Standing Committee on Rural Development (2018-2019)

STANDING COMMITTEE ON RURAL DEVELOPMENT

(2018-2019)

MINISTRY OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT (DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT)

[Action taken on the recommendations contained in the Forty Sixth Report (Sixteenth Lok Sabha) on 'Demands for Grants (2018-19) of the Ministry of Rural Development (Department of Rural Development)'.]

FIFTY SECOND REPORT

LOK SABHA SECRETARIAT

NEW DELHI

FIFTY SECOND REPORT

STANDING COMMITTEE ON RURAL DEVELOPMENT (2018-2019)

(SIXTEENTH LOK SABHA)

MINISTRY OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT (DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT)

Presented to Lok Sabha on 31.12.2018

Laid in Rajya Sabha on 31.12.2018

LOK SABHA SECRETARIAT

NEW DELHI

December, 2018/ Pausa, 1940 (Saka)

CRD No 149

Price : Rs.

Published under Rule 382 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha (____ Edition) and Printed by ______. CONTENTS

Page No.

COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE (2018-2019) ...... (ii)

INTRODUCTION …...... (iii)

CHAPTER I Report ...... 1

CHAPTER II Recommendations which have been accepted by the Government ...... 15

CHAPTER III Recommendations which the Committee do not desire to pursue in view of the Government’s replies…………...... 37

CHAPTER IV Recommendations in respect of which replies of the Government have not been accepted by the Committee ...... 38

CHAPTER V Recommendations in respect of which final replies of the Government are still awaited ...... 44

ANNEXURES

I. Extracts of Minutes of the sitting of the Committee held on 9 December, 2016………………...... 19

I. Extract of Minutes of the Fourth Sitting of the Committee held on 27 December, 2018 45

II. Analysis of Action taken by the Government on the recommendations contained in the Forty Sixth Report (16th Lok Sabha) of the Standing Committee on Rural Development...... 47

(i) COMPOSITION OF THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON RURAL DEVELOPMENT (2018-2019)

Dr. P. Venugopal -- Chairperson MEMBERS LOK SABHA 2. Shri Sisir Kumar Adhikari 3. Smt. Sajda Ahmed 4. Shri Kirti Azad 5. Smt. Renuka Butta 6. Shri Harishchandra Deoram Chavan 7. Shri Biren Singh Engti 8. Shri Vijay Kumar Hansdak 9. Shri Ajay Misra (Teni) 10. Shri Manshankar Ninama 11. Dr. Ramesh Pokhriyal "Nishank" 12. Smt. Mausam Noor 13. Shri Prahlad Singh Patel 14. Shri Gokaraju Ganga Raju 15. Dr. Anbumani Ramadoss 16. Shri Jugal Kishore Sharma 17. Dr. Yashwant Singh 18. Dr. Naramalli Sivaprasad 19. VACANT ^ 20. Shri Ladu Kishore Swain 21. Shri Kamakhya Prasad Tasa RAJYA SABHA 22. Smt. Shanta Chhetri 23. Shri Samsher Singh Dullo 24. Shri Surendra Singh Nagar$ 25. Shri Prashanta Nanda 26. Shri Narayan Lal Panchariya 27. Shri Naranbhai J. Rathwa 28. Shri A.K. Selvaraj 29. Shri Ajay Pratap Singh 30. Shri K.T.S. Tulsi 31. Shri Lal Sinh Vadodia

Secretariat

1. Shri Abhijit Kumar - Additional Secretary 2. Shri S. Chatterjee - Director 3. Smt. B. Visala - Additional Director 4. Smt. Emma C. Barwa - Deputy Secretary 5. Shri Inam Ahmed - Senior Committee Assistant ------^ Vacant due to resignation of Shri Balka Suman from the Membership of Lok Sabha w.e.f. 17.12.2018 $ Nominated to the Committee w.e.f. 19.11.2018 vice Shri Javed Ali Khan (ii) INTRODUCTION

I, the Chairperson of the Standing Committee on Rural Development (2018-2019) having been authorised by the Committee to present the Report on their behalf, present the 52nd Report on the action taken by the Government on the recommendations contained in the Forty Sixth Report of the Standing Committee on Rural Development (16th Lok Sabha) on 'Demands for Grants (2018-19) of the Ministry of Rural Development (Department of Rural Development).

2. The Forty Sixth Report was presented to the Lok Sabha on 13 March, 2018 and was laid on the Table of Rajya Sabha on the same date. Replies of the Government to all the recommendations contained in the Report were received on 20 August, 2018.

