits from AI,” he added. While India could be lagging behind in higher education, Mr. Vegesna exuded confidence that the country would have its unique way to address the transformations and the market. Giving an example, he said AI was like giving bicycle-riders a motorcycle; it ensured that they reached more places faster, though the tech would have to be adopted with caution. India’s chances in the game were on how to adopt AI technology for the benefit of enterprises. Among those present at the inaugural session were Santhosh T.G., Chief Digital Officer, Switch Mobility; N. Ram, Director, The Hindu Group; Suresh Nambath, Editor, The Hindu; L.V. Navaneeth, Chief Executive Officer, The Hindu Group; and Suresh Balakrishna, Chief Revenue Officer, https://epaper.thehindu.com/ccidist-ws/th/th_international/issues/170772/OPS/GJGFJ3CT7.1.png?cropFromPage=true The Hindu Group.

Vande Mataram, its six stanzas and a settled question

The January 28, 2026 order of the Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), directing that all six stanzas of Vande Mataram be played at official functions, with everyone present required to stand at attention, is not an act of patriotism. It is constitutional vandalism dressed up in national pride. To understand why, we need to go back to 1937, look at what the Constituent Assembly decided, and remember what the Supreme Court of India had said in the landmark case, Bijoe Emmanuel and Ors. vs State of Kerala and Ors. (1986).

1937 settlement is not weakness, but wisdom

In October 1937, the Congress Working Committee had met in Calcutta. What happened there was not appeasement, as some now claim. Dr. Rajendra Prasad moved the resolution while Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel seconded it. Mahatma Gandhi was there as a special invitee. The resolution was unanimous. They recognised “the validity of objections raised by Muslim friends to certain parts of the song” and concluded that “the first two stanzas alone, accepted as the national song at national gatherings, are in no sense objectionable”.

This was not cowardice. It was common sense. The later stanzas of Bankim Chandra Chatterjee’s poem (Vande Mataram) call out, by name, the Hindu goddesses Durga, Lakshmi and Saraswati. One verse literally describes the motherland as “Tvam hi Durga dasa-praharana-dharini (You are Durga, wielder of the 10 weapons”).

Think about what it means to force a Muslim civil servant, a Christian schoolteacher, a Sikh soldier, a Buddhist monk, or an atheist scientist to stand at attention while these verses are sung. That is not fostering unity. That is imposing a religious test in a secular republic.

Even Rabindranath Tagore supported keeping it to two stanzas. The whole freedom movement — from the moderate to the radical, from the secular to the devout — agreed that the first two stanzas captured the song’s spirit without hurting anyone’s faith. This was not a fringe decision. It was the collective wisdom of the people who fought for India’s freedom.

On January 24, 1950, President Rajendra Prasad announced that Jana Gana Mana would be the National Anthem, and that Vande Mataram would “be honoured equally” with it. But here is what matters: the Constituent Assembly adopted only the two-stanza version as the National Song. Those four other stanzas were not accidentally forgotten. They were deliberately left out because our founders understood something crucial: a secular republic cannot make verses devoted to specific gods and goddesses into official symbols.

In the Constitution, Article 51A(a) tells every citizen “to abide by ...the National Flag, and the National Anthem”. If one notices carefully, the National Song is not mentioned. When Parliament added fundamental duties through the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1976, it specifically listed the Flag and the Anthem. It did not include the Song. This was not an oversight. This was a choice. The Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971, protects the National Anthem, the Flag, the Constitution. It does not cover Vande Mataram. There is no legal penalty for not singing it, not standing for it, or not showing it any particular respect. This is not accidental. The constitutional framework deliberately treats the anthem (which is secular and inclusive) differently from the song (which has religious elements that need to be carefully limited).

The case about the right not to sing

In July 1985, Bijoe, Binu Mol, and Bindu Emmanuel, three children in Kerala, were expelled from school. They were Jehovah’s Witnesses. Every morning during assembly, they stood respectfully while the National Anthem played. But they did not sing it, because their faith did not allow it. They did not cause trouble. They did not disrupt anyone. Then a State Minister got involved, and they were sent out. While the Kerala High Court said the expulsion was fine, the Supreme Court said absolutely not.

In his judgment, Justice O. Chinnappa Reddy said the expulsion violated their fundamental rights to free speech and freedom of religion. Then he wrote something that should be carved in stone: “Proper respect is shown to the National Anthem by standing up when it is sung. It will not be right to say that disrespect is shown by not joining in the singing.”

The Court went further. “It will not be right to say that disrespect is shown by not joining in the singing.” ‘Standing respectfully but staying silent does not break any law’. The children’s right to remain silent, which is itself part of free speech, was constitutionally protected. Justice Reddy quoted an American judge, Justice Robert H. Jackson, from a case, West Virginia State Board of Education vs Barnette (1943): “If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein.” That star has not stopped shining.

Now, consider what the MHA order does. It mandates the playing of the complete six-stanza version at civil investitures, presidential events, and flag ceremonies. Everyone must stand at attention. Schools must start the day with community singing of the National Song. And, yes. It includes the four stanzas that the Constituent Assembly deliberately excluded. The stanzas invoking Durga with her weapons, Lakshmi with her blessings and Saraswati with her knowledge. The logic is simple. If the Court said that you cannot force people to sing even the National Anthem (which has constitutional protection under Article 51A and legal protection under a specific Act), then you certainly cannot force them to sing the National Song (which has neither constitutional mention nor legal protection). What is forbidden for the greater must surely be forbidden for the lesser.

