SWARAJ ABHIYAN - (ILL) versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: [2016] 9 S.C.R. 311 · Decided: 13-05-2016 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: MADAN B. LOKUR · Disposal: Directions issued

Judgment (excerpt)

[2016] 9 S.C.R. 311 
SWARAJ ABHIYAN - (Ill) 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 
(Writ Petition (Civil) No. 857of2015) 
MAY13,2016 
(MADAN B. LOKUR AND N.V. RAMANA, JJ.] 
Public interest litigation - Mahatama Gandhi National Rural 
Employment Guarantee Scheme - Implementation of- Prayer sought 
that Government of India and State Government to ensure adequate 
budgetary provision is made for financial implementation of the 
Scheme and that the State Government not to place any budgetary 
limit under the Scheme if employment is sought over and above 100 
days; that the informal capping of funds through labour budget 
and agreed to budget process to be done away with; that there is 
delayed release of payments both for wages and materials; and 
effective monitoring of the scheme - Held: There is no informal 
capping of funds although it does appear that Government of India 
is not prone to easily release funds for the projects under the Scheme 
- There has been unconscionable delay on the part of the 
Government of India in release of funds both under the wage and 
material component - When rights of lakhs of people are affected 
by delayed payment of the legitimate dues, there is clear 
constitutional breach committed by the State - Further, not clear as 
to existence of Centre Employment Guarantee Council and State 
Employment Guarantee Council - In view thereof. issuance of 
directions by this Court - State Governments to present a realistic 
budget and thereafter, Government of India to release to State 
Governments. adequate funds under the Scheme in a timely manner 
- Government of India to ensure that compensation for delayed 
payment beyond 15 days made to workers - State Governments 
and Government of India to make all efforts to encourage needy 
persons to come forward and take advantage of the Scheme -
Government of India to constitute Central Employment Guarantee 
Council and State Governments to establish State Employment 
Guarantee Council within the stipulated period - NREG Act being 
a social welfare and social justice legislation, Government of India 
311 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
312 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2016] 9 S.C.R. 
A 
to ensure faithful implementation of its provisions - Constitution of 
India - Art. 32 - Mahatama Gandhi National Rural Employment 
Guarantee Act, 2005 - ss. 3(1), 3(3), 7, JO, JI, 14(6). 
B 
Sanjit Roy v. State of Rajasthan (1983) 1 SCC 525: 
1983 (2) SCR 271 - referred to. 
Case Law Reference 
.1983 (2) SCR 271 
referred to 
Para 32 
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 
857of2015. 
C 
Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
Prashant Bhushan, Roh it Kr. Singh, Govind Jee, 0. Kuttan, Advs., 
for the Petitioner. 
P.S. Narasimha, Tushar Mehta, ASGs, Aj it Kumar Sinha, Sr. Adv., 
Anil Grover, Irshad Ahmad, AA Gs, Mukul Singh, lrhan George, Ajay 
Sharma, Sridhar Potaraju, 8.K. Satija, Neeraj Kumar Sharma, Guntur 
Prabhakar, Ms. Prerna Singh, Gopal Singh, Manish Kumar,A.P. Mayee, 
Ms. Shashi Juneja, A. Selvin Raja, Ms. Hemantika Wahi, Kabir Hathi, 
Ms. Puja Singh, Ms. Noopur Singhal, Manan, Dr. Monika Gusain, Tapesh 
Kumar Singh, Kumar Anurag Singh, Mohd. Waquas, Shashank Singh, 
V. N. Raghupathy, C. D. Singh, Ms. Sylona Mahapatra, Udit Arora, 
Nishant R. Katneshwarkar, Sibo Sankar Mishra, Umakant Mishra, 
S. Udaya Kumar Sagar, Krishna Kumar Singh, Upendra Mishra, Vinay 
Garg, Advs., for the Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
MADAN B. LOKUR, J. I. In our judgment dated 11th May, 
2016 we had considered the issue of the drought or drought-like conditions 
prevailing in some parts of the country and had issued certain directions 
for compliance. Subsequently, in a related matter in our judgment 
pronounced today, we have dealt with the provisions of the National 
Food Security Act, 2013 and the Mid-Day Meal Scheme announced by 
the Government of India and issued directions for the effective 
implementation of the statute and the Mid-Day Meal Scheme to benefit 
people (including children) particularly those affected by the drought or 
drought-like conditions. 
SWARAJ ABHIYAN - (III) v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 
313 
[MADAN B. LOKUR, J.] 
2. In this judgment we deal with the implementation of the 
A 
Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 and 
the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme 
framed under the provisions of Section 4 of the said Act. 1 
Implementation of the MGNREG Scheme 
3. The Mahatma

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.