3. The Report was considered and adopted by the Committee at their sitting held on 27 December, 2018.

4. An analysis of the action taken by the Government on the recommendations contained in the Forty Sixth Report (16th Lok Sabha) of the Committee is given in Appendix-II.

NEW DELHI; DR. P. VENUGOPAL 27 December, 2018 Chairperson, 06 Pausa, 1940 (Saka) Standing Committee on Rural Development

(iii) 1

CHAPTER I

REPORT

This Report of the Standing Committee on Rural Development (2017-18) deals with the action taken by the Government on the Observations/Recommendations contained in their Forty Sixth Report (Sixteenth Lok Sabha) on 'Demands for Grants (2018-2019) of the Ministry of Rural Development (Department of Rural Development)'.

2. The Forty-Sixth Report was presented to Lok Sabha on 13 March, 2018 and was laid on the Table of Rajya Sabha on the same date. The Report contained 22 Observations/Recommendations.

3. Action Taken Notes in respect of all the Observations/Recommendations contained in the Report have been received from the Government. These have been examined and categorised as follows: - (i) Observations/Recommendations which have been accepted by the Government: Serial Nos. 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20 and 22. Total:16 Chapter-II (ii) Observations/Recommendations which the Committee do not desire to pursue in view of replies of the Government: Nil Total: 00 Chapter-III

(iii) Observation/Recommendation in respect of which replies of the Government have not been accepted by the Committee: Serial Nos. 3, 5, 7, 13, 17 and 21 Total: 06 Chapter-IV

(iv) Observations/Recommendations in respect of which final replies of the Government are still awaited: Nil Total:00 Chapter-V

4. The Committee desire that Action Taken Notes on the Observations/ recommendations contained in Chapter I of this Report may be furnished to the Committee within three months of the presentation of this Report.

5. The Committee will now deal with action taken by the Government on some of their Observations/Recommendations that require reiteration or merit comments. Recommendation (Serial No. 3)

Scheme for Coastal Rural Population 6. The Committee in their afore-said recommendation had recommended as under:-

The Committee have been apprised of the hardships being faced by the rural populace of Coastal habitations. The challenges faced by them are entirely different from other habitations. The Committee strongly felt that the rural coastal population need to be looked at differently and customised Schemes suitable for the upliftment and growth of such areas need to be formalised and implemented. Such areas need not go neglected and thus, the Committee strongly urges the DoRD to carry out relevant studies of rural coastal areas of the country and come out with a road-map/Scheme which suitably caters to the need and requirement of coastal habitations.

7. The Ministry in their Action Taken Reply have stated as under:-

"MGNREGA- MGNREGA is a demand driven scheme and the local bodies are involved in planning and execution of works. Even in coastal areas, the bottom up approach in deciding the types of works to be taken up is being implemented. Among the list of permissible works under MGNREGS a number of activities are being planned and implemented across the coastal regions. PMAY-G- Under PMAY-G assistance of Rs.1.3 lakh in hilly states, difficult areas, and IAP districts, as opposed to 1.2 lakh in plain areas is provided for construction of pucca house. Difficult areas are those where due to reasons of poor availability of materials, poor connectivity, adverse geo-morphological and climatic conditions etc., the cost of construction is higher. The classification of difficult areas is to be done by State Governments based on an existing classification in the state or through the use of a methodology based on objective criteria. The Empowered Committee of the Ministry of Rural Development approves the difficult areas in a particular state on the basis of higher cost of construction. Coastal areas classified as difficult areas if approved by the Empowered Committee would be able to get higher unit assistance under the scheme. Further, there is a provision under ‘Special Project’ of PMAY-G for financial assistance to states for rehabilitation/relocation of families whose 3

houses have been affected by natural calamities, provided that the households appear in the Permanent Wait List. The proposal in this regard is required to be submitted by the respective State / UT Government.

In so far as Rural Housing is concerned, no separate evaluation study has been conducted or proposed to be conducted for coastal areas. PMGSY- Ministry truly applauds the Committee’s concern for coastal areas. The Ministry has directed NRRDA to engage some reputed organization to conduct feasibility studies on randomly selected coastal districts. The random distribution studies’ conclusions would be brainstormed at reaching roadmap aimed at fulfilling demand of rural coastal populace. DAY-NRLM- An advisory will be issued to the States to take appropriate action to cover the rural populace of Coastal habitations in the fold of DAY-NRLM by organizing them into Self Help Groups. DDU-GKY- Ministry of Rural Development and Ministry of Shipping have entered into an MoU for convergence of Sagarmala, which focuses on ‘port-led development’, with DDU-GKY to enable skilling of coastal population for growing maritime industry, thereby leading to sustainable inclusive growth in the coastal areas. Fresh projects have been invited under Sagarmala and approved for implementation. NSAP- It has been decided to conduct a concurrent evaluation study for National Social Assistance Programme (NSAP) with the objective to assess the extent to which the programme has achieved its objectives and to suggest the solutions thereof that need to be applied to improve the implementation processes in all the States/UTs including coastal areas.

