·PIB·15 marks·250–350 words

Despite a manifold rise in procurement from SC/ST-owned MSEs, the 4% mandate remains unmet. Identify the structural constraints and suggest measures.

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
  1. Structural constraints
  2. Measures

The Public Procurement Policy for MSEs Order, 2012, issued under the MSMED Act, 2006, says Central Ministries and CPSEs must buy 25% of their annual purchases from MSEs. Of this, 4% must come from SC/ST-owned MSEs [3]. Procurement from these firms rose 37-fold, from ₹99.37 crore (0.07%) in 2015-16 to ₹3,738.34 crore (1.59%) in 2025-26 [2]. The shortfall is structural, not a matter of time.

Structural constraints

  • Sub-target sits inside a target already met: CPSEs buy 47.4% from MSEs but only 1.85% from SC/ST MSEs [4]. Any small firm satisfies the 25% target, so buyers have no reason to look for SC/ST suppliers.
  • Weak accountability: 76 CPSEs were negatively marked in FY 2023-24 with no real corrective action. The cumulative shortfall is about ₹18,000–20,000 crore over six years [4].
  • Credit-first subsidy design: the SCLCSS 25% capital subsidy applies only to machinery bought with institutional credit [1]. This excludes entrepreneurs who lack collateral.
  • Refunds, not upfront help: loan-processing and bank-guarantee charges are reimbursed only after they are paid [1]. Nothing covers the working capital needed to deliver a contract once it is won.
  • Thin supplier base: only 3,160 MSEs have received the capital subsidy since 2016, against 1,90,414 reported beneficiaries. Only 12,524 firms won orders in 2025-26 [1].
  • Base effect: the large multiple starts from a tiny base. The share has risen only about 1.5 percentage points in a decade [2].

Measures

  • Fix responsibility: set CPSE-wise annual sub-targets, require disclosure of shortfalls, and link penalties to MoUs with real consequences for managers [4].
  • Connect the data: integrate the MSME Sambandh portal with GeM and build a national vendor directory [4], so that claims of "no supplier available" can be checked.
  • Credit convergence: link Stand-Up India and CGTMSE collateral-free loans to SCLCSS so that first-time entrepreneurs qualify.
  • Support after the award: NSIC-backed working capital and upfront guarantees for SC/ST firms that win tenders; set-aside tenders in selected categories.
  • Deepen capacity: expand GeM-aligned training, already 55% women and covering 24 Aspirational Districts [1], to more tribal and North-Eastern regions.

NSSH has shown that state purchasing can create demand for SC/ST enterprise. Turning that into the full 4% needs firm accountability, credit that reaches the most excluded, and support after contracts are won. This would give real effect to Article 46 and help move SC/ST communities from job-seekers to job-creators.

Sources

  1. 1PIB press release on National SC-ST Hub, 08 Oct 2026SCLCSS terms, reimbursements, 3,160 MSEs, 1,90,414 beneficiaries, 12,524 MSEs, training coverage
  2. 2Ministry of MSME is Promoting Inclusive Entrepreneurship through National SC-ST Hub Scheme (PIB)37-fold rise, 0.07% to 1.59%
  3. 3Public Procurement Policy for Micro and Small Enterprises (PIB)25% target, 4% SC/ST sub-target, 2012 Order under MSMED Act
  4. 4Press Release on the 333rd Report of the Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Industry (PIB)47.4% vs 1.85%, 76 CPSEs, ₹18,000–20,000 crore shortfall, CPSE-wise sub-targets, MSME Sambandh–GeM integration

More from this note