When one rights-based welfare law replaces another, protections for specific groups can be lost. Examine with reference to the transition from MGNREGA to the VB-G RAM G Act, 2025.

The VB-G RAM G Act, 2025 replaced MGNREGA on 1 July 2026 [3]. It raised the work guarantee for every rural household from 100 to 125 days [2]. However, it did not carry over the extra 50 days that Adivasi households holding Forest Rights Act (FRA) titles received earlier [1]. This shows how group-specific protections can disappear quietly when one law replaces another.

How the protection was lost

• The benefit came from an executive order, not the Act: a 2014 Ministry of Rural Development directive gave 150 days of work to Scheduled Tribe (ST) households in forest areas [4]. It was later built into MGNREGA's Annual Master Circulars [5].
• No order was reissued: in an RTI reply to the NCPRI (Oct 2026), the Ministry confirmed that it had issued no order, circular or guideline for FRA title holders under the new Act [1].
• The new provision is discretionary: under Section 5(4), the Centre or a State may provide extra days "within the limits of economic capacity". It names no group [1].

Implications

• Social: the maximum work available to FRA households falls from 150 to 125 days [1]. Only households with no private property other than FRA land were eligible, so they are among the most wage-dependent [5].
• Legal: the legal claim now ends at 125 days. The unemployment allowance applies only within the guaranteed days [2]. This weakens the spirit of Articles 41 and 46.
• Federal: if the Centre does nothing, the cost of extra days falls on States. Beneficiaries were concentrated in poorer States such as Jharkhand, Odisha and Chhattisgarh [4].
• Governance: the gap was found through an RTI application, not by either ministry. This points to poor planning of the transition [1].

Counter-view

• Every household now gets a higher basic guarantee [2]. In practice, actual delivery of work matters more than the legal ceiling.

Way forward

• The Ministry of Rural Development should issue a Section 5(4) order for FRA title holders, funded by the Centre, as it did in 2014 [1][4].
• Before a law is repealed, the government should list every order issued under it and decide openly which ones to carry forward. The Ministry of Tribal Affairs should be consulted.

Replacing one law with another should consolidate rights, not quietly reduce them. Restoring the FRA tier through a single executive order, and planning future transitions with a full list of existing protections, would uphold the Directive Principle in Article 46 and the inclusive goal of SDG 1 (No Poverty).