8. Having been apprised of the hardships being faced by the rural populace of coastal habitations, the Committee had felt that the rural coastal population needs to be looked at differently and customised schemes suitable for the upliftment and growth of such areas need to be formalized and implemented. Therefore, the

Committee had recommended the DoRD to carry out relevant studies of rural coastal areas of the country for devising road map/scheme which suitably caters to the need and requirement of coastal habitations. However, to the surprise of the

Committee, it seems that the recommendations have not been paid any heed to by the DoRD as the reply of DoRD under different schemes barring PMGSY has expressed helplessness or routine exercises to be carried out. Even, while admitting that 'coastal areas classified as difficult areas if approved by the 4 empowered committee would be able to get higher unit assistance under the scheme', the reply under PMAY-G again states that 'no separate evaluation study has been conducted or proposed to be conducted for coastal areas'. This reply is highly criticisable as the recommendations of the Committee aimed at enlightening the DoRD to gear up to tackle the issues of coastal population and not to elicit such casual and negative response. The issue is a pertinent one with large masses of coastal areas tackling severe day to day problems which need to be realized and solution to their problems envisioned and seriously materialized. Thus, the

Committee while reiterating its recommendation strongly urges upon DoRD to shed any callousness and look into the issues faced by coastal rural population with humane approach.

Recommendation (Serial No. 5)

MGNREGA Monitoring of Fund Utlization

9. The Committee in their afore-said recommendation had recommended as under:-

MGNREGA is a demand driven scheme aimed at providing solace to the unemployed population of our country through the provision of proving 100 days of guaranteed job. Such a visionary scheme which alone requires almost 50% of the fund allocation of the DoRD ( Rs.55,000 crore in 2018-19 against the total BE of Rs.112,403 crore of DoRD) needs to have robust mechanism of inspection and monitoring by the Centre, not just through letters/DOs but routine physical inspection as has been felt by the Committee while going through the progress and challenges in the implementation of MGNREGA. The role of DoRD should not be confined to mere funding but accounting for fund utilisation and monitoring of each aspect of MGNREGA is equally essential. Keeping this in view, the Committee recommends DoRD to take such strong steps which can put a lid to the gaping vulnerabilities in the implementation of MGNREGA besides proper fund management.

10. The Ministry in their Action Taken Reply have stated as under:-

"Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), 2005 provides at least one hundred days of guaranteed 5

wage employment in every financial year to every household whose adult members volunteer to do unskilled manual work. The status of implementation of MGNREGS is reviewed on a regular basis with all States/UTs. National Level Monitors, Common Review Missions internal audit team and Officers of the Ministry visit States at regular intervals to review implementation of the programme. After the field visits, the findings/shortcomings and recommendations are shared with the States for appropriate action at their end. Performance Review Committee meetings of the Ministry and Regular Video Conferencing on specific issues are also important tools of monitoring."

11. During the examination of Demands for Grants (2018-19), the

Committee had noted that MGNREGA in itself warranted almost half of the fund allocation of the DoRD, pegged at Rs. 55,000 crores specifically. It was felt by the Committee that in wake of such a huge amount of fund involved in the scheme of MGNREGA, it was essential for the DoRD to ensure accounting for fund utilization and monitoring of each aspect of MGNREGA. Thus, the

Committee had recommended DoRD to take steps for proper fund management in the implementation of MGNREGA. In their action taken reply,

DoRD have outlined their regular/routine protocol employed for the monitoring of the MGNREGA scheme with no specific response regarding the monitoring of fund utilization. The stress of the Committee is on the utilization aspect of the funds concerning the scheme and not merely to know about the routine tools of monitoring. Proper fund utilization is key to the success of any scheme and for MGNREGA, it assumes ever greater importance owing to its outreach and its rural coverage. More is expected from DoRD regarding the placing of suitable mechanism which cater to the sprucing up of vigilance upon the fund utilization. Therefore, the Committee 6 reiterate its recommendation and urge the DoRD to devise steps for monitoring of fund utilization under MGNREGA in a befitting manner.