But this order does something worse. It is not just asking people to stand. It is making them participate, even passively, in singing explicitly religious verses. Consider the position of a Muslim bureaucrat compelled to stand at attention as “You are Durga, wielder of the ten weapons” echoes through the hall, or a Christian child in a school assembly where Hindu deities are invoked. That is not a formality. That is a wound to conscience.

That is exactly what Article 25 of the Constitution protects against. India’s founders were not naive. They were building something extraordinary: a constitutional order that could hold together a civilization of staggering diversity. They understood what we seem to have forgotten. Real patriotism does not require everyone to pray the same way.

The first two stanzas — “Sujalam, suphalam, malayaja sheetalam” — celebrate our motherland’s rivers, fruits, cool breezes, moonlit nights. They belong to every Indian, regardless of faith. The later stanzas are beautiful devotional poetry, but they are addressed to specific deities of one religious tradition. To mix them together and force everyone to participate in both is to break the republic’s founding promise.

What this is really about

Nobody is questioning whether Vande Mataram deserves respect. Of course it does. Its first two stanzas lit the fire of resistance against colonial rule. People sang them in streets and in jail cells, Hindus and Muslims together, as a battle cry for freedom.

The real question is simpler: Can the government force citizens to participate in religious observance by calling it patriotism? Any honest reading of the Constitution and the Supreme Court’s judgments gives you the answer. No. Bijoe Emmanuel is not some dusty old precedent. It is alive. It stands for something essential — in a constitutional democracy, the right to disagree, even silently and respectfully, is not treason. It is freedom itself.

The MHA order overturns the 1937 settlement. It ignores what the Constituent Assembly deliberately chose. It disregards Article 51A. It sidesteps the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act. It violates the principles in Bijoe Emmanuel. And it does all this through executive order, without any law being passed, without any constitutional amendment, without any court approval.

If there is any fixed star in our constitutional sky, it is this. The Republic belongs equally to all its citizens. To those who sing and to those who, for reasons of conscience, stand in respectful silence. To put out that star in patriotism’s name is to betray the very idea of India that its founders fought to build. The Constitution does not demand that we all worship the same way. It demands that we are all equal citizens. Those are not the same thing, and no amount of forced standing can make them so.

The order of the Home Ministry mandating the full version of Vande Mataram is constitutionally indefensible

അധികാരം കീഴാളരെ അദൃശ്യരാക്കുമോ?

പ്രൊഫസർ ആർ.രാംകുമാർ പ്രശസ്തമായ

ടാറ്റാ ഇൻസ്റ്റിറ്റ്യൂട്ട് ഓഫ് സോഷ്യൽ സയൻസിലെ

സാമ്പത്തിക ശാസ്ത്ര അധ്യാപകനും പ്രശസ്ത സാമ്പത്തിക ശാസ്ത്രവിദഗ്ദനുമാണ്.

അദ്ദേഹം എഴുതുന്നു:

-------------------------------------------

അധികാരം കീഴാളരെ അദൃശ്യരാക്കുമോ?

ഞാൻ എട്ട്-പത്ത് പ്രശസ്തരെ വായിച്ചിട്ടുണ്ട് എന്നു പറഞ്ഞ്, അവരുടെ പേരുകൾ അവിടെയും ഇവിടെയും വിതറി, അതിൽ നിന്ന് ഒരു ധാർമിക അധികാരം  നിർമ്മിച്ചെടുക്കുന്നത് അത്ര നല്ല സംവാദ ശീലമല്ല. 

പേരുകൾ അല്ല പ്രധാനം. അധികാരം, വർഗ്ഗം, ഭരണകൂടം, സാമൂഹ്യമാറ്റം എന്നിവയെ നമ്മൾ ശരിയായി വിശകലനം ചെയ്യുന്നുണ്ടോ എന്നതാണ് പ്രധാനം. കീഴാള ദൃശ്യതയെ അധികാരത്തിൽ നിന്ന് വേർപെടുത്തി വിശകലനം ചെയ്യുന്നത് ഒട്ടും ഒരു മാർക്സിസ്റ്റ് രീതിയല്ല.

