AIAWU Bulletin May 2015

A.
Vijayaraghavan
The PMs High Level Committee

Recommendations on FCI : Road to Food Insecurity
The Bharatiya Janata Party Government under
the stewardship of Narendra Modi made an explicit
commitment to remove any kind of state intervention
which hinders the free play of market forces. The
successive policy pronouncements, be it FDI in
insurance, defense, railways, or privatization of
Navaratna companies by incremental sale of shares,
welcoming foreign national entities unhindered in to
various economic activities or the so called smart
cities project, take any one, this is the sole policy
objective. The BJP government committed to
destroy all the protective systems which are kept in
place in countrys endeavor of economic
development. The High Level Committee appointed
by the Prime Minister under the chairmanship of
Shantakumar, former union minister for Food and
Public Distribution comes under this category only.
The HLC constituted on 20th August 2014 with
an explicit mandate of studying " various models of
restructuring or unbundling of, and to suggest a best
suited model for restructuring or unbundling of FCI",
" To define or give suggestions to reorient the role
and functions of FCI in MSP operations, storage
and distribution of food grains and food security
systems of the country", " strengthening and
integration of supply chain of food grains in the
country". While submitting its report, the HLC made
a scathing attack on the basis that brought FCI into
existence. When we look at the report closely it
becomes evident that it is an eyewash attempt to
re-route the governments predetermined policy
orientation in the form of recommendations of a so
called expert body, which was and is the case in all
the attempts of privatization. The reference to food

security failing to get space in the elaborate terms
of reference reveals real intention of government.
The HLC gave a detailed recommendation to phase
out public distribution system in its current form and
change over to cash transfer scheme, whose
effectiveness is yet to be proved.
The timing of the constitution of HLC and release
of its report are crucial. The WTO summit at Bali
mandated the governments to stay off from the
market distorting economic activities. The terms of
reference were tuned according to the mandates of
WTO Bali summit. The procurement of levy rice
by Food Corporation of India has been found one
of such market distorting intervention by WTO.
Even before the Bali summit and prelude to that, a
section of economic think tanks in India started this
argument by saying that it is against the spirit of
competition. Those who argues in this lines are
suggesting to privatise the procurement of farm
produce. Procurement by private players is a vital
link for establishing the back-end supply chain for a
profitable operations of large scale retailers such as
Wallmart. The entry of FDI in to retailing is governed
by profitability. Withdrawing the state from procuring
agricultural commodities through various channels
such as FCI, STC, MMTC, CCI is only to meet
this task and facilitate entry of private capital both
foreign and domestic in trading of agricultural
commodities. In this regard, already certain vested
interests filed a petition in the Competition
Commission of India too seeking its intervention to
study whether the FCI procurement amounts to
AIAWU BULLETIN - MAY - 2015
restricting the entry of private players there by

restricting the open market competition which inturn
violates WTO guidelines.
to a great extent in making cultivation viable during

1970s and 1980s. The rural India is thriving, so as
the ruling alliance.
Nothing hindered the High Level Committee,

neither the experiences of 1960s sever drought,
food scarcity, falling production etc, from concluding,
" the larger food management system, of which
FCI is an integral part, has not delivered on its
primary objectives very efficiently." On the other
hand, the report on page 44 tabular format said,
"Of course, FCI may not be directly responsible
for many of these" When it is evident that FCI not
directly responsible for the mess up, why a
recommendation to the extent that FCI be dissolved
or unbundled ? What is the logic behind this ?
As the time moved on, global and domestic

economic conditions transformed and the
government both at central level and state level
embarked on the reforms. Several reforms measures
were unleashed during the last two and half decades.
The basic objective of these reforms is to delink the
rationale of social responsibility underlying the series
of economic decisions that were taken and
institutions that came up during the era of mixed
economy. Once such rational of social responsibility
is delinked, it became easy for the critiques to look
at the issues, institutions, and economy as a whole
based on the pure commercial terms dictated by
market forces. Once we moved away from the
rational behind emergence of each institution, it wont
take much of time to recommend, comment against
the spirit and objectives of the institutions themselves.
That is what the neoliberal elite in India is
contributing now a days. The government
mechanism became the biggest source to channel
this understanding of neoliberal elite. That is why all
the committees that were constituted since the
country embarked up on the policies of globalization
recommended against the very spirit and objectives
of the mixed economy. The same happened with
the HLC on Food security as well.
The FCI was set up in 1965 under Food

Corporation Act 1964 against the backdrop of
major shortage of food grains, especially wheat, in
the country. To face the eventual food crisis, the
country, then, embarked on large scale import of Pl
480 which had its own implications in terms of
foreign exchange management and price volatility
in the global market. That was the time when the
government looked inward and agreed with the
contention that we need self sufficiency in food
production. Accordingly the agrarian reforms
launched with the task of enhancing the food
production and embarked on the green revolution.
This helped the newly emerging rich farmers
community to go on producing to meet the nations
requirement. Again, when we look in the class angle,
the government is bound to provide assured returns
for rich farmers to secure their support for its ruling
and orchestrate a ruling alliance in rural India
corresponding to its ruling alliance at national level.
This led to a series of steps such as emergence of
cooperative system to provide inputs, credit on
subsidy and to institute the Minimum Support Price
mechanism to offset the market impact on the rich
farmers earnings. This trinity of policy moves helped
2 AIAWU BULLETIN - MAY - 2015
All these neoliberal elites picked up some holes

in each of these institutions, mechanisms and
processes. These holes are calculatedly developed
over the period as part of government non response
to meet the situation arising out of new
developments. The government understanding
submerged in to the neoliberal economic
understanding is the key reason behind this. Now
the same consequences of governments ineptness
is being used as basis for undermining the system
itself. The HLCs recommendation of handing over
all procurement operations of wheat, paddy and to

states is one in such a direction. That means in effect,
the responsibility of food security related
management is left to the state governments
themselves which are already reeling under the
mountains of debts and deficits, courtesy, neoliberal
reforms which under cut the income sources of state
governments.
Regarding the MSP also, by simply raising a
question that the MSP mechanism is benefiting not
more than 13% of farmers, the HLC recommended
to discontinue with this mechanism itself. Further,
the HLC recommended , " Center should make it
clear to states that in case of any bonus being given
by them on top of MSP, center will not accept grain
under the central pool beyond the quantity needed
by the state for its own PDS and OWS". The
instrument of bonus on the top of MSP is being
mastered by the state governments over the period
of time in order to keep their ruling alliance with the
farming community under the leadership of rich
farmers intact. Now with this recommendations, the
farming community is going to loose huge amount
that is being showered on them occasionally by the
state governments. Also it has the potential to change
the ruling class alliances in rural India, which
effectively undermines the power of rural ruling elite.
The most damaging recommendation is about
the implementation of National Food Security Act.
Though the NFSA was enacted almost two years
before, but yet to be implemented. The BJP which
campaigned the elections with a promise of
immediate implementation of NFSA if it comes to
power, gave three extensions to state governments
to defer the implementation. Finally through this HLC
recommendations it is going to put the food security
commitments permanently in to dust bin. The HLC
recommended, " GoI have to have a second look
at NFSA, its commitments and implementation."
The rational is a beaten track of leakages. The HLC
report says, " Leakages in PDS range from 40

50%, and in some states go as high as 60 70 %."
In this context, the HLC further goes on to
recommend, " GoI should defer implementation of
NFSA in states that have not done end to end
computerisaion, have not put the list of beneficiaries
online for any one to verify, and have not set up
vigilance committees to check pilferage from PDS".
At the same time, the HLC failed to study the
reasons behind such problems. It just pooled up
the criticism of neoliberal elite against the social
security measures in general and against the PDS in
particular which is readily available in print media
and several reports and proceeded to conclude that
the whole system centering around FCI is wrong
and it needs to be unbundled. The basic reason
behind such a recommendation and the rational that
governed the constitution of HLC is neoliberal logic
that with procurement market in India under the
government control, making private players role
difficult to manipulate the market. The international
trade in agricultural commodities further stream lined
now and the export and import restrictions on these
commodities are being removed, with Trade
Facilitation Agreement. Unbundling of FCI and
discontinuation of supportive mechanisms that are
helping the farming community to sustain cultivation
partially, became the immediate policy priorities for
the central government. With this it wanted to show
the global elite that it can go against the interests of
the nation while honoring the commitments to the
international trading community.
This is nothing but throwing the rural economy
into the clutches of uncertain, volatile global market
forces. Implementation of the recommendations of
HLC would prove , not only the countys food
security but also the countrys hard earned self
sufficiency in food management and the historical
contribution of FCI for the countrys agrarian
economy, very costly.
Hannan Mollah
Down with Anti-Farmer Land

