I n order to provide technical support and quality monitoring of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) scheme, Quality Monitors as decided by the Union Ministry of Rural Development had to be appointed by every State and Union Territory in the country. The proposal comprises appointment of District Quality Controllers and State Quality Monitoring Unit which will have Quality Monitors and a Nodal Officer to coordinate , supervisor and facilitate. Such an officer to be not less than the rank of a Superintending Engineer at the State (UT) level lends its own credence to the guidelines. That should have since set in motion the actual working of Monitoring Unit should it have been armed with the supporting infrastructure of the Quality Monitors. These personnel are required to be appointed under a proper procedure of selection by inviting applications from the eligible candidates as provided for in the guidelines of the Union Ministry. Accordingly, a panel of bureaucrats having been appointed for the purpose by the UT Government in December last year has rather found nearly nine months insufficient a period to make the selection process of the Quality Monitors under the flagship scheme of the Central Government. Looking incredible? Had there been a smooth and foolproof implementation of the said scheme across the country especially looking to the size of the beneficiaries and whopping amount of funds involved, perhaps, such monitoring probably would have been thought to be not required at all but there being numerous violations and flaws in various areas of its implementation, such a move has been thought imperative to ensure effective implementation. We need not elaborate as to the specific role to be played by both the Quality Monitors as well as the Nodal Officer but definitely do not favour such an inordinate delay in even doing the preliminary things about it which is finalising the selection process. These quality monitors are expected to inspect the works by paying personal visits every three months and submit reports to the Government. This report should not be of fact finding only but suggestive of which measures were required to be taken to set right the flaws and even irregularities mainly in implementation. The times of treating MGNREGA all about digging earth aimlessly and making pits to be refilled again by the next rains only, has gone. Assets must be created out of the works allotted under the scheme. The question is not that of routine monitoring or the one for formality purposes but for ensuring quality monitoring hence appointing of Quality Monitors. A mechanism on transparent and scientific pattern needed to be evolved which had been long felt with intent to make the concerned flag ship scheme really work on the ground to realise the objectives behind it. That means a realistic view all to be taken based on expert advice in respect of recurrence of deviations in planning, designing, selection, execution and supervision of works. Supervision of works is imperative as more is shirked in most of the cases and less is done in less of the cases – that being a stark reality. Therefore, any move towards bringing in reforms and modifications as also efficiency in the overall gamut of MGNREGA should be got expedited to be introduced instead of virtually sitting over the issue as has been observed in respect of the committee of bureaucrats set up by the Government of Jammu and Kashmir in December last for the said purpose. It does not augur well that almost for whatever objectives committees are set up comprising high Government officials / bureaucrats etc and assigned with various tasks by the Government with instructions to submit recommendations or whatever action required to be taken in time bound manner, usually are just attended to in a casual approach. For moving away from such an inertial mode is witnessed only after repeated reminders , DO letters, rejoinders etc by the higher levels of the Government mentioning therein that ”a serious view has been taken”. There is no problem in identifying flaws and shortcomings in the system and mechanism of implementation but definitely it is a grave error considered to be a deliberate one, if remedial measures are not taken. Selection of Quality Monitors under MGNREGA, therefore, is such a revised and refined move to bring about the desired improvement in effective implementation. Needless to add, going by the eligibility criteria of the Quality Monitors expected to be having adequate experience, expertise and exposure, their services can be aptly and effectively utilised not only for fact finding and work evaluation but providing professional and technical advice to the agencies engaged in implementation of MGNREGA. If this scheme has to continue which it should, then in that case from every angle, it needs to be monitored and monitored qualitatively.
Follow our WhatsApp channel