ഴാക്ക് റാൻസിയേറുടെ ജനാധിപത്യത്തെ കുറിച്ചുള്ള എഴുത്തുകൾ അദൃശ്യരെ ദൃശ്യരാക്കാനും കേൾക്കാത്തവരുടെ ശബ്ദം കേൾപ്പിക്കാനും പ്രേരിപ്പിക്കുന്നവ തന്നെ. പക്ഷേ ഒരു ഭരണകൂട സംവിധാനത്തിന് എതിരായി നിൽക്കുമ്പോഴും ഭരണകൂടവുമായി ഇടപെട്ടു കൊണ്ടും മല്ലിട്ടു കൊണ്ടും ഒരു പുതിയ രാഷ്ട്രീയത്തിന്റെ നിർമ്മാണം നടത്താൻ സഹായിക്കുന്ന ഒരു ദർശനവും അത് പകർന്നു തരുന്നില്ല. ജനാധിപത്യം റാൻസിയേറിന് ആനുഷംഗികം മാത്രമാണ്; അതിനെ സ്ഥാപനവൽക്കരിക്കാൻ അദ്ദേഹം ഒരിക്കലും ശ്രമിച്ചിട്ടില്ല. ദൃഢതയുള്ള, ഈടു നിൽക്കുന്ന, ഒരു ഭരണകൂട സംവിധാനത്തെ അദ്ദേഹം ഒരു സാധ്യതയായി കാണുന്നതേയില്ല. അപ്പോൾ അസമത്വങ്ങൾ നിറഞ്ഞ, ഏകാധിപത്യ പ്രവണതകൾ നിറഞ്ഞ, ഒരു സംവിധാനത്തെ എതിർക്കാൻ റാൻസിയേർ ഉപയോഗപ്പെട്ടേക്കും. പക്ഷേ കീഴാളർ അവർക്കു കൂടി പ്രാതിനിധ്യമുള്ള ഒരു അധികാര ഘടന നിർമ്മിച്ചെടുക്കാൻ ശ്രമിക്കുമ്പോൾ, അവിടെ എതിരിന്റെ  സൗന്ദര്യശാസ്ത്രം മാത്രം നോക്കുന്ന വാദങ്ങൾ ഉപയോഗകരമല്ല. കീഴാളരുടെ ദൃശ്യത എന്നത് പ്രതീകാത്മകം മാത്രമല്ലാതെ നിലകൊള്ളണമെങ്കിൽ അധികാര സ്ഥാപനങ്ങൾ വേണം, പുനർവിതരണം വേണം, ഭരണകൂടത്തിന്റെ നിയന്ത്രണ ഉപകരണങ്ങൾ വേണം, സർക്കാരിന്റെ സാമ്പത്തിക പരിസരം വേണം. അല്ലാത്തപക്ഷം മാർക്സിസവും വെറുമൊരു സൗന്ദര്യശാസ്ത്രം മാത്രമായി മാറും; സാമൂഹിക പരിവർത്തനം അതിന്റെ ലക്ഷ്യമല്ലാതായി മാറും.

കേരളത്തിന്റെ ഉദാഹരണം തന്നെ ഇവിടെ പറയണം. ഉപരി-മധ്യവർഗ്ഗത്തെ പ്രീതിപ്പെടുത്തിയല്ല കേരളം അതിന്റെ ഇന്നത്തെ നേട്ടങ്ങൾ നേടിയത്. മറിച്ച്, അധികാരം പിടിച്ചെടുത്ത്, ഭൂപരിഷ്കരണം, വിദ്യാഭ്യാസം, ആരോഗ്യം, ഭക്ഷ്യ സുരക്ഷ, ഭവന സുരക്ഷ എന്നിവയെല്ലാം ഭരണകൂടത്തിലൂടെ നടപ്പിലാക്കിയത് കൊണ്ടാണ് ഇന്നത്തെ കേരളം കേരളമായി മാറിയത്. എപ്പോഴൊക്കെ കീഴാളരുടെ പാർട്ടിക്ക് അധികാരം നഷ്ടപ്പെട്ടുവോ അപ്പോഴൊക്കെ ഇത്തരം പുനർവിതരണ സംവിധാനങ്ങളൊക്കെ അട്ടിമറിക്കപ്പെടുകയും ചെയ്തിട്ടുണ്ട്.