Acquisition Ordinance
The Modi government unleashed a barbaric attack
against the farmers and agricultural workers of our
country by the Land Acquisition Ordinance-2014 on
31 st December 2014. The imperialist British
government enacted the Land Acquisition Act in 1894
to snatch land from the farmers without their consent
at anytime, anywhere and any amount and without
proper compensation and to hand over such land to
industrialists to set up their industry. This Act forced
the farmers to loose lakhs of acre of land during last
120 years under British rule as well as under Congress
and other governments after independence. No
governments consider to protect the farmers interest.
There was wide unrest among farmers against such
forcible acquisition of their land, the only means for
their living and livelihood. They protested again and
again against such arbitrary act. All India Kisan Sabha,
demanded the abolition of this draconian imperialist
act long back.
Later on buckling under the pressure of sustained
struggle by farmers organizations, social movements,
governments are forced to take note of the necessity
of remaking the draconian 1894 Act. As a result in
2007, two bills- one on Land Acquisition and other
one Rehabilitation and Resettlement were introduced
in the Parliament. Both bills were sent to the rural
Development Standing Committee. The BJP leader
Kalyan Singh was its chairman and I happened to be
its member. The committee made intensive studies over
these bills. On Chairmans request, I took major
responsibility to examine the bills and we consulted
large number of farmers organizations, NGOs,
individual experts, agri-economists and many others
and in depth studies were made before finalizing the
report with recommendations. With large number of
amendments to the original bills, the report was

submitted in Parliament. But the term of 14th Lok
Sabha was over and the bills could not be passed.
After 15th Lok Sabha election was held and UPA-II
government was formed, the government submitted
one single bill on Acquisition and Rehabilitation in
Parliament. This bill also sent to the Parliamentary
Standing Committee, which was chaired by BJP, MP
Smt. Sumitra Mahajan. The committee again examined
the bill in details. The most of the recommendations
of the previous committee were retained and some
new added. Then this new Land Acquisition and
Rehabilitation and Resettlement bill 2014 was passed
by the Parliament in September 2013.
Though this new Act was not to the full satisfaction
of the struggling masses, but we considered it an
improvement over the imperialist Act of 1894. Many
of our demands were included in it and farmers
interests were protected to some extent. This bill was
unanimously recommended by the standing Committee
and after full discussion in both the Houses, the Bill
was passed. At that time, the BJP was in full agreement
with the Bill. The Bill was enacted but the UPA-II
governments term was at the end and it could not
implemented. Certain good features of the Act were
as follows:a) For Land Acquisition, farmers consent was
necessary. For Government project 70% and for
Private project 80% of the owners and other
dependents consent was mandatory. b) Social impact
assessment has to be undertaken to study the impact
of the proposed acquisition on various aspects of rural
life, economy, employment, on environment and
sources of livelihood. This will be assessed through
an independent team of expert on project to project

basis. The role of local bodies and their opinion will
also be factored in the report and basing on such a
widely consulted report, the acquisition process has
to be completed in a transparent manner. c)
Compensation to be reasonable not arbitrary, and
negotiable, payment in advance and acquisition after
rehabilitation completed. d) No acquisition of fertile
and irrigated multi cropped land. e) Better standard
of living of affected people
Besides, compensation was fixed at 4 times of
market rate, was guaranteed. The definition of public
purpose was restricted. Food Security was ensured,
Acquisition of only minimum land as per requirement,
provision of going to court by farmers against any
errant officers were provided. Return of land to the
owner, if not used within five years also provided.
But the new ordinance of Modi government taken
away all the above benefits and better provisions of
the Act : a) The ordinance striped of the consent clause
- now no consent of owner is required, b) No need of
social impact assessment that means whether the
industry will damage environment, scuttle local
employment, thwart sources of livelihood need not
be considered. Compensation to only farmers but not
to agricultural labourer and other affected people, no
consent of panchayat, no public hearing, everything
will be done secretly. No role of gram Sabha in
acquisition. Definition of public purpose widened even
private company work also may be considered as
public purpose such as private schools and hospitals.
Land will not be returned after five years even if it is
not used. Farmers cannot go to court against any errant
officer it will require government permission. New thing
added for acquiring land with in the range of one
kilometer on both sides of National Highway or
Railway line, for industrial corridor is exempted from
the purview of new Act only to snatch lakhs of acres
of land from farmers. The other 15 land acquisition
acts have been included in the ordinance but if there is
no social impact assessment, this is meaningless.
Initially Modi government told they would pass this
ordinance and listen to no suggestion. But this

ordinance created wide range of anger among farmers
of the country. Under the leadership of All India Kisan
Sabha and many other organizations, thousands of
copies of the ordinance were burnt all over the country.
All India Agricultural Workers Union also became part
of this nation wide movement.
Later on massive protest rally before Parliament
was held and it was raised in Parliament. The
government compelled with nationwide resistance,
went one step back and announced that they would
amend the ordinance and listen to the suggestions from
the public. On the other hand the government and the
BJP put to use their humongous chain into action to
counter the criticism raised against the Ordinance and
started a Gobbelsian campaign only to fool the
country. They continually campaigned that oppositions
were making false propaganda against the ordinance.
They claimed that the amendments to the 2013 Land
Acquisition and Rehabilitation Act are very good for
the farmers. Modi asked his MPs/MLAs to go to the
village and convince farmers. He Modi himself led the
lie-campaign through his "Man-Ki Bath" in radio. All
these showed the government was in panic and
threatened before public anger. With this wide ranging
outrage, some of the partners of NDA also questioned
the Government and cautioned it. Now the
government, instead of heeding the public opinion is
trying its best to convince its partners in power first to
accept the amendments and tampering with the
democratic parliamentary process only to carry on
with its ill motivated Ordinance.
We should debunk Modis false propaganda and
explain the true nature of this anti farmer Act clause
by clause to the people. The national level coordination
meeting decided to collect 5 crore signatures of the
farmers, agricultural workers and other affected
sections against this Bill/Ordinance. We should
organize and mobilize lakhs of farmers, agricultural
workers and democratic peoples against their anti
farmer conspiracy and defeat this black ordinance in
its entirety.
Subhashini Ali
Era of Neo-Liberal Reforms &

Agricultural Workers
The introduction of neo-liberal reforms since the
to be equivalent to the minimum wages of the State

1990s have created a very complex and difficult concerned and also equal pay for equal work. This is
situation for the landless, rural poor. In the last 3 one occasion where the women are getting equal pay
decades, Government policies have made agriculture for their work along with male compatriots in rural
a losing proposition for very large sections of India. The work was very hard manual labour digging
cultivators. There have been more than 3,00,000 of irrigation ditches and ponds, and other works that
farmer suicides in this period mostly the result of the did not require machines of any kind. The scheme
debt-trap created by reduction of institutional credit was laudable for many reasons the most important of
made available to farmers, rapidly rising prices of all which was that a Government committed to the neofarm inputs, reduction of subsidies, failure of liberal paradigm was forced to design and implement
Governments to procure crops at declared prices and a scheme that went against its espousal of a policy of
the twin vagaries of weather and international markets. the State withdrawing as much as possible from
In a situation where cultivation itself has become a welfare schemes and measures.
precarious venture, the condition of the landless rural
The Forest Rights Act conferred the right to receive
poor has worsened considerably. Availability of homestead land and to continue cultivation on forest
agricultural work has been reduced to between 20- land on those who had been living there for generations.
40 days in a year and migration and uncertain casual The fact that this was passed at a time when largework are very harsh alternatives.
scale evictions were the norm because large tracts of
Left led movements of the peasantry and agricultural forests rich in resources and minerals were being
labour have responded with struggles and movements handed over to corporates and multi-nationals.
but because the vast majority of political parties and
It is important to keep in mind that such
their Governments are united in their espousal of neo- interventions could only be made successfully because
liberal policies it has not been possible to achieve of the fact that the Left occupied a crucial space in
anything substantial either in the way of changes in Parliament and could make its demands more effective
Government policy or in enhancement of wages or because of the mass mobilisations that it could
availability of work.
organise.
There has been one important policy intervention,
This significance of this fact was not lost on the
however, that was possible during 2004-2008 when ruling classes in India. These Left led governments
the Congress led Central Government was dependent not only provides space for discourse on alternative
on the support of 62 Members of Parliament belonging policy trajectory but also the MPs elected from these
to the 2 Communist Parties for its survival. At that states acted as bull work against the neoliberal
time, the Left could push through two legislations onslaught on the rural poor and urban working class.
the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act It is because of this reason, from 2004 onwards, the
(NREGA) and the Forest Dwellers Right to Land Act. ruling classes in India and their foreign collaborators
The NREGA guarantees 100 days of work to any spared no effort to weaken the Communist Parties,
rural household that demanded work. Payment was malign them and reduce the political space they
occupied. The results have been extremely

deleterious not only for the Parties themselves but for
the working class and all sections of the peasantry,
especially the landless, rural poor.
The most important result of this well-planned
onslaught was the electoral defeat of the Left Front in
West Bengal in 2011. While reams have been written
analysing the reasons for this and, in the main, blaming
the Left Front and its largest constituent, the CPI(M),
for this debacle one crucial development that has
accompanied the new political dispensation in the State
finds almost no mention in the political discourse even
that emerging from a Left perspective. In the span
of three short years, hundreds of acres of land that
had been distributed to the landless are being taken
back by the erstwhile landlords with the full support,
co-operation and intimidatory violence of the
administration and police. Hundreds of poor families
have seen their land taken away and sold, their
fishponds taken over by vested interests and their
family members tortured, beaten, raped and killed.
34 years of Left Front rule had made the realities of
class oppression seem like a long-forgotten nightmare.
Organising, struggling and fighting back has to be relearnt, re-invented. This is happening but it will take
some time for the struggles of the poor and landless
to acquire an aggressive edge.
With the influence of the Left and the CPI(M) vastly
reduced inside Parliament, the new Government of
the Right-wing Hindu Nationalist Party, the BJP, is
aggressively attacking whatever had been achieved
by peoples struggles and movements in the last
decade. The Rural Employment Scheme is being
starved of money and support. It will take a massive
struggle to reverse what the Government is doing to
completely destroy it. The poor tribals and forest
dwellers are once again facing evictions and loss of
livelhood. The fight back against this has begun but
needs to acquire more strength if the attacks of various
Governments are to be withstood.
With shrinking opportunities for employment in
agriculture combined with very low wage rates,
landless agricultural workers in considerable number
are engaged in non-agricultural work than agricultural.
They have now become part of an ever-increasing

rural proletariat without any fixed form of employment
and, very often, without any fixed place of employment.
Many males migrate to near and distant urban and
semi-urban areas in search of work. Some may
migrate with their families. They find work at
construction sites or brick kilns or in road building.
Their children are deprived of educational facilities and
most of these families cannot access the very meager
health and other services that Governments provide
for the poor because they do not have the ID cards
that are becoming more and more essential and
exclusionary. Very often, women and children stay
behind in the village and today the vast majority of
agricultural workers throughout the country are
women.
Women are actually facing the brunt of the huge
changes being wrought by the neo-liberal regime. They
are extremely vulnerable to violence, abduction and
abuse both as migrants and as household-heads in
the village. They are also participating more and more
in struggles and movements. It is absolutely essential
to bring large numbers of women workers into the
organisation of agricultural workers and to ensure that
they occupy positions of leadership.
While NREGA is under threat, it still provides the
potential not only for providing employment but also
sites of organisation and struggle. In recent months,
the membership of NREGA workers in the agricultural
workers union has increased and they are participating
and leading many local struggles in different States.
At a time when neo-liberal policies are destroying
the livelihoods and futures of the large masses of the
rural poor, Left and democratic forces have to
overcome the adverse situation in which they are
placed and become much more aggressive in
organising the rural landless and launching effective
struggles around issues not only of employment and
wages but of social reform and gender equality. It is
only when issues like untouchability, caste oppression,
violence against women and unequal treatment of
women workers become focal points of campaigns
and struggles that the neo-liberal regime can be
successfully challenged.
Suneet Chopra
The Right to live is

