Social audits were the accountability backbone of MGNREGA. Discuss the governance challenges in scaling similar mechanisms under the VB-G RAM G framework.

Q. Social audits were the accountability backbone of MGNREGA. Discuss the governance challenges in scaling similar mechanisms under the VB-G RAM G framework. (15 marks, 250-350 words)

Section 20 of the VB-G RAM G Act, 2025 retains and strengthens Gram Sabha social audits, mandated at least once every six months [1]. Yet MGNREGA's own record shows the instrument was stronger on paper than on the ground; scaling it to a larger, infrastructure-heavy mission is essentially a governance, not a legal, challenge.

MGNREGA's social audit record — the baseline problem - The Standing Committee on Rural Development found only about 32% of Gram Panchayats audited in 2023-24, with states like Goa, Andaman & Nicobar and Puducherry yet to establish a Social Audit Unit (SAU) [3]. - SAUs suffered delayed fund release and thin trained manpower, and audit findings rarely converted into recovery or action — the Committee had to recommend independent functioning and public disclosure of reports [3].

Governance challenges in scaling under VB-G RAM G - Institutional independence: SAUs remain financially dependent on the very rural development departments whose works they audit — a structural conflict the new Act does not automatically dissolve. - Fiscal capacity of states: with 60:40 (general) and 90:10 (NE/Himalayan) cost sharing, and states bearing expenditure above the Centre's normative allocation [2], audit budgets are the first casualty in fiscally stressed states. - Widened technical scope: auditing 125 days of employment plus durable infrastructure and water-security works [1] demands engineering literacy that village-level auditors typically lack. - Technology as substitute, not complement: biometric authentication, geospatial monitoring and weekly public disclosure [2] improve traceability, but cannot replace deliberative Gram Sabha verification of work quality. - Transition risk: an interim allocation of ₹95,692 crore for FY 2026-27 [4] was made while rules were still being framed, leaving audit institutions in administrative limbo.

The Act's real advance lies in the raised 9% administrative ceiling, which — if ring-fenced for independent, professionally staffed SAUs with statutory action-taken reporting — can convert audits from ritual to remedy. Anchored in Article 243G's mandate of Panchayat self-governance, credible social audits will decide whether VB-G RAM G delivers rozgar with accountability on the road to Viksit Bharat.

(~330 words)

Sources: 1. President gives assent to the VB—G RAM G Bill, 2025 — PIB — Section 20 social audits by Gram Sabhas every six months; 125-day guarantee; priority work categories 2. The Viksit Bharat–Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) VB–G RAM G Bill, 2025 — PRS Legislative Research — 60:40 and 90:10 sharing, normative allocation with states bearing excess, biometric/geospatial/weekly disclosure systems 3. Standing Committee on Rural Development: Rural Employment through MGNREGA — PRS Report Summary — 32% Gram Panchayats audited (2023-24); states without Social Audit Units; recommendations on independence and disclosure 4. Provision of ₹95,692 crore made for Viksit Bharat–G RAM G in FY 2026-27 — Prasar Bharati News Services — interim central allocation during transition