Recommendation (Serial No. 7)

Audit System in MGRNEGA

12. The Committee in their afore-said recommendation had recommended as under:-

"Effective Auditing System in MGNREGA is an utmost essential requirement of such a diversified Scheme (both in terms of geographical area concerned and financial aspects involved). The Committee are of the view that it is high time when a regular and periodic internal audit mechanism be effectively put in place in all the Gram Panchayat level or facets of third party audit be explored with its report published regularly in the public domain to bring more transparency and credibility to scheme of such magnitude. Rs.55,000 crore is a huge amount and the DoRD requisitioning such an amount for MGNREGA need to spruce up its all avenues for the accountability of each rupee spend in the scheme. It is, therefore, recommended that the DoRD without any further delay put in place a robust auditing system in MGNREGA and usher in greatest level of transparency."

13. The Ministry in their Action Taken Reply have stated as under:-

"The Ministry in pursuance with the Section 17(1) of the MGNREG Act, 2005 has been stressing upon all the States to conduct Social Audits of works taken up under MGNREGS. The Ministry in consultation with C&AG notified Audit of Scheme Rules 2011 and Auditing Standards for Social Audits which laid down minimum principles and standards for conducting Social Audits Further, States have been instructed to set up independent Social Audit Units (SAUs) with its own Governing Body, independent Director and minimum core staff in the SAUs resource persons to facilitate Gram Panchayats in conducting effective Social Audits. As of now, 26 States have set up independent SAUs. The Ministry in collaboration with National Institute of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj, Hyderabad and Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS), Mumbai, has also taken up several capacity building initiatives. The Ministry has also improved the Social Audit MIS. The new MIS System has provisions for analysis of Social Audit findings and action taken thereof, which will be made available in public domain. Beside, internal audit teams of the Ministry are being sent to states for carrying out audit exercises."

14. The need for fixing of accountability of each rupee spent in the scheme of MGNREGA has been felt for a long period of time and repeatedly the issue of effective audit system has cropped up. The Committee is not oblivious to this fact and had noted the lack of a robust auditing mechanism in MGNREGA scheme. Considering the magnitude of the scheme and for greater transparency in the ground realities of the functioning of the scheme, the

Committee had recommended the DoRD to put in place a strong auditing system in MGNREGA. Going through the action taken reply of the DoRD in this context, the Committee find that DoRD, while referring to the

Section 17(1) of the MGNREGA Act, 2005 have stated about the instructions issued to the States to set up independent Social Audit Units (SAUs) with its governing body to facilitate Gram Panchayats in conducting effective Social

Audits and that the Social Audit finding and action taken, thereof will be made available in public domain. The Committee finds this reply in similar vein to the responses that have been elicited from the DoRD so far in this regard. More than a decade has passed since the implementation and proper coverage of MGNREGA Act over the entire country and still the responses regarding the setting up of Audit System in MGNREGA talks about issuance of instructions etc. The Committee is surprised at the approach shown by DoRD in this context and is patiently waiting for the results/actions out of the mechanism of Audit System in public domain. There are no results to vindicate the claims of DoRD regarding functioning of Audit System. There is no point in lingering the process. It is high time that the Audit System is put 8 in place effectively and start yielding results for the accountability and transparency in MGNREGA scheme. The Committee, thus, strongly reiterate its recommendation and implores the DoRD to put in place effective Audit

System in MGNREGA with results to be placed in the public domain.

Recommendation (Serial No. 9) Slow pace of Work

15. The Committee in their afore-said recommendation had recommended as under:-

"During the examination of DFG (2018-19), it also surfaced before the Committee that a marquee scheme such as PMGSY has been suffering due to slackened pace of projects in different States, particularly in hilly States such as Uttarakhand, etc. The Committee are apprehensive of the slow pace of growth of the scheme and fathoms whether the change in funding pattern of the project to 60:40 is resulting into non release/delay in the release of shares by the States at appropriate time. Thus, the Committee, recommends DoRD to hasten the pace of completion of targets in PMGSY projects, especially in the hilly States and resolve any issue of non release/delay in the release of funds with the States appropriately."