Our Birthright:
The hot debate over the land acquisition
our right to compensation for work lost in land

ordinances of the NDA government is not accidental takeovers, but also the right of landless dalits and
or restricted only to the matter of access to a scarce women in the villages where they live and contribute
resource. Land rights, and especially those that we to life and production.
achieved after our struggle for independence from
We must not only fight this attempt of the Modi
colonial rule, are crucial to our social existence as government to do away with our social existence in
citizens with equal rights under the Indian Constitution. the rural areas in one sweep, but we must deepen our
The denial of any of these rights is an attack on our struggle for democratic rights by demanding that land
right as citizens of India.
rights for dalits, tribal people and women are a
It must never be forgotten that for over a thousand necessary part of our struggle to defend the rights we
years we were able to keep a fifth of our population won with independence and to implement them even
in the shackles of untouchability and semi animal more thoroughly. Any backtracking on this count will
conditions by simply denying dalits land rights in the also lead to the erosion of our democratic rights as
village. A similar situation prevails in the case of women they exist today as well. In this condition we have a
who may reproduce the family line but are denied the situation in which a worker peasant alliance in the rural
right to land in both the family they are born in and the areas can be strengthened meaningfully.
one they may marry into. Social marginalization like
The struggles going on in tribal areas to protect
this may be traditional but it violates our rights as full lands seized from tribal people by the British and never
citizens of a state that claims to be both secular and returned to them by independent India are not merely
socialist. Now with scarce resources likely to become an economic demands but an assertion of their
even more scarce with a government wishing to hand democratic rights that were taken away from them. In
over everything to corporates, foreign agencies and the same way, when we struggle for house-sites for
even mafias, we are left with no alternative but to dalits in our villages or for land to the tiller, and dalits
struggle.
are half the tillers of the land anyway, so we are fighting
Much of the anger we see in the peasantry today for strengthening the roots of our democratic system.
is a result of the fear that the Modi government at the In the same way we strengthen it when we demand
centre is taking away our citizenship of the Indian state that women get land rights on the land they till anyway
and handing it over to corporates, mafias and as second-class citizens.
speculators. That is why the same peasantry that not
The struggles against the dispossession of the
only gave land for development freely and even its peasants and the tribals by the state today must be
sons and daughters to defend our borders is resisting integrated with those for giving land rights to landless
the present governments rush to act as real estate dalits and women. These are necessary to strengthen
agents for big business. Today the same peasants who the roots of our democracy at the level of our villages
denied dalits and women land rights are coming out in and will ensure we do not lose our place as equals in
protest against the new legislation. While we support the face of economic fundamentalist policies handing
their struggle firmly and actively, we must also demand over our fate to a handful of corporates and billionaires
who will then feel free to transport us like cattle and

trade us off as cheap labour. Or worse, let us wander
wherever we can, begging for work and becoming
targets for human traffickers. This must not be
permitted. The human cost of this development will
be far greater than any benefit such development
delivers.
Even today dalits constitute 28 % of the landless
while they are only 16.3 % of the population according
to 70th Round of NSSO Survey. For the Scheduled
Tribes the figure is 9.4 % landless of 13.4 % of the
population. For the OBCs the figure is 52.5 % landless
of a population of 45.4% while others who constitute
24.9 % of the population, have only 10.4 % landless.
This reflects the fact that caste seriously affects the
pattern of land ownership and consequently the
continued oppression and denial of rights of the lower
castes, primarily the dalits.
From this angle, the struggles for land, for work
ensured by MNREGA legislation and the proper
implementation of provisions like reservations for
scheduled castes and tribes, for backward classes and
women, for equal wages for equal work, for free and
compulsory education, free medical aid and food
security are all connected with our right to live as
human beings in our communities and more precisely
as the citizens of a secular, democratic socialist republic
based the principle of one person one vote.
It is obvious that in a society based on sharp
inequalities, laws will be made to exploit, dispossess
and oppress us. But our struggles also have given laws,
that we wanted in our interest, like Zamindari
abolition and land ceilings, Prevention of Atrocities
against Scheduled Castes, 73rd Amendment devolving
power to local government institutions like Panchayats,
the Womens reservations at various levels in the
political system, MNREGA, Forest Rights and Food
Security Acts to name only a few. But not only are
they not being implemented as they should without
our struggles , we find powerful individuals backed
by the NDA government taking over assets, drying
up job opportunities and even trying to make these
laws toothless. At such a time we cannot wait and
watch. We must fight for the demands of the mass of
our rural people from the ground upwards.
The AIAWU is well fitted to achieve this end as it

has developed as an umbrella organization of the rural
poor in a number of states like Kerala, Telangana,
Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Tripura, Punjab,
Karnataka, Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.
We expect to develop our organization in West Bengal
as well. So we can with some confidence take up the
defense of the democratic rights of a large mass of
our people without which the democratic rights of the
rest are also likely to be eroded. But it is up to us to
carry this message to them. This can only be done
through strengthening our presence among the basic
mass of the rural poor on the one hand, and our links
with others by being part of joint struggles and at the
same time being the most militant section on the ground
in our local struggles for our democratic demands and
the implementation of laws and schemes that should
benefit the mass of the rural poor if they could put
pressure on the system to respond to them.
This will require not only the expansion of our
organization to other states and districts in states where
we exist but will also require that we formulate correct
slogans for struggle and organize struggles that we carry
forward till they are realized. This requires a closer
link between our leadership, cadre and the masses.
Experience has shown that the ordinary member
follows the pattern set by the leader and the burden
of reaching out is far greater on the leadership than on
the ordinary members who will see them as role
models.
It is not easy to develop such a consciousness
spontaneously or individually. It requires greater
organizational functioning and democratic decision
making at every level of the organisation. At the same
time it requires systematic education of our cadre and
leaders on the conditions prevailing in the country as
a whole, the spontaneous upsurges resulting from them
and the solutions to the problems they represent. Time
is short as the crisis is deep, but knee-jerk responses
alone are not enough. There are no short cuts in our
struggle to protect the people and ensure their rights.
So we must apply ourselves to ensuring that the
programs we choose are not only implemented
properly but are also realistic. Nothing less will do.
Bhanulal Saha
Widening Reach of
Social Security in Tripura
In Tripura with a population of 39,00,00 having
9.63 lakhs families, number of social pension holders
is 3,27,082. Nearly one third of the families of the
state is under Social Security in Tripura. When we
look at the proportion of beneficiaries in total
households, Tripura stands on top in the country.
Despite having financial constraints, Tripura
Government is doing its best to bring as many people
under coverage of different social security measures.
Even this financial year, they targeted to extend the
number of beneficiaries by additional 20000 under
state government funded schemes. There are 23
different schemes for the old aged persons, widow,
disable persons with (100% blind and 60% disable).
Deserted women, Rickshaw pullers, Cobblers,
incentive to girl child, Beedi workers, Transport
workers, Laundry workers, Barber workers,
Handloom workers, Fishermen etc.
Out of these 23 schemes, only 3 are National
Level Schemes and more 20 such schemes are run
by the State Government. Out of 3,27,082 social
pension holder, 1,86,239 are beneficiaries of Central
Schemes such as National Old Age Pension and
Indira Gandhi Widow Pension scheme, where central
share is Rs. 53.40 cr. The State Government added
more money to the tune of Rs. 74.40 cr. to enhance
the monthly pension by Rs. 300 per month above
the central share of Rs. 200/- per month. Besides
that, 20 completely state pension scheme for other
1,40,843 people of different categories with an
expenditure of Rs.72.56 cr. are given annually that
is total expenditure is Rs. 200 cr. per annum for the
social security system. Out of which 27% is financed
by the Union Government and 73% by the State

Government.
In short it can be said that the Social Security
System for the deserving people is largely made by
the state government for which a monthly pension
of Rs.500 to Rs.1000 is given to them for their
minimum expenses of their livelihood. There is a plan
to increase this amount though state government is
facing constraint due to the new approach of the
union governments decision to curtail the people
oriented programmes.
Impact of this social security in Tripura is that the
poor people of below poverty line can purchase their
quota of public distribution system like rice, wheat,
sugar, kerosene oil etc. the government is giving
subsidies towards food grains like rice dal, edible
oil @ Rs. 4.15, Rs.10 and Rs.15 per Kg/ litre
respectively.
18.58 lakh people is getting subsidy in food grains
and the entire people is getting subsidy in dal and
edible oil. This subsidy package is also a social
security to the poor. They are mainly agri-workers,
poor peasants, village artisans and poor senior
citizens. That is why, there is no starvation death
and peasants suicide in the state where nearly 5560 % people can be termed as poor. As there is no
industry in the state and only 26% of the entire
geographical area is cultivable, the entire poor people
depends on agriculture and get nearly 75 days works
from the agricultural operation in the state.
MNREGA is being implemented successfully to
give 90 day job for the year 2014-15 maintaining its
( cont...page 19)
Veeraiah Konduri
The Modi Government and Rural Poor