1960-കൾക്ക് ശേഷം യൂറോപ്പിലെ മാർക്സിസ്റ്റുകൾക്ക് പിടിപെട്ട ഒരു പൊതു നിരാശയിൽ നിന്നാണ് ഇത്തരം കേവല സൗന്ദര്യശാസ്ത്ര സിദ്ധാന്തങ്ങൾ രൂപം കൊണ്ടത്. അല്ലാതെ മാർക്സിസ്റ്റ് ഭൗതിക വിശകലനത്തിൽ കൂടെയല്ല. റാൻസിയേറുടെയും കൂട്ടുകാരുടെയും എഴുത്തുകൾ ഫ്രാൻസിൽ തന്നെ നവ-ഫാസിസ്റ്റ് വിരുദ്ധ പോരാട്ടങ്ങളെ എങ്ങിനെ ദുർബലപ്പെടുത്തി എന്ന് നോക്കിയാൽ തന്നെ കാര്യം മനസ്സിലാകും. അവിടെ കഴിഞ്ഞ കുറെ ദശകങ്ങളായി ഇടതുപക്ഷം ശ്രമിച്ചത് രാഷ്ട്രീയ തന്ത്രങ്ങളോ സംഘടനയോ ഇല്ലാത്ത പ്രസ്ഥാനങ്ങളിലൂടെയും സ്ഥാപനവൽക്കരണത്തിന് എതിരെയുള്ള നിരന്തരമായ എതിർപ്പിലൂടെയുമാണ്. പക്ഷെ വലതുപക്ഷമോ? വളരെ അച്ചടക്കമുള്ള പാർട്ടി വളർത്തിയും, തൊഴിലാളിവർഗത്തിന്റെ രോഷങ്ങളെ മുതലെടുത്തും ഭരണകൂട സംവിധാനങ്ങളെ നിർദാക്ഷിണ്യം ഉപയോഗപ്പെടുത്തിയുമാണ് അവർ വളർന്നത്. ചുരുക്കത്തിൽ, ഇടതുപക്ഷം രാഷ്ട്രീയത്തെ ധാർമികവൽക്കരിച്ചപ്പോൾ വലതുപക്ഷം സംഘടിതമായ രാഷ്ട്രീയത്തെ അവലംബിച്ചു. അവർ വളർന്നു; ഇന്ന്, മറൈൻ ലെ പെന്നിന്റെ തീവ്ര-വലതുപക്ഷ നവ-ഫാസിസ്റ്റ് പാർട്ടി വലിയൊരു ശക്തിയാണവിടെ. റാൻസിയേർ ഒരു പക്ഷെ ഇത് ആഗ്രഹിച്ചിട്ടുണ്ടാവില്ല. പക്ഷെ അദ്ദേഹത്തിന്റെയും കൂട്ടുകാരുടെയും എഴുത്തുകൾ -- അറിഞ്ഞോ അറിയാതെയോ -- ഈ പ്രതിഭാസത്തിന് സൈദ്ധാന്തിക പരിസരം ഒരുക്കി. പുതിയ ബദൽ സ്ഥാപനങ്ങൾ നിർമ്മിക്കാനോ, ബഹുജന സംഘടനകൾ വളർത്താനോ, ഭരണകൂട നിയന്ത്രണം ഏറ്റെടുക്കാമോ മുതിരാത്ത ഇടതുപക്ഷത്തെ ഫ്രാൻസിലെ തൊഴിലാളിവർഗം തന്നെ ഇന്ന് വിശ്വസിക്കുന്നില്ല. എതിർപ്പ് വെറും ധാർമികമോ, പ്രതീകാത്മകമോ ആയി ചുരുങ്ങുമ്പോൾ ഉണ്ടാകുന്ന സ്വാഭാവിക പരിണതഫലം. 

പിന്നെ ഗ്രാംഷിയും റോസയും. 

ഗ്രാംഷിയെ ലെനിനിസത്തിനെതിരെ നിർത്തുന്നത് അപഹാസ്യമാണ്. ഗ്രാംഷിയുടെ ഹെജിമണി ഭരണകൂടത്തിന് എതിരെ നിൽക്കുന്ന ഒരു സങ്കല്പം മാത്രമല്ല. കീഴാളർ സിവിൽ സമൂഹത്തെ കീഴ്പെടുത്തി അധികാരം പിടിച്ചെടുക്കുന്ന ഒരു ഭാവിയെക്കുറിച്ചാണ് ഗ്രാംഷി ചിന്തിച്ചത്. അതുപോലെ, പാർട്ടിക്ക് ഉണ്ടായേക്കാവുന്ന ബ്യൂറോക്രാറ്റിക്ക് സ്വഭാവങ്ങളെപ്പറ്റി റോസ ഉയർത്തിയ വിമർശനങ്ങൾ അധികാരത്തെയോ ഭരണകൂടത്തെയോ ഉപേക്ഷിക്കണം എന്ന് വിവക്ഷിക്കുന്നവയല്ല.

ചുരുക്കത്തിൽ, ഫാസിസ്റ്റ് ഭരണകൂടങ്ങളെ എതിർത്തു തോൽപ്പിക്കാൻ ഭരണകൂടത്തിന് പുറത്തു നിൽക്കുന്നത് ആത്മഹത്യാപരമാണ്. കീഴാളർ ഒച്ചയുണ്ടാക്കിയാൽ തീരുന്നതല്ല ഫാസിസം. അതിന് ഭരണം പിടിച്ചെടുത്തേ തീരൂ, സ്ഥാപനങ്ങളിൻ മേൽ അധികാരം നിലനിർത്തിയേ തീരൂ, നിയമങ്ങൾ പ്രയോഗിച്ചേ തീരൂ.

എന്താണ് കേരളവുമായി ബന്ധപ്പെട്ട് ഉയരുന്ന വിമർശനങ്ങൾ? തുടർച്ചയായ ഇടതുപക്ഷ ഭരണം ഒരു രാഷ്ട്രീയ ബ്യൂറോക്രസിയെ സൃഷ്ടിക്കുന്നു, കീഴാളരും ആയുള്ള ബന്ധം ദുർബലപ്പെടുത്തുന്നു, ഇവയൊക്കെയല്ലേ? പക്ഷേ ഇവയെല്ലാം ഭരണത്തിൽ ഇരിക്കുന്നതിന്റെ ഭാഗമായി ഉയരുന്ന വൈരുദ്ധ്യങ്ങളാണ് എന്നതല്ലേ ശരി? അവയെ നേരിട്ടു കൊണ്ടും പരിഹരിച്ചു കൊണ്ടും മുൻപോട്ടു പോകുന്നതിന് പകരം ഭരണമേ വേണ്ട എന്ന ആപൽക്കരമായ  നിലപാട് എന്ത് അടിസ്ഥാനത്തിൽ ആണെടുക്കുക?വൈരുദ്ധ്യങ്ങളിൽ നിന്ന് ഒളിച്ചോടിയാണോ മാർക്സിസ്റ്റുകാർ അവയുമായി ഇടപെടുന്നത്? അവയെ രാഷ്ട്രീയവൽക്കരിച്ചു കൊണ്ട് അവയ്ക്കുള്ള പരിഹാരം തേടാൻ അല്ലേ ശ്രമിക്കേണ്ടത്? അതോ അതിനു പകരം എന്തോ വലിയ ധാർമിക നിലപാടെടുത്തു എന്ന് ഭാവിച്ച് മേനി നടിക്കുകയാണോ വേണ്ടത്?

