Centrally Sponsored Schemes often lead to blurred accountability between the Union and States. Discuss with reference to post-matric scholarships for Scheduled Castes.
New · District CollectorCan you hold the district for 72 hours?Floods, a heatwave, an outbreak, a grievance queue. Take the decisions, see the consequences.Play →In this answer
In Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS), the Union designs the scheme, both tiers fund it and the States run it. This split lets each tier disown failure. The Post-Matric Scholarship for SCs (PMS-SC) shows how: before the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) in October 2026, the Union said implementation lies with States, while six Chief Secretaries did not turn up [1][2].
How the CSS design blurs accountability
- Split roles: the Centre sets the guidelines and pays 60% (90:10 for North-Eastern States). States check eligibility, caste, Aadhaar and bank details on the portal [3].
- Sequenced funding: the Central share is released only after the State pays its share. A delay by one tier becomes a delay for the whole scholarship [3].
- Divided oversight: CAG findings go to Parliament's PAC, but Chief Secretaries answer to their State governments. Privilege notices could turn into a Union–State standoff [1].
Evidence from PMS-SC
- The CAG (Report No. 36 of 2025) found 40.75 lakh beneficiaries in 14 States paid late, by up to 90 months. More than 3.5 lakh got nothing, more than 6,000 non-SC beneficiaries were paid, and more than 5,700 were paid without an income check [1][2].
- Kerala's audit found no survey of likely beneficiaries and schools left off the e-grantz portal [4].
- Recurring faults: the 2018 audit had already flagged payment delays for 18.58 lakh students and poor financial management [5].
Where responsibility actually lies
- States: most leakages, such as ineligible, non-SC and double payments, happen at State-level checking [1][3].
- Union: as the scheme's designer and majority funder, the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment (MoSJE) must enforce its own conditions. Faults that recur from 2018 to 2025 show weak follow-up, which is why the PAC gave the Ministry one month to file an Action-Taken Report [1][5].
Way forward
- Publish State-wise release dates and rejection rates at each checking step, so it is clear which tier caused a delay.
- Audit institutions, not just students, and pay only into Aadhaar-seeded, in-person-verified bank accounts.
- Make Action-Taken Reports time-bound, with follow-up checked in the next audit.
PMS-SC shows that shared funding without clearly shared responsibility leads to a cycle of blame, and SC students pay the price. Clear roles, open fund-flow data and time-bound action on audits can make CSS real cooperative federalism. That would fulfil Article 46's mandate to promote the educational interests of Scheduled Castes.
Sources
- 1The Hindu, "House panel questions Centre, States on issues in SC scholarship schemes" (16 Oct 2026)PAC hearing, Union's stand on States, absent Chief Secretaries, privilege notices, CAG 2025 findings, one-month ATR deadline
- 2PRS Legislative Research – Schedule for Parliamentary CommitteesPAC meeting of 15 Oct 2026 on SC scholarships, based on Para 2.13 of CAG Report No. 36 of 2025
- 3PIB, "Cabinet approves transformatory changes in Post Matric Scholarship for SCs"60:40 / 90:10 sharing, Central share released after State share, States check eligibility on the portal
- 4CAG, Report No. 3 of 2024 (Kerala), Performance Audit on Pre- and Post-Matric Scholarship Schemes for SC, ST and Minority Studentsno beneficiary survey, schools not registered on e-grantz
- 5CAG, Report No. 12 of 2018, Performance Audit on Post Matric Scholarships to SC Studentssystemic gaps, poor financial management, payment delays for 18.58 lakh students