: Road to Triple Insecurities
The Constitution of India guarantees socioeconomic security to the people of India. Directive
Principles of State Policy elaborately prescribed the
objectives of social security and prescribed measures
for same. Since then, these directives guides the overall
policies that are being implemented by the successive
governments.
Article 38 of the Constitution mandates the
governments, " (1) The State shall strive to promote
the welfare of the people by securing and protecting
as effectively as it may a social order in which justice,
social, economic and political, shall inform all the
institutions of the national life. (2) The State shall, in
particular, strive to minimize the inequalities in income,
and endeavor to eliminate inequalities in status, facilities
and opportunities not only amongst individuals but also
amongst groups of people residing in different areas
or engaged in different vocations." with an objective
" to secure a social order for the promotion of welfare
of the people." Similarly, Article 47 of the Constitution
says that it is the duty of State to raise the level of
nutrition, standards of living of its people and improve
public health. Specifically, Article 45 of the Constitution
establishes the guiding principle of Integrated Child
Development Scheme when it says, "Provision for early
childhood care and education to children below the
age of six years."Given the need for employment, the
Directive Principles have made a special mention of
this. Article 41 focuses on Right to work as an
important principle which should govern the policies
of the States. Article 41 says, "The State shall, within
the limits of its economic capacity and development,
make effective provision for securing the right to work,
to education and to public assistance in cases of
unemployment, old age, sickness and disablement, and

in other cases of undeserved want."
The governments since 1991 paid scanty attention
towards the necessity of socio-economic security as
envisaged by the Constitution. The Modi led BJP came
into power, which did not have any respect either on
Gandhi whose ideals shaped the Directive Principles
nor on Ambedkar who drafted these ideals into rights.
The BJP government, in its first full budget started
destroying the socio-economic security guaranteed by
the Constitution of India.
The NDA Government presented its first full budget
for 2015-16 financial year. The interim budget
presented in June 2014 can be considered as joint
venture between UPA-II and NDA. This budget is
prepared solely after NDA had its fullest command
over the finances of the country during last year.
Reflecting its command over the economy, the budget
presentation began by saying that under dynamic Modi
leadership they could give new direction to the nations
economy. The Central Statistical Organisations
revised estimates are being shown as a proof for strong
revival of economy. Also he announced that we are
only the country that even surpassed China in growth
rate and poised achieve 10 percent growth rate within
no time. This the government wants to achieve this
growth at the cost of its people. It is evident from the
reduced allocations for almost all the social security
schemes and programs.
India, approaching it Amrit Mahotsav of
independence in 2022 still predominantly lives in
villages. Agriculture is back bone for the rural economy
which is catering the bare minimum needs for more
than two thirds of its population. The policy makers
11
with neoliberal mind set neglected the constitutional

mandate of providing social security to its people. We
are talking about the social security not merely in terms
of welfare schemes such as pensions and PDS. The
social security in our understanding includes food
security, employment security and social security in
traditional sense. Let us consider the budget
implications and future policy directions in this budget
on all these three counts.
The slogan of minimum government and maximum
governance attracted several new segments including
some sections of first time voters who had bitter
experience with the government authorities on various
occasions. But we need to remind that the rural India
as a whole having bitter experiences with the
authorities since independence. The roots of these
bitter experiences are in the policy prescriptions of
the government but not in the individual functioning
styles of few officials. The same reflected even after
the BJP government came to power. The focus of
policy direction has been shifted from rural India to
urban, that too cosmopolitan landscape to be more
precise. Thus the present budget provides minimum
attention both at the level of policy and in terms of
budget to several several social security schemes.
These schemes are intended to deliver minimum relief
to the rural poor. The attention towards welfare
schemes and subsidies meant for Integrated Child
Development Scheme (ICDS), Public Distribution
System(PDS), fertilizer subsidy, subsidized gas
cylinders, national social assistance program, Indira
Avas Yojana (IAY) , sanitation, rural drinking water,
rural roads and other several other programs and
schemes are being considered as non priority areas.
It is unfortunate that at a time when nearly about 16
lakhs children under 5 years age group are dying due
to malnutrition, the central government cut down the
budget for Integrated Child Development Scheme
(ICDS) to half from its last year allocations. Similarly
the table given as part of statistical appendix informs
us how the government is treating the rural
development and social security shabbily.
The government claims that due to 14th Finance

Commission recommendations, large amounts of funds
have been transferred to states, now the responsibility
of implementing these schemes are left to the state
governments. It is to be noted that even after such a
high pitch campaign of center transferring more funds
to state governments, the actual transfers have been
reduced from 6.2 % of GDP to 5.9 % of GDP
between 2014-15 and 2015-16. This in fact
compounds the problems of state governments by
imposing new burdens on them. The union government
cancelled 8 schemes and reduced budgetary support
for another 24 schemes. Implementation of remaining
schemes becomes state governments responsibility.
In the mean time the funds earmarked for such
schemes will be transferred to state gvernments kitty
where they will be having discretion in utilizing these
funds. All these schemes were formulated after a well
laid out thought process and expert consultation to
bridge the gaps in development. But the government
that does not care much for such gaps in development
which will fuel inequality distancing itself from this
responsibility of ensuring social security.
Moreover after transferring these schemes and their
funds to the shoulders of state governments, the central
government is not going to share the cost of revenue
expenditure such as staff salaries. For any social
security scheme, the expenditure will be considered
as plan expenditure at the conceptualization stage and
for few years till the systems are in place for its proper
implementation. Once the scheme is in place for some
years, then majority of the expenditure on that
particular scheme becomes revenue expenditure, a
kind of recurring expenditure. As on now, meeting this
expenditure is the responsibility of central government.
Not sharing this recurring expenditure by center means,
the burden of implementing or discontinuing the said
scheme purely lies on the state governments.
Now let us consider the three key pillars of social
security and their allotments in the budget. The first
pillar is job security for the rural poor. The
governments attitude towards this major flagship
program had been kept on changing since its inception.

During the tenure of UPA 2, the MNREGAs
potential impact became evident on the rural economy
and also at the same time the ruling class that
commands rural India started annoyed with the fact
that the MNREGA became a powerful tool in granting
self respect to agricultural workers. It also facilitated
the agricultural workers to demand for their legal wages
and the rich farmers are forced to increase a portion
of wages for agricultural workers. Not only that.
Before the introduction of MNREGA, the rural poor
are forced to migrate to urban centers in search of
work at sub-minimum wages just to save their children
from half empty stomachs. Thus the urban economic
actors used to get the uninterrupted supply of man
power at cheapest rates. Because of this low cost of
labour power only, the present government under
Modi inviting foreign companies to come to India not
only to exploit the rich natural resources but also to
exploit numerically strong labour power at fraction of
wages. This is the rational behind the Make in India
slogan.
But this situation had undergone a change with the
implementation of MNREGA. As the MNREGA
guarantees the employment with in their home village,
rural workers reluctant to work for paltry payments
in far off locations. Thus those sectors which are
banking on the cheapest labour power are now facing
constraints on their profits. Thus the ruling class
alliance, both in rural India and urban India came
together to scuttle the job guarantee program. This is
evident from official data itself. The Act generated
employment for 5,25,30,453 households in 2009
where as the same came down to 3,94,76552 which
means during the last five years, the number beneficiary
households came down by a whopping 1, 30, 53,
901 ! Average days of employment generated for each
household under the Act came down drastically from
53.99 in 2009-10 to 37.74 days in 2014-15. Similarly
the percentage of SC beneficiaries came down from
30.48 % in 2009-10 to 22.52 % in 2014-15. More
interestingly the Outcome budget submitted by the
Ministry of Rural Development to Parliament indicates

that of the total allocations, Rs. 18,333.95 crores left
unspent in 2010-11 financial year where as the unspent
amount from MNREGA allocations stood at Rs.
14,545.47 crores by 2012-13 financial year. Even in
2014-15 financial year Rs. 4406.31 crores left
unspent. The number of person days generated came
down from 230.41 crores in 2012-13 to 164.11 crore
days in 2014-15. The number of villages with nill
expenditure under MNREGA program also went up
from 25,155 to 31939 during the same period. This
is how the ruling class started scuttling and diluting the
premier employment security providing program
MNREGA.
Let us consider the food security aspect during the
last five years. It is clear that the National Food
Security Act (NFSA) is yet to deliver its intended
benefits to the eligible poor despite it was adopted by
the Parliament two years back. The Act is officially
under implementation only in 11 states that too without
proper infrastructure for successful delivery of services.
Though the last two years annual budgets are having
provision for fund to implement NFSA, on the ground
already existing targeted public distribution system
also getting a raw deal from the governments.
According to the Department related Parliamentary
Standing Committee on Food and Consumer Affairs,
and Public Distribution system, the total coverage
under targeted public distribution system is limited to
mere 8134.91 laksh beneficiaries where as the
officially recognized number of BPL families are fare
more than that. To implement the NFSA needs
budgetary allocation of Rs. 1,31,086 crore where as
the allocations for the financial year 2014-15 stands
at Rs. 100505 crore, which is almost 25 % less than
the requirement. The fund shortage for food security
during 2012-13 stood at Rs. 32,743 crores. The
Standing Committee itself found that shortage of funds
for food subsidy rose from Rs. 32,743 crore in 201213 to Rs. 53,458 crore in 2013-14 and may go upto
Rs. 60,730 crore in current year.
13
It is in this situation, the BJP government at the