പിന്നെ, ഒരു സന്നിഗ്ധ സാഹചര്യത്തിൽ സ്വീകരിക്കേണ്ട സൈദ്ധാന്തിക നിലപാടും അവിടെ നിൽക്കുന്ന വ്യക്തിയുടെ ജീവചരിത്രവും തമ്മിൽ ഒരു ബന്ധവുമില്ല. സർട്ടിഫിക്കറ്റുകൾ കൊണ്ടല്ല സിദ്ധാന്തങ്ങൾ നിർമ്മിക്കപ്പെടുന്നത്. ഒരു അധികാര ഘടനയെ എതിർക്കുന്നു എന്ന ഭാവേന, സ്വന്തം ജീവചരിത്രം ഉപയോഗിച്ചുകൊണ്ട് പുതിയൊരു ധാർമിക അധികാരം സ്ഥാപിച്ചെടുക്കാൻ ശ്രമിക്കുന്നത് വല്ലാത്തൊരു വൈരുദ്ധ്യമാണ്.

മുൻപ് പറയാൻ ശ്രമിച്ച കാര്യം ഒരിക്കൽ കൂടി പറയാം. കേരളത്തിൽ ഇടതുപക്ഷത്തിന് തുടർഭരണം ലഭിച്ചാൽ ഇടതുപക്ഷ ആശയങ്ങൾക്ക് ക്ഷയമുണ്ടാകും എന്ന് വാദിക്കുന്നത് സൈദ്ധാന്തികമായും രാഷ്ട്രീയമായും അടിസ്ഥാന രഹിതമാണ്. അത്പോലെ തന്നെ, മാർക്സിസത്തെ നിതാന്തമായ ഒരു സൗന്ദര്യശാസ്ത്രം മാത്രമായി മാത്രം നിലനിർത്താൻ ശ്രമിക്കുന്നത് കടുത്ത മാർക്സിസ്റ്റ്  വിരുദ്ധതയുമാണ്. മാർക്സിസം സാമൂഹ്യ മാറ്റത്തിന്റെ സിദ്ധാന്തമാണ്. അധികാര സ്ഥാപനങ്ങൾ ഉപയോഗിച്ച് കൊണ്ട് തൊഴിലാളികളെയും കർഷകരെയും വിഭജിച്ച്, അടിച്ചമർത്തി, ഭരണം നടത്തുന്ന നവ-ഫാസിസ്റ്റ് പ്രവണതകളെ തച്ചുടയ്ക്കാൻ അധികാര സ്ഥാപനങ്ങളിൽ കീഴാള പ്രാതിനിധ്യം ഉണ്ടായേ കഴിയൂ. അതിനു പുറത്തു നിന്ന് വെറുതെ ഒച്ച വെച്ചാൽ മതി എന്ന് വാദിക്കുന്നത് ഇതേ കീഴാളരെ കൊലക്കത്തിക്ക്‌ എറിഞ്ഞു കൊടുക്കുന്നതിനു തുല്യമാണ്. അതിന് കേരളത്തിലെ സിപിഐഎമ്മിനെ കിട്ടില്ല.

ആർ. രാംകുമാർ

NREGA: How political will impacted implementation

By Ujjwal Krishna The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) has been described by the World Bank as the largest antipoverty state-run employment-generation scheme in the world. It formed the cornerstone of the shift in the UPA’s approach to development towards universalisation and entitlements, articulated in the National Common Minimum Programme. The idea […]

Written by Guest

June 5, 2019 02:22 IST

FE Google Preferred Button 

 

Follow Us

MGNREGA, NREGA, Rural Employment Guarantee, Budget 2019-20, India Union Budget

Rural workers (file photo).

MGNREGA, NREGA, Minimum income programs, NYAY, farm loan waivers, MGNREGA advantages, bjp mnrega congress mnrega

By Ujjwal Krishna

The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) has been described by the World Bank as the largest antipoverty state-run employment-generation scheme in the world. It formed the cornerstone of the shift in the UPA’s approach to development towards universalisation and entitlements, articulated in the National Common Minimum Programme. The idea of an employment guarantee was also central to the Congress’s agenda in its 2004 election manifesto.

The BJP’s ascendance post-2014 raised several questions over the continuation of MGNREGA, especially in light of its welfare narrative distinguished from that of the Congress by way of its focus on ‘empowerment’, as opposed to a ‘rights’ and ‘entitlements’ focused agenda. Despite the BJP’s ideological differences with the Congress over the approach to employment generation, it has made the highest-ever budgetary allocations to MGNREGA, with `550 billion allocated to the scheme for FY19, up from `480 billion in the previous year. The preceding three years witnessed the NDA increase budgetary allocation towards it.