center appointed a high level committee under the
chairmanship of former union minister for food and
public distribution, Mr. Shanta Kumar who
recommended for dismantling of the Food
Corporation of India altogether, which is the back
bone for countrys food security. The high level
committee also recommended not to implement the
National Food Security Act at its present form as it
involves huge sums of subsidy. The WTO demands
to de-regulate the agricultural produces market in third
world countries. Accordingly the government is
preparing ground for meeting such commitments given
to community of international financial capital. Financial
constraint is not the real reason behind such
recommendation. While on one hand, precious public
money is being doled out to the corporate sector by
way of tax concessions, it became a fashion for every
one to criticize the social security schemes. With this
kind of understanding towards the countrys food
security, the government is trying its best to push the
country to pre 1960s era where in the nation
experienced hunger deaths and roots of rural distress.
This only will lead to dismantle the food security the
country achieved at the cost of sweat and blood of
farmers and agricultural workers of this country.
Finally let us consider third aspect of social security.
This includes several schemes that are of income
substitution and expenditure substitution in nature. The
two key pillars above mentioned are completely
different from the third set of schemes. Above
mentioned two pillars are ensuring right to work and
right to food irrespective of the caste, creed, gender,
region and religion, APL/BPL differentiation. Also
these two social and economic security measures are
backed by law and the governments can not tweak at
their will. Unlike these two, the income substituting
and expenditure substituting schemes such as National
Rural Livelihood Mission, formerly known as
Sampoorn Gram Swarojgar Yojana, Indira Avas
Yojana, Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojnana,
National Old Age Pension schemes, Disability pension
schemes and other such schemes. These are all being

implemented at the will of governments of the day.
The budgetary allocations are not being fully utilized.
As we have shown in this bulletin, Rs. 9954 crores
left unspent for the financial year 2010-11 for just three
schemes, SGSY, IAY and PMGSY where as this
amount went up to Rs. 12824 crores for the year
2012-13 and stands around Rs. 9516 crores left
unutilized. Within this budget the allocations for old
age pensions have been reduced by one thousand
crores. Not only that. The government proposed to
change IAY is being changed into repayment based
model from subsidy/ grant based model. Thus the
government is tweaking with all these income and
expenditure substitution schemes which will impose
larger burdens on the rural poor and agricultural
workers. More over the government asking the
corporate sector to share its social responsibility by
spending peanuts from their profits. Already 124
villages have been adopted by Tata Trust in Krishna
districts of Andhra Pradesh. In such villages, the role
of Panchayati Raj institutions becomes irrelevant.This
is the dangerous trend that is creeping into the policy
making and participatory democracy. Already the
central government is shifting its constitutional
responsibility to the discretionary authority of states.
It is withdrawing itself from legally backed social
security programs whose implementation solely lies
on the shoulder of central government. Thus the
government wants to dismantle the existing structures
to mitigate the inequality. The programs such as
MNREGA are primarily oriented towards addressing
the structural inequalities and marginalization. All this
is going for a toss under NDA government. Thus the
BJP government laying foundations for triple
insecurities employment insecurity, food insecurity
and social insecurity. This is in this context we need to
build the movement for social security. The aims of
this movement shall be to strengthen the legally backed
rights for their fullest possible implementation and the
expand the base of income/expenditure substitution
based schemes with more funds.
Pinnamaneni Murali Krishna
TDP Government Undermining Social

Security in Andhra Pradesh
It has been 11 months since TDP came to power
in Andhra Pradesh. On July 8th, on the day of
swearing in, the Chief Minister signed on key five
electoral promises. The promise of loan waiver for
farmers became a fiasco. Of 1.18 crore lakhs with
indebtedness, only 35 lakh farmers got relief. The
65 lakh members of DWACRA are yet to see the
light of loan waiver. The third signature was on
canceling the belt shops. But in practice, the income
of excise department went up by 20 % with increased
belt shops. " To get a job, Vote for Babu" was the
TDP slogan. But thousands of contract workers are
being ousted from jobs including 3000 of field
assistants under MNREGA. Instead of providing
social security to marginalized and distressed, the
joint venture of Modi-Babu ensuring profit security
for corporates.
More over. The TDP government is mercilessly
vacating the farmers from their farm lands under Land
Pooling System (LPS) in the name of new capital
region. Till now 31000 acres from 29 villages have
been pooled up. The speculative land market was
created to convince the farmers to hand over the
lands under LPS. The farmers were cheated with a
false propaganda that their benefits under LPS will
be more than under Land Acquisition Act 2013.
Despite such a false propaganda, farmers of 9
villages refused to surrender their land. To help
Chandrababus task more easy, Modi government
is trying to amend the Land Acquisition Act 2013
where 80 % farmers consent is required for public
project. Thus the joint venture of TDP-BJP is
determined to see the farmers into daily wage earners
willing to sell their labour power at cheaper wages.
Those who have realized that they were duped by

TDP are not resorting to court to take back their
lands.
The Land Acquisition Act 2013 also ensures 20
years royalty for those who lost their sources of
livelihood. Against this, the TDP government
promised only Rs. 2500 compensation for each
family, that too for 10 years. Under the LPS system
government will be able to own 80 % of the land
pooled up with out paying single paise of
compensation. This same land is being planned to
hand over to foreign companies from Singapore and
Japan for their collaboration in capital design and
construction. Thus, the poor and land less in Andhra
Pradesh are worst kind of primitive accumulation.
Further, TDP government wants to pool up 20
lakhs acres of land under LPS. This will devastate
the rural economy resulting in loss of rural
employment. The indiscriminate and mindless land
allocations can be seen from the decision of handing
over 400 acres of forest land to a Yoga guru, Jaggi
Vasudev as a Guru Dakshina just for organising a
three day yoga camp for TDP legislators and serious
bureaucrats. In addition to this, in the name of
beautifying Vijayawada, notices are being issued to
thousands of houses on canal bunds who are staying
there for generations.
During the election campaign, TDP promised to
increase the subsidy component from Rs. 70000 to
Rs. 1.50 lakhs and took a task of building 5 lakh
houses in a year. But it submitted proposal to central
government only to construct 1,45,570 houses ! Also
the budget for rural housing has been reduced to
mere Rs 897 crores. With this amount government
15
can only construct only 59800 house at the cost of

Rs. 1.50 lakhs per house. Then how the government
can complete 5 lakh houses in a year ? This is nothing
but a clear cheating of the houseless. Even to complete
the 4.6 lakh houses that were started during the last
governments tenure, it needs Rs. 2701 crores.
With regarding to MNREGA, the track record
of TDP is more disappointing. Over the last
agricultural year 59 lakh worker took part in
MNREGA works and 70 % of workers are from
severely draught effected Rayala Seema and North
Costal Andhra region. Against the mandate of the
Act, the government created budget allocations to
tie up the MNREGA workers with the land owners/
land lords. The quantum of wages paid under
MNREGA came down from Rs. 2138 crores in
2012-13 to Rs. 1851 crores in 2014-15. The
average employment generated per household also
came down from 61days to 47 day. Those who got
employment for 100 days came down from 7 lakhs
household to 3.88 lakh households. As the
mechanization of farm operations increasing, there
is an urgent need to increase minimum days of
employment from 100 to 200 days under
MNREGA. The honorarium for mates is also linked
with whether worker earns Rs. 100 or not. In the
current year, the MNREGA funds are being diverted
to Water-Tree scheme which was designed to ensure
profits for machinery owners from TDP.
With the reduction of employment of under
MNREGA, agricultural workers from draught
effected districts are migrating to neighboring states.
In an unfortunate accident in Chennai at a work site,
24 migrant workers from Andhra Pradesh died. From
a village in Kurnool, the strength of school came
down from 119 to 49 just because remaining children
migrated along with their parents in the middle
academic year. The rate of literacy came down to
less than 34 % in Kosgi mandal in Kurnool which
reflects upon the consequences of rural distress. This
is the fate of literary in some of the rural area in India.
The TDP government even violating of Right to
Education Act. The RTE mandated one primary

school with in one kilo meter distance, and one upper
primary school with in two kilo meter distance.
Against this, the state government came out with a
concept of one cluster school with in 3 kilo mater
distance there by closing down all the schools with
in that distance. This will lead to closing down of
12919 schools in the state which will deny right to
education to lakhs of students, obviously from
agricultural workers and rural poor families. Already
the state literary rate is only 67 % , which is below
the national average of 74.4%. The private schools
having 40 %. With the increasing cost of traveling,
uniform, fee, the quality education became a hanging
fruit for agricultural workers. Also the RTE mandates
the governments to earmark 25 % of seats for children
from economically socially backward sections which
is not at all being implemented by the private
managements in the state. According to this provision,
1,72,239 seats are to be filled with such students
where as only 358 such students got admissions
under this quota in the year 2013-14 in un-bifurcated
state of AP.
The public health system in the state is in
doldrums. Earlier hundreds of crores were spent on
Rajiv Arogya Sri to amass the profits for corporate
hospitals and neglected the primary health system.
As of now there is a requirement of 20000 trained
doctors where as we have not only 6114. Out of
7647 sanctioned nurse posts, 1625 falling vacant for
more than three years. State government is yet to
implement the National Food Security Act 2012.
Because of delay in implementation more than 3.82
crore beneficiaries are denied their due right. Despite
existence of 20 lakh tenants only 3.5 lakhs are
recognized. The crop loans dues worth Rs 400
crores for tenant farmers not being implemented on
the pretext of technical reasons. Government is not
committed to implement the minimum wages act.
TDP is undermining the SC/ST Sub Plan Act. Thus
it is undermining the minimum social security that is
available for agricultural workers.
B. Prasad
Social Security in Telangana

A Mirage ?
Telangana emerged as the youngest state of India
in 2014. Sentiment based movement fueled KCR to
power and became the first Chief Minister of
Telangana state. During his election campaign, he
showered number of promises, schemes, concessions
to almost all sections of people. But he did worked
out a detailed plan of action to ensure that these
promises be realized. Though he initiated
implementation of some schemes with much ad
hocism. Some of the key promises that won KCR to
power are as follows.
a)
Three acres of land for each dalit and adivasi

household along with capital investment for one
year cultivation.
b)
Increase of pension amount from Rs. 200 to

Rs. 1000.
c)
12 % reservations for SC and recognizing the

Adivasi hamlets as villages.
d)
House sites for all the houseless poor, two bed

room houses with hall, kitchen, with cost of 3.50
lakhs grant.
e)
Free education from KG to PG
f)
Implementing Food Security Act
g)
Strengthening of Anganwadi centers, mid day

meal scheme and public health systems.
Though these resulted in enthusiasm but when TRS

came to power, the government started watering down
all these promises.
Reducing Pension Beneficiaries : The pension
beneficiaries have been categorized into a) Old Age,
b) Widow, c) Disabled, d) Handloom, e) Taddy
tappers. Earlier pensions used to be issued on individual
basis. But the TRS government considering each
household as a unit and allotting one pension for each

household. Thus the number of beneficiaries have come
down drastically. For those also it given much scope
for administrative description by increasing the number
of mandatory documents to be produced by a
beneficiary.
Dubious Land Distribution : TRS captured Dalit
vote bank with a promise of distribution not less than
three acres of land for each family. On swearing in, he
owed to ensure that no landlessness in the state. Out
of 14.50 households in Telangana, 9.50 lakhs dalit
families lives in rural Telangana. Instead of
implementing its own promise, now it says that there
is no vacant government land for distribution, he will
purchase. Accordingly on 15th August 2014, 1011.54
acres of land was distribution to 512 families. Of this
only 110 acres is government land and remaining land
was purchased from real estate developers by
compensating them. The cost of land soared from Rs.
20000 to Rs. 3.59 lakhs. This only helped to amass
profits by real estate developers. Thus the TRS
government instead of becoming land distributor,
merely becoming a land broker.
Food Security With out Rice : The government
playing havoc with the public distribution system.
There are 2.80 lakhs BPL ration cards which are being
now linked to Aadhar to make them Food Security
cards. Though they announced distribution of 6 kgs
per head, money was not allocated for that. It is
arbitrarily cutting down the list of beneficiaries and
number of beneficiary households on different reasons.
Similarly several other promises have not even been
initiated resulting in doubt whether the social security
in Telagana a mirage ?
17
G. Mani
Social Security Programs in Tamil

Nadu : A Brief Comment
Social security programs became key vehicles
in the hands of central and state governments to
quench the public anger. That is why from time to
time, all new governments announces some or other
new schemes with their branding. The experience of
Tamil Nadu is no different. There are several schemes
and programs under implementation. Some of them
are centrally sponsored schemes and some are state
government designed. In Tamil Nadu it is difficult to
differentiate between the dole outs at the time of
elections and the social security oriented schemes
and programs. They are being announced and
implemented in such a mixed way. The Tamil Nadu
state committee of AIAWU decided to study the
functioning of some the schemes. In our study, we
found that number of schemes are not implemented
properly. Here we are giving a brief information about
different schemes, their guide lines and the available
data on beneficiaries.
The peasant protection scheme : Under this
scheme, agricultural workers, small and marginal
farmers who are having not more than 5 acres of dry
land or 2.5 acres of wet land are eligible for
government benefits. Artisans, inland fishermen,
poultry owners, beekeepers have also been included
in this scheme. So far 1,68,08,350 members
registered beneficiaries and another 1,25,78,160
dependents are getting benefit from this scheme. The
registered beneficiaries are entitled for marriage
benefit, old age pension, temporary incapacitation
pension, compensation in the event of natural death,
accident, and funeral expenditure. The dependents
are eligible for marriage benefit, education assistance,
and funeral expenses. Thus it is almost like an

umbrella of social security for the poor in the state.
Both in the case of registered beneficiaries and
dependent beneficiaries, individual members of
households are considers as unit, which helps the
government to expand the beneficiary base.
The old age pension, Rs. 1000 is being restricted
to only those who dont receive any help from their
son or daughter. Additionally if any beneficiary is
effected by enduring illness such as TB, HIV, Cancer
or incapacitated temporarily, they will be getting
additional Rs. 1000 per member. In case of natural
death Rs. 10000 will be given as one time grant along
with Rs. 2500 for funeral expenditure. In case of
death due to accident of loss of both hands, legs, the
households are eligible for Rs. One Lakh
compensation. In case of loss of eye sight
permanently, Rs. 50000 will be given as one time
grant. Apart from this, children studying will also be
getting scholarship as per their class of study.
But the crux is that except the old age pension,
which is sponsored by central government, all others
are incidental benefits. Each family used to get these
benefits once in their life time. Thus the financial
burden on state governments would be a limited one.
But in the eyes of people, the governments of the
day will be the champions of their welfare.
Apart from this, under Green House Scheme, the
grant for constructing houses in ones own land has
been increased to Rs. 2.10 lakhs of which Rs. 30000
deducted to provide solar power generation set for
each house. This is the modified version of IAY. Each
year, government set the target of constructing 60000

houses of which 17400 (29%) beneficiaries will be
selected from Dalit households, 600 (1%) from Tribal
and remaining 42000( 70%) from backward classes
communities.
Also a separate marriage assistance scheme is
under implementation. Under this scheme, from a
poor family with annual income below Rs. 72000
with one girl is the key criteria for benefiting under
the scheme. If the girl studied below 10th class, an
amount of Rs. 25000 and 4 gram gold will be
provided by the state government. If the girl studied
Diploma or more than that, her family is entitled to
get Rs. 50000 along with 4 gram gold. Also there
are separate schemes for providing financial
assistance for widow remarriage, widows daughters
marriage, and in an inter-caste marriage where bride
or bridegroom are from Dalit or OBC castes, they
are entitled for financial support from government.
Also the government currently implementing the
mixie, grinder, fan scheme where all the 1.83 crore

households are considered as beneficiaries. All these
families will be provided with mixie, grinder, and fan
with in the fiver years tenure.
Apart from above mentioned state sponsored
social security schemes, several government
sponsored social security schemes are being
implemented in the state. Some of them are central
government sponsored and some are sponsored by
state governments. Under Indira Gandhi National Old
Age Pension Scheme, Indira Gandhi National
Physically Challenged Personss Pension scheme,
Widow pension scheme, Destitute Physically
challenged persons scheme, Destitute Widow
Pension Scheme, Destitute Agricultural Workers
Pension scheme, Destitute Women Pension Scheme,
Un Married women with above 50 years pension
scheme are to mention some. Under all these listed
schemes, there are 30,71,981 beneficiaries are getting
some kind of financial benefits.
Widening Reach of
Social Security in Tripura
( from...page 10)
supremacy in the country for last 5 years increasing
highest number of man days from this project though
the Government of India tried to allocate less money
this year violating the act itself. The state government
come forward with money in this project to create
more mandays. Numbers of beneficiaries in this
project is 5.75 lakh job card holders.
In the urban areas, the poor people are given the
scope of work through Tripura Urban Employment
Programme through which 60-65 mandays have
been created in 2014-15 to combat the poverty of
the urban poor mainly the slum dwellers. Under IAY,
we have sanctioned more than 41000 houses for
eligible poor in the last three years.
With these works and social security pensions,