Even though the UPA was led by the Congress, a left-of-centre political party, a key factor in ensuring that the NREGA, when passed in 2005, was not watered-down to adhere to neoliberal conceptions of social policy was the dependence of the UPA on Left Front parties. After 2004 elections, the UPA would not have secured the numbers to form a government without the support of parties like the CPI(M). Left Front parties enjoyed disproportionate policy influence in such a set-up until their decision to withdraw support from the UPA.

This influence was exercised by way of interventions played out through the UPA-Left Coordination Committee negotiations, a party political process. Moreover, UPA alliance partners like the RJD brought political leaders to the Centre like rural development minister Raghuvansh Prasad Singh, who played the crucial role of a bridge between the fiscal conservatives and populists in the UPA.

MGNREGA was the flagship scheme among the many policy initiatives of the first term of the UPA. Its success and impact on rural India is believed to have carried the UPA to another term at the Centre. However, as the second term of the UPA (2009-14) became increasingly mired in corruption scandals, the existing issues in MGNREGA’s implementation with states failing to provide employment, delaying and withholding wages, and corruption occurring due to a lack of proper social auditing and monitoring, were exacerbated by the UPA’s overall image of policy paralysis and inaction.

According to Ashok Pankaj, upon “reaching full acceleration in 2009-10 and 2010-11, (MGNREGS) decelerated in 2011-12 while the UPA was dilly-dallying with the idea of a cash transfer-based social protection programmes, aiming at 2014 parliamentary elections”, and the shift in attention from MGNREGA to DBT is partly to blame for the slack implementation of the scheme during 2011-14. Systematically cutting funding for MGNREGA began in 2010, by way of caps on allocated funds, causing administrative failures like problems with wage payment and provision of employment. Its impact on the employment generated through the scheme was that the number of households that got jobs increased by 89.5% over a decade. But the number peaked at 5.49 crore in 2011 and has since declined steadily.

The right-wing BJP-led NDA came to power in 2014, with Narendra Modi as PM. The BJP commanded a majority in the Lok Sabha by itself, and was thus less beholden to coalition partners in formulating its policies. It also placed technology at the heart of its policy agenda, onboarding the UPA’s DBT approach early on through its Jan Dhan-Aadhaar-Mobile trinity, with a view to migrating towards a cash-based welfare setup. Some believe this unfortunately glosses over the roots of governance delivery failures like complex procedures, weak human resources and poor training.

While proposals to scale back MGNREGA had been discussed during the first year of Modi government, in light of its pro-business and investment-oriented approach—hinged on a narrative of ‘empowerment’, exemplified by Make in India, Skill India, and Start-up India, etc—as opposed to the ‘entitlements’ and ‘rights’-oriented framework of the Congress, the NDA has made increasingly higher budgetary allocations to MGNREGA, with the figure for FY19 being the highest allocation till date, and has simultaneously not abandoned the programme.

But these allocations have followed the BJP learning from the adverse political consequences of initially attempting to strangulate MGNREGA through pointedly low allocations in the NDA’s first two years. At the same time, the NDA has altered the focus of MGNREGA towards emphasising on top-down, target-driven, asset-creation, which is the polar opposite of the UPA’s demand-driven job-creation regime focused on participatory decentralised development.

Ashok Pankaj argues there has been a sharp distinction in the nature of the programme pursued by the UPA and the NDA, which he describes as “wage-focused” against “asset-focused”, and “target-focused” at the cost of “demand-focused”, compromising the objective of participatory decentralised development.

But this “asset fetishism”, while not entirely undesirable, has nevertheless tilted the benefits of MGNREGA in favour of agriculturists, excluding landless rural labourer households that constitute a quarter of India’s rural population from accessing benefits of individual assets owing to their lack of land, and affecting job-creation.

The UPA had prioritised job-creation over asset-creation by mandating a wage-material expenditure ratio of 60:40 in the Act, which also mandated that four out of the eight works are to be labour-intensive.

Only a weak relationship exists between ‘political will’ and the implementation of a scheme, especially in Indian context, since there is a lack of a one-to-one mapping between economic and social ideologies on either side of the political spectrum in India. While lying on two opposite ends of the political spectrum, the Congress and the BJP have followed broadly the same paths in the pursuit of neoliberal policy.

With Modi lending no personal ideological support to MGNREGA, the BJP has been forced to retain the scheme for fear of losing electoral support in rural India. The enhanced outlays, and mere tweaking the programme’s attributes to justify its own ideological underpinnings, prove that political will cannot be seen as an important determinant of the implementation of MGNREGA in the case of the BJP.

(The author is with ICRIER, New Delhi)

https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/nrega-how-political-will-impacted-implementation/1598304/?utm_source=perplexity

Undermining the Legal Guarantee of MGNREGA: Right, Left, and Centre

Governments of every political dispensation have sought to hollow out India’s rural employment guarantee scheme. Only a mass movement that keeps the vulnerable at its centre can make the MGNREGA what it is supposed to be.

Sowmya Sivakumar 

The central government has cut budgetary allocations to the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) for 2022-23 by a fourth over the revised estimates for 2021-22. The allocation is so low that the budgeted amount will run out even if just a sixth of the 9.94 crore eligible households demanded 100 days of work.

A record 11 crore workers from 7.5 crore households worked under the scheme in 2020-21, the year the pandemic struck. Even in the pre-pandemic ‘normal’ of 2019-20, this figure was about 7.9 crore individuals from 5.48 crore Why would the government cut allocation to a legally guaranteed scheme that has saved millions of lives through the pandemic crisis; when the employment record is still fragile, and five states were at polls?households.

The dominant thread of analysis, even from supporters of the scheme, explains this as yet another site of a slugfest between the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party and the Congress. They would point to Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s known disdain for the MGNREGA and how his government has repeatedly tried to stifle the programme

This analysis, however, prevents us from seeing the larger picture.

MGNREGA is neither a case of poor implementation, bad planning, or down-the-road corruption ruining an otherwise well-intended scheme; nor the victim of a turf war. We are looking at very deliberate attempts to undermine the act, right from the time of its very passage.

To understand what is going on, we need to travel back — to the winter of 2004 in Delhi.

UPA’s track record

A nationwide employment guarantee act was long in the making. By 2003–04, a broad pan-India civil society movement had mobilised thousands of rural workers in nearly every state. The organisations in the campaign came up with an initial draft for the employment guarantee act, drawing on lessons from the experiences of existing lifesaving, but corrupted, public works programmes in the drought-prone western states. Articles were written both in favour and against, and a healthy debate flourished.

The then-opposition Congress was convinced that such a rural employment guarantee would be a persuasive poll plank for the 2004 Lok Sabha elections. A promise to enact such legislation found its way into its manifesto. With the defeat of the National Democratic Alliance in the polls, the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) formed a government with Left support.

It was time to deliver. But the National Rural Employment Guarantee Bill that was tabled in Parliament was a hugely watered-down version of drafts from civil society and the government’s own National Advisory Council. The bill tried to introduce targeting, defeating the entire purpose of a universal guarantee. It restricted the scheme to certain areas and periods of the government’s choice. Most significantly, it did not guarantee workers the prevailing statutory minimum wages in different states.

Thanks to mobilisation and pushback from people’s movements, some of these dilutions were removed. But one stayed. Sub-section 6(1), inserted a week before the bill was tabled in Parliament, delinked the MGNREGA wages from the legal minimum wages (of the centre and states) and gave the centre powers to arbitrarily fix wages under the act.

This section was held unconstitutional by at least one high court. Yet it remains in practice till date — in complete disregard of Supreme Court directions in 2012 and an expert panel’s recommendations in 2014 to bring parity of MGNREGA wages with the state minimum wages and link it to Consumer Price Index – Rural (CPI-R). As recently as 2020, the MGNREGA wage was below the minimum wage for agricultural rural workers in 17 out of 21 major states.

A shift in priorities

By the 2009 Lok Sabha elections, the UPA went back one more step. While it “promised to provide ‘at least’ 100 days of work at a ‘real wage’ of Rs 100 per day,” in its manifesto, what the government did, in reality, was to cap the ‘nominal’ wages at Rs 100 on 1 January that year. India’s inflation rate at the time touched crippling double-digit levels. If states wanted to pay MGNREGA workers higher wages, they had to get the new rates approved by the centre and shell out the additional cost.

Comfortably back in power for a second term, the UPA fast lost interest in the MGNREGA. Allocation fell to Rs 33,000 crore in 2012-13 from Rs 40,100 crore in 2010-11. The centre disregarded states’ demands under the scheme. To top it all, a Comptroller and Audit General report on the scheme’s performance between 2007 and 2012 found that the poorest were not fully able to exercise their rights under the scheme. There was a lack of transparency in the release of funds, non-maintenance of records, widespread staff shortages, and a shortfall of information, education, and communication expenditure. Across states, unemployment allowance was not being paid.

In plain sight, UPA’s strategy for 2014 had shifted — from MGNREGA to the ‘game-changing’ Aadhaar-linked direct cash transfers. In 2013, the government announced it would disburse Rs 3–4 lakh crore of subsidies in direct cash transfers to people through various schemes. But the rollout faced stiff opposition around linking to Aadhaar.

In each of these instances — in 2005 (delinking MGNREGA from statutory payment of minimum wages), 2009 (cap on wages,) and 2013 (cuts in allocation) ­— it was clear that the finance ministry wielded the pen. The then finance minister, P. Chidambaram, who often accuses the BJP of starving the scheme of funds, practically froze MGNREGA allocations at Rs 33,000 crore during the second term of the UPA tenure. He claimed it would cause agricultural wages to rise and the fiscal deficit to spin out of control. Government officials were quick to point out that any breach in fiscal deficit could lead to a sovereign rating downgrade, which would scare away financial investors.

The point of bringing out this earlier history of MGNREGA’s abuse is not only to say that Congress-led and BJP-led governments have behaved in similar ways. Rather, it is a necessary background to understand what we are up against.

The ‘missing’ Left

What were the national Left parties doing through all this?

In two words: not enough. To be sure, they played a critical role in the act’s passage. They raised issues of low wages and demanded the expansion of the scheme. But they had little to show on the ground in terms of mass political organisation of MGNREGA workers at the village level across the country. It has been mainly the civil society groups that have made sporadic and localised efforts to build such unions in different states.