these families are helped for their survival. There is
none who dont get two square means a day. And
for this there is no beggar in the street. None
remained half-fed and the question of starvation
death does not arise.
These are the measures which the Left Front
Government has seriously taken to save the poor
people from hunger, unemployment and the rural
economy in the state. In short this is the social impact
of the three decade long Left Front rule in the state
from 1978 to 2015 barring 1988 to 1992 due to
the conscious mass support of the poor people of
Tripura.
19
25715.23 7875.63 30.63
21170.77 4660.53 22.01
21848.00 4726.75 21.63
21867.74 4941.37 22.60
14897.78 3355.04 22.52
54954225
49894603
48561267
47684864
39476552
2538.30 17.04
3758.22 17.19
3627.81 16.60
3862.26 18.24
5361.79 20.85
8197.93
55.03
11554.60 52.84
11388.51 52.13
10197.74 48.17
12274.21 47.73
Average
person
days per
Household
53.99
9004.44
37.74
13168.15 45.86
13493.44 44.99
12647.98 42.43
12477.81 46.79
No of
Composition of Beneficiaries ( Person Days in Lakhs)
Households Total
SCs
% of SC
STs
% of ST
Women % of
Others
provided
beneficiaries
Beneficiaries
Women
employment
Beneficiaries
52530453
28359.59 8644.84 30.48
5874.40 20.71
13640.48 48.10
13840.35
2228.07
8799.90
385.00
0.00
11339.92
149.85
2009-10
2391.61
29212.92
9872.06
90.00
119.71
2559.37
2195.39
30274.72
7868.76
0.00
8884.31
375.00
Actual Expenditures
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2022.09
32992.83
12981.65
3.00
9805.11
303.52
2013-14
Budget
Estimates
2014-15
1372.60
33364.00
15976.00
50.00
4235.41
519.30
Revised
Estimates
2014-15
789.52
32464.00
10990.00
00.00
4235.41
328.50
Budget
Estimates
2015-16
1077.70
33713.00
10000.00
0.00
4185.00
315.00
SGSY = Swarn Jayanti Gram Swarojgar Yojana, now known as National Rural Livelihood Mission. MNREGA = Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment
Guarantee Act, IAY = Indira Avas Yojana, PURA = Provision of Urban Amenities in Rural Areas, PMGSY = Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadk Yojana.
SGSY
MNREGA
IAY
PURA
PMGSY
BPL Survey
Scheme
Scheme wise Actual Expenditure and Outlays under Ministry of Rural Development
No of
Households
demanded
employment
2009- 52864608
10
2010- 55763244
11
2011- 50380213
12
2012- 50411455
13
2013- 51765569
14
2014- 45899635
15
Year
MNREGA Yearwise Outcomes between 2009-2010 to 2014 - 2015
1740731
4603973
4826054
3896589
5561812
Households
availed 100
days
employment
7083663
State wise Unspent Balance of Funds for some key Programs under Rural Development
for Major States
( for 2010, 2012, 2014 ( As on December 31st )
Up to December 31st, 2010
SGSY
IAY
MNREGA PMGSY
Total
SGSY
IAY
MNREGA PMGSY
Total
SGSY
IAY
MNREGA PMGSY
Total
AP
25.59
691.97
1214.40
253.41 2185.37 87.18
0.00
758.83
314.98 1160.99 19.00
0.00
89.54
152.79
261.33
Assam
29.75
377.33
449.15
112.36
968.59 103.65 417.09
120.07
340.53
981.34 120.00 643.07
70.13
21.20
854.40
Bihar
318.83 1924.67 1351.23
NA
3594.73 139.37 1296.49
670.39
619.99 2726.24 590.00 1958.51
418.66
-375.66 2591.51
Chhattisgarh 32.43
54.88
682.39
423.76 1193.46 34.12
12.30
1387.71
702.24 2136.37 22.00 218.99
228.05
65.24
534.28
Gujarat
1.77
256.68
321.63
-81.27
498.81
0.00
243.36
157.76
50.64
451.72
22.00 207.66
-14.76
79.60
294.50
Haryana
17.80
38.13
18.18
14.47
88.58
8.23
6.48
169.85
15.53
200.09
6.00
39.58
61.34
23.46
130.38
H.P
6.61
5.97
222.38
147.21
382.17
7.33
1.79
216.21
142.56
367.89
6.00
19.34
28.75
79.60
133.69
Jharkhand
59.47
346.72
541.29
224.51 1171.99 59.85
132.68
315.98
619.85 1128.36
8.00
353.54
79.04
210.69
651.27
Karnataka
32.27
353.43
660.00
NA
1045.70 29.73
516.76
368.42
-70.30
844.61
34.00 660.22
95.93
-1.83
788.32
Kerala
9.46
85.48
281.34
NA
376.28
19.69
94.59
316.78
88.22
519.28
20.00 146.29
19.78
-38.70
117.37
M.P
73.22
124.36
2194.61
NA
2392.19 87.83
57.77
1105.50
308.96 1560.06 17.00 202.66
-197.27
-89.88
-67.49
Maharashtra 43.87
137.80
328.36
233.40
743.43 177.90 274.82
322.21
354.72 1129.65 128.00 242.00
269.99
57.21
695.20
Odisha
53.79
262.44
396.25
NA
712.48
75.90
241.16
566.89
472.42 1356.37 28.00 250.10
80.33
-444.60
113.83
Punjab
5.99
23.77
11.03
11.56
52.35
2.35
20.78
35.86
59.32
118.31
1.00
42.91
-0.18
-62.69
-18.96
Rajasthan
42.78
120.09
3692.45
83.69
3939.01 73.95
0.00
974.42
283.14 1331.51 52.00
55.12
348.08
156.89
612.09
Tamil Nadu 42.45
169.14
210.91
NA
422.50 104.20 272.61
3388.86
62.21
3828.88 102.00 244.47
1580.83
131.67 2058.97
Tripura
9.62
46.00
404.48
NA
460.10
8.56
39.26
796.14
164.63 1008.59 11.oo 119.56
26.93
2.66
160.15
U.P
218.91 520.92
2984.53
715.61 4439.97 250.95 509.56
1247.23
269.09 2276.83 973.00 693.57
564.22
115.79 2346.58
W. Bengal
86.92
389.90
1001.13
85.24
1563.19 57.47
391.03
469.71
390.65 1308.86 42.00 543.50
117.70
-352.02
351.18
Total India 1175.46 6047.60 18333.95 2730.17 28287.18 1387.99 4646.99 14545.47 5788.58 26369.03 2269.00 7161.87 4406.31
85.26 13922.44
State
IAY Allocations for 2014-15 for major states

(Rs. In lakhs, Houses in units)
State
Central Share
State Share
Total
Social Composition of proposed Beneficiaries
For Houses
Admin For Houses Admin
For Houses
Admin
SC
ST
Minority Others Total
Exp
Exp
Exp
AP
76424
3056.976 25474.800 1018.992 101899.202 4075.968 46242 30057 12874 56397 145570
Assam
123640.546 4945.622 13737.838 549.514 137378.385 5495.135 17307 45695 48323 71846 183171
Bihar
147134.104 5885.364 49044.701 1961.788 196178.805 7847.152 77606 7848
49403 145398 280255
Chhattisgarh 22516.967
900.679
7505.656
300.226
30022.623 1200.905 7278 27560
1366
6685
42889
Gujarat
17905.426
716.217
5968.475
238.739
23873.901
954.956
4492 17996
3121
8496
34105
Haryana
18254.898
730.196
6084.966
243.399
24339.864
973.595 17831
0
3363
13577 34771
H.P
2637.024
105.481
879.008
35.160
3516.031
140.641
3689
781
118
100
4688
Jharkhand
26093.291 1043.732 8697.764
347.911
34791.055 1391.642 9819 33050
2135
4697
49701
Karnataka
49872.783 1994.911 16624.261 664.970
66497.044 2659.882 39238 28291 12170 15296 94995
Kerala
31006.956 1240.278 10335.652 413.426
41342.608 1653.704 18285 9337
17875 13563 59060
M.P
60472.957 2418.918 20157.652 806.306
80630.610 3225.224 19406 66554
9851
19735 115186
Maharashtra 98867.573 3954.703 32955.858 1318.234 131823.431 5272.937 48594 82925 18783 38017 188319
Odisha
84320.264 3372.811 28106.755 1124.270 112427.018 4497.081 36963 80220
4220
39207 160610
Punjab
29794.145 1191.766 9931.382
397.255
39725.526 1589.021 37109
0
5785
13856 56750
Rajasthan
53033.089 2121.324 17677.696 707.108
70710.785 2828.431 32285 47195
7266
14270 101015
Tamil Nadu 28050.549 1122.022 9350.183
374.007
37400.732 1496.029 32713 4075
6788
9873
53429
Tripura
6446.285
257.851
716.254
28.650
7162.538
286.502
2121
5677
651
1101
9550
U.P
223282.142 8931.286 74427.381 2977.095 297709.523 11908.381 247465 15572 91117 71145 425299
W. Bengal 227221.873 9088.875 75740.624 3929.625 302962.497 12118.500 184040 88809 78063 81891 432803
Total India 1355725.970 54229.036 419672.437 16786.897 1775398.407 71015.933 892899 618371 377929 629779 2518978
21
State wise Notified Wages for MNREGA from 2005- 06 to 2015

( Wages in Rs.)
State
Assam
Andhra Pradesh
2005-06
Rs. 62.00
Rs. 80.00
2009
Rs. 79.60
Rs. 80.00
2010
Rs. 100
Rs. 100
2011
Rs. 130.00
Rs. 121.00
2012
Rs. 136.00
Rs. 137.00
2013
Rs. 152.00
Rs. 149.00
2014
Rs. 167.00
Rs. 169.00
2015
Rs. 179.00
Rs. 180.00
Bihar
Rs. 68.00
Rs. 89.00
Rs. 100
Rs. 120.00
Rs. 122.00
Rs. 138.00
Rs. 158.00
Rs. 162.00
Gujarat
Haryana
Himachal
Pradesh
Rs. 50.00
Rs. 95.00
Rs. 70.00
Rs. 100.00
Rs. 141.02/Rs. 100.00
Rs. 124.00
Rs. 179.00
Nonscheduled
AreasRs. 120.00
Scheduled
AreasRs.150.00
Rs. 134.00
Rs. 191.00
Nonscheduled
Areas- Rs.
126.00
Scheduled
AreasRs.157.00
Rs. 147.00
Rs. 214.00
NonScheduled
Areas-Rs.
138.00
Scheduled
AreasRs. 171.00
Rs. 167.00
Rs. 236.00
NonScheduled
AreasRs-154.00
Scheduled
AreasRs. 193.00
Rs. 178.00
Rs. 251.00
NonScheduled
AreasRs. 162.00
Scheduled
AreasRs. 203.00
Karnataka
Kerala
Madhya
Pradesh
Maharashtra
Rs. 63.00
Rs. 125.00
Rs. 59.00
Rs. 82.00
Rs. 125.00
Rs. 91.00
Rs. 100
Rs. 125.00
Rs. 150.00
Rs. 122.00
Rs. 155.00
Rs. 164.00
Rs. 132.00
Rs. 174.00
Rs. 180.00
Rs. 146.00
Rs. 191.00
Rs. 212.00
Rs. 157.00
Rs. 204.00
Rs. 229.00
Rs. 159.00
Rs. 100
Rs. 127.00
Rs. 145.00
Rs. 162.00
Rs. 168.00
Rs. 181.00
Rs.90.00
Rs. 125.00
Rs. 153.00
(effect
from 28th
July,2011)
Rs. 119.00
Rs. 119.00
Rs. 118.00
Rs. 120.00
Rs. 130.00
130.08
Rs. 126.00
Rs. 166.00
Rs. 143.00
Rs. 184.00
Rs. 164.00
Rs. 200.00
Rs. 174.00
Rs. 210.00
Rs. 133.00
Rs. 132.00
Rs. 124.00
Rs. 125.00
Rs. 136.00
141.48
Rs. 149.00
Rs. 148.00
Rs. 135.00
Rs. 142.00
Rs. 151.00
157.75
Rs. 163.00
Rs. 167.00
Rs. 155.00
Rs. 156.00
Rs. 169.00
176.11
Rs. 173.00
Rs. 183.00
Rs. 167.00
Rs. 161.00
Rs. 174.00
191.08
Rs. 47.00
Odisha
Punjab
Rs. 55.00
Rs. 101
Rajasthan
Tamil Nadu
Tripura
Uttar Pradesh
West Bengal
National
Average
Rs. 73.00
Rs. 80.00
Rs. 60.00
Rs. 58.00
Rs. 67.00
52.80
Rs.72,Rs.70,Rs.
68 & Rs. 66
respectively for
Zone
I,II,III,IV
Rs. 70.00
Rs. 100.00
Rs. 80.00
Rs. 85.00
Rs. 100/
Rs. 75.00
108.87
Rs. 100
Rs. 100/
Rs. 100/
Rs. 100/
98.11
Total Size of the Budget and % of Budget Foregone due to Tax