— by parties that claim to mainly represent worker interests — around the single largest rural employment scheme in the country that supports some of the most vulnerable sections among the working class? As Himanshu writes, “The answer to this puzzle may partly lie in the nature of the rural political economy […] It is the farmer unions that agitated against NREGA and in some states even managed to get it suspended during peak agricultural seasons.”

That said, the Left included the MGNREGA as one of the issues raised during the Kisan Long March in 2018 organised by the All India Kisan Sabha, the peasants’ wing of the Communist Party of India (Marxist).

In this context, Jens Lerche (2021), while noting the importance of a “broad-based political challenge to the increasingly repressive BJP government,” writes that “There is less reason to believe that this protest [farmers’ movement of 2020-21] will also usher in enduring popular alliances across the caste-class divide, between Dalit labourers and petty commodity producers as well as agrarian capitalists from farming castes. For most farmers, this is a contingent phase, a phase of alliance between groups that right now have interests that are sufficiently aligned for them to take action together, but in other ways are opposed to each other. When this struggle is over, one should not expect all farmers to stand up for demands by Dalits, Muslims, informal workers, let alone agricultural labourers.”

It is this inherent class-caste contradiction between the interests of farmers and MGNREGA workers — both of whose causes the Left claims to support — that puts a huge question mark on the demands of the landless workers seeking MGNREGA work taking centre stage of such struggles.

The corporate lobby

No analysis of the labour market would be complete without looking at the larger operations of capital. ‘Fiscal deficit’ is the bogeyman that every government brings up to cut what they deem as welfare or social expenditure. But behind every finance ministry decision is the invisible hand of the finance lobby, going right up to Wall Street

India Inc has resented the MGNREGA from the very beginning 1 , apparent from a steady stream of editorials and opinion pieces in the financial media, both in India and abroad, right from the days of its launch. Corporates view any large-scale public welfare programme for unprotected workers as a threat to their infinite supply of ‘cheap labour’.

But times of slumps and crises are slightly different.

Post pandemic, corporates have cut costs and fired workers. There is only that much they can do. But what if demand does not revive? Corporates might acknowledge, if only temporarily, that the MGNREGA, by putting money in workers’ hands, could stimulate the near-term demand they are looking for.

That does not mean they have ceased to view labour as a cost.

Input costs are increasing. Domestic manufacturers can ill-afford a rising wage bill, especially when the global environment pushes them to be ‘competitive’ with countries that are worse exploiters of their labour. So it is in their core interest to keep MGNREGA wages as low as possible.

Kalecki’s political business cycles

If there is anything businesses value more than profits, it is “discipline in the factories” and “political stability”, the Polish economist Michal Kalecki wrote in 1943 in his classic Political Aspects of Full Employment.

‘The neglected prophet’ clearly foresaw the “political business cycles” that play out today. Kalecki has two very relevant takeaways for the MGNREGA and its defenders.

First, these cycles will continue to operate, no matter which government is in power and as long as we live in a capitalist democracy. Two opposing forces will keep them in motion. One, the need to keep labour costs low and labour ‘disciplined’. The interests of the powerful big business-rentier class would limit government spending — especially on anything that directly addresses employment. Two, the acceptance by these same interests that ‘something must be done (only) during a slump’ to avert mass unemployment. It recognises the need to reproduce labour and keep it at sustenance levels and for the government to appease labour closer to election time.

The second takeaway is that these cycles are not inevitable 2 . Workers know at an intuitive level what they are up against, as they experience ‘the establishment’ every single day. If enough workers organise to demand a living wage and entitlements under a job-guarantee scheme, any democratically elected government will have a difficult time yielding to only one side.

Restoring the promise

A distinctive feature of MGNREGA – that it is an act passed by Parliament and not just another rural scheme – is often lost on many. The government violates workers’ legal rights every time it does not match funds to demand, turns back job seekers, pays them below minimum wages, or does not pay them on time.

Some might argue that budgetary allocations can be and are subsequently increased over the year. However, the experience is that these increased allocations do not reach on time, snuffing out the existing work demand. There are inordinate delays in wage payments, which amounts to the government extracting forced labour.

India needs to get to a point where the government’s central question is no longer How do we control expenditure and keep the fiscal deficit low? but becomes How do we provide for and sustain a healthy, fulfilled workforce? We have seen the power of a unified, democratic, collective bargaining force in the case of the farm laws. We are yet to see anything close to it for the most vulnerable: migrant and landless workers and those in the informal sector.

As long as that does not happen ­— either through a renewed Left organisation or through an entirely new impetus — legally guaranteed, universal job schemes like the MGNREGA will get used and abused by governments of no matter which dispensation.

I am grateful to Jean Drèze, Visiting Professor, Ranchi University, for his valuable comments on earlier drafts; an anonymous reviewer for suggestions that helped sharpen some of the arguments presented; and Nathaniel Roberts, Centre for Modern Indian Studies, University of Göttingen, for his insights on Kalecki and class-caste contradictions.

https://www.theindiaforum.in/article/undermining-legal-guarantee-mgnrega-right-left-and-centre-0?utm_source=perplexity