Concessions
(All Figures in Crores)
Financial Year
Plan Budget
Non Plan Budget
Total Budget Size
Revenue
Foregone
% of Revenue
Foregone in Total
Budget Size
2008-2009
243386
507498
750884
458516
61.06
2009-2010
325149
695689
1020838
482432
47.25
2010-2011
373092
735657
1108749
459705
41.46
2011-2012
441547
816182
1257729
533583
42.42
2012-2013
521025
969900
1490925
566235
37.97
2013-2014
555322
1109975
1665297
572923
34.40
2014-2015
575000
1219892
1794892
589285
32.83
2015-2016
465277
1312200
1777477
Total
36,62, 679
State-wise Share of Total Value of Output of Agriculture and Allied
Reductions in Budgets for Social Security in India Under NDA Rule

( All numbers in Crores)
Ministry / Department
Department of School
education and Literacy
Ministry of Women and
Child Development
Ministry of Water
resources
Ministry of Drinking water
and sanitation
Department of Rural
Development
Ministry of Panchayati Raj
Department of Health and
Family Welfare
Department of Agriculture
and Cooperation
Department of Land
Resources
Ministry of Micro, Small
and Medium Enterprises
Department of Animal
Husbadry, dairying and
Fisheries
Department of AIDS
Control
Ministry of Housing and
Urban Poverty Alleviation
Ministry of Labour and
Employment
Department of Food and
Public Distribution
Department of Textiles
Department of Higher
Education
Ministry of Labour and
Employment
Budget Estimates 2014-15
Budget Estimates 2015-16
Plan
51,828
Non Plan
3,287
Plan
39,039
Non Plan
3,181
12,790
21,100
94
10,287
96
10,813
13,237
600
3,607
625
9,630
15,260
6,236
9,024
80,043
50
71,642
53
8,401
7,000
30,645
1
4,518
94
24,549
1
5,104
6,906
6,096
22,309
343
16,646
358
5,663
3,750
1,628
10
2,122
3,327
375
2,613
395
714
2,174
92
1,491
94
683
1,785
1,397
Reduction in
Plan Size
388
6,000
5,625
375
2,449
3,160
2,153
3,208
296
330
1,15,327
212
1,25,000
118
4831
16900
866
10756
3253
15855
751
11000
1308
1045
2449
3160
2153
3208
296
23
State-wise Share of Total Value of Output of Agriculture and Allied

Activities in NSDP and Share of Agriculture in Rural Employment
(at current prices)
States
Share
are of agriculture
agr
in rural employment (%) Change
ge in share of total
tota value
Change in share of
of output of agriculture and
agriculture in rural
allied activities in NSDP (% employment (% points)
points)
19992000
200405
200910
199900 to
200405 to 199900 to 200405 to
200405
200809
200405
200910
Andhra Pradesh
78.8
71.8
68.7
-4.9
-3.7
-7.0
-3.1
Arunachal
83.4
81.9
75.7
6.8
-5.7
-1.5
-6.2
Pradesh
Assam
67.7
74.3
70.5
-5.2
-0.5
6.6
-3.8
Bihar
80.6
77.9
66.9
-5.5
-6.0
-2.7
-11.0
Chhattisgarh
86.2
84.9
-11.9
-5.6
-1.3
Delhi
7.5
7.2
0.0
-0.6
-0.6
-0.3
-7.2
Goa
28.7
35.3
23.9
-5.5
-2.9
6.6
-11.4
Gujarat
79.8
77.3
78.3
-0.5
-2.4
-2.5
1.0
Haryana
68.5
64.1
59.8
-12.3
-1.8
-4.4
-4.3
Himachal
73.6
69.6
62.9
4.1
-2.7
-4.0
-6.7
Pradesh
Jammu &
76.3
63.9
59.7
4.0
-5.6
-12.4
-4.2
Kashmir
Jharkhand
70.0
54.8
2.7
4.5
-15.2
Karnataka
82.1
81.0
75.7
-15.4
-4.5
-1.1
-5.3
Kerala
48.3
42.0
35.7
-12.8
-1.8
-6.3
-6.3
Madhya Pradesh
87.1
82.5
82.4
0.0
-4.5
-4.6
-0.1
Maharashtra
82.6
80.0
79.4
-7.6
-2.3
-2.6
-0.6
Manipur
75.3
69.3
53.4
-1.0
1.0
-6.0
-15.9
Meghalaya
86.5
81.8
70.7
0.0
-4.2
-4.7
-11.1
Mizoram
85.5
87.4
80.6
3.2
-3.7
1.9
-6.8
Nagaland
79.7
79.3
74.1
-8.1
-5.9
-0.4
-5.2
Odisha
78.2
69.0
67.6
-5.3
-4.1
-9.2
-1.4
Punjab
72.6
66.9
61.8
-4.5
-5.2
-5.7
-5.1
Rajasthan
77.7
72.9
63.3
-0.7
-6.3
-4.8
-9.6
Sikkim
60.8
60.5
53.9
-4.0
-5.6
-0.3
-6.6
Tamil Nadu
67.9
65.4
63.7
-7.3
0.0
-2.5
-1.7
Tripura
45.7
43.2
30.6
-7.0
-4.1
-2.5
-12.6
Uttar Pradesh
76.2
72.8
66.9
-3.0
-2.7
-3.4
-5.9
Uttarakhand
78.4
69.5
-7.8
-13.2
-8.9
West Bengal
63.6
62.7
56.3
-7.1
-4.3
-0.9
-6.4
All-India
76.3
72.7
67.9
-6.6
-3.3
-3.6
-4.8
Notes: NSDP: Net State Domestic Product; All-India includes figures for UTs.
Sources: NSS: Employment and Unemployment Situation in India, Report Nos. 458 (55th Round, 19992000), 515
(61st Round, 200405) & 537 (66th Round, 200910); State-wise Estimates of Value of Output from Agriculture and
Allied Activities (19992000 to 200506 & 200405 to 200809), Central Statistical Office (CSO), Ministry of Statistics
and Programme Implementation website (www.mospi.nic.in, accessed on 7 May 2013), Handbook of Statistics on
Indian Economy, RBI Annual Publications website
(http://www.rbi.org.in/scripts/AnnualPublications.aspx?head=Handbook of Statistics on Indian Economy, accessed on
7 May 2013).

AIAWU Bulletin May 2015

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

AIAWU Bulletin May 2015

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

A.

The PMs High Level Committee

the attempts of privatization. The reference to food

restricting the entry of private players there by

to a great extent in making cultivation viable during

Nothing hindered the High Level Committee,

As the time moved on, global and domestic

The FCI was set up in 1965 under Food

All these neoliberal elites picked up some holes

all procurement operations of wheat, paddy and to

report says, " Leakages in PDS range from 40

Down with Anti-Farmer Land

amendments to the original bills, the report was

an independent team of expert on project to project

ordinance and listen to no suggestion. But this

Era of Neo-Liberal Reforms &

to be equivalent to the minimum wages of the State

occupied. The results have been extremely

They have now become part of an ever-increasing

The Right to live is

our right to compensation for work lost in land

who will then feel free to transport us like cattle and

The AIAWU is well fitted to achieve this end as it

by the Union Government and 73% by the State

The Modi Government and Rural Poor

unemployment, old age, sickness and disablement, and

with neoliberal mind set neglected the constitutional

The government claims that due to 14th Finance

program had been kept on changing since its inception.

Ministry of Rural Development to Parliament indicates

It is in this situation, the BJP government at the

schemes and other such schemes. These are all being

Pinnamaneni Murali Krishna

TDP Government Undermining Social

Those who have realized that they were duped by

can only construct only 59800 house at the cost of

Education Act. The RTE mandated one primary

Social Security in Telangana

Three acres of land for each dalit and adivasi

Increase of pension amount from Rs. 200 to

12 % reservations for SC and recognizing the

House sites for all the houseless poor, two bed

Free education from KG to PG

Implementing Food Security Act

Strengthening of Anganwadi centers, mid day

Though these resulted in enthusiasm but when TRS

household as a unit and allotting one pension for each

Social Security Programs in Tamil

and funeral expenses. Thus it is almost like an

year, government set the target of constructing 60000

mixie, grinder, fan scheme where all the 1.83 crore

With these works and social security pensions,

AIAWU BULLETIN - MAY - 2015

20 AIAWU BULLETIN - MAY - 2015

25715.23 7875.63 30.63

21170.77 4660.53 22.01

21848.00 4726.75 21.63

21867.74 4941.37 22.60

14897.78 3355.04 22.52

MNREGA Yearwise Outcomes between 2009-2010 to 2014 - 2015

IAY Allocations for 2014-15 for major states

AIAWU BULLETIN - MAY - 2015

State wise Notified Wages for MNREGA from 2005- 06 to 2015

Total Size of the Budget and % of Budget Foregone due to Tax