16. The Ministry in their Action Taken Reply have stated as under:-

"At the time of release of Central share under PMGSY to the States, the M inistry specifically mentions in the Sanction Order that the corresponding State Share should be released within 3 working days from the date of receipt of Central funds. The Ministry keeps a track of the release of corresponding State Share through OMMAS. Wherever, there is a delay, the Ministry requests the concerned Chief Secretary/Principal Secretary of the State to intervene in the matter. As per programme Guidelines also, it is mandatory to release corresponding State Share before next set of installment. Progress has been relatively slow in some of the States due to following reasons:- 1. Inadequate execution and contracting capacity. 2. Less working season and difficult terrain particularly in Hill States. 3. Scarcity of the construction materials. 4. Security concerns particularly in LWE areas. 5. Some works are held up due to delay in obtaining clearance under Forest Conservation Act 1980. 6. Insufficient availability of the construction materials such as gravel, morum, sand, stone aggregate bitumen, machinery, personnel to handle machinery etc. 9

7. Banning of morum/ gravel/ sand / Stone quarries. The Ministry of Rural Development has taken a number of initiatives to meet the above challenges faced by the States. The Ministry has engaged Central Public Sector Undertakings (CPSUs) in some of the States to augment execution capacity of the States. The Ministry has also conducted number of Contractor’s Outreach Programmes in the States to attract the Contractors in the implementation of the programme. Further, in order to encourage locally available materials and use of green technologies, guidelines were issued by the Ministry, wherein the State Governments are required to propose minimum 15% of total length of annual proposals under New technologies such as Cement stabilization, Lime stabilization, Cold mix, Waste plastics, Cell filled concrete, Panelled cement concrete pavement, Fly ash etc. The Ministry is also in constant touch with the State Governments and other stake holders to address the security concerns for smooth implementation of PMGSY. Programme funds under PMGSY are released on the basis of certain mandatory documents, as specified in the Programme Guidelines. If the documents are in order, the funds are immediately released by the Ministry with the concurrence of IFD. Funds are only delayed when States fail to submit the compliance on time. As and when satisfactory compliance is received from the States , funds are released by the Ministry with due concurrence of IFD. During 2017-18, Rs. 15,650.29 crore were released under PMGSY for implementation of the Programme, out of which Rs. 686.31 crore were released to Uttarakhand. Further, during the year 2017-18, 48,759.66 km rural roads were constructed with an average of 134 km per day. During 2018-19, total national targets of 61,000 km of road length to be constructed has been fixed and communicated to all the States.

17. The slow pace of work under PMGSY in some quarters, specifically the hilly

States, emerged before the Committee during its examination of Demands for

Grants (2018-19). Thus, the Committee had recommended DoRD to hasten the pace of completion of targets in PMGSY projects, especially in the hilly States.

The Committee, while appreciating the admittance of DoRD in identifying the causes of relatively slow progress of projects in some States went through the reasons so elicited and feel that efforts being entailed by the DoRD are in right direction and ensuring the consistency in such measures will ultimately pave way 10 for picking up the pace of work under PMGSY. However, the Committee still desire that DoRD does not weaken its grip over the situation and keep on working in a sustained manner for the effective resolution of the issue of slow progress under PMGSY in many States.

Recommendation (Serial No. 13)

Maintenance of Roads built under PMGSY

18. The Committee in their afore-said recommendation had recommended as under:-

"Time and again the Committee have received complaints about the deteriorating conditions of roads built under PMGSY after a certain period of time. This is a serious obstacle in the success of PMGSY Scheme and it is high time that the issue of maintenance of roads constructed under PMGSY need to be dealt with an 'iron fist'. The officials/machinery responsible for the maintenance ought to be made accountable and due culpability be fixed in case of non-adherence to the provision. Therefore, the Committee once again urges the DoRD to take all measures in order to ensure that the roads built under PMGSY are duly maintained and do not deteriorate soon."

19. The Ministry in their Action Taken Reply have stated as under:-

"National Rural Roads Development Agency (NRRDA) and the Ministry of Rural Development have extended support to the States in the maintenance management of rural roads. Accordingly, a Model Policy Framework for Maintenance of Rural Roads along with a Guidance Note for the States has been finalized in close consultation with the States and circulated among all States. Based on these documents, the States are required to formulate, notify and implement State Rural Road Maintenance Policies to suit State specific needs. So far, 24 States (Assam, Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Odisha, Punjab, Rajasthan, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand and West Bengal) have notified such rural road maintenance policies. In addition, National Quality Monitors (NQMs) are regularly deputed, by the Ministry/NRRDA to all the States to inspect the quality of roads not only under the five year maintenance period but sample inspections of post five year roads. The States are required to submit Action Taken Reports (ATR), in respect of such inspections of the NQMs. The provision of upload of ATR on OMMAS also placed which has been regularly monitored by NRRDA. In 11

the Financial year 2017-18, the 2651 nos. roads under five year maintenance got inspected by NQMs."

20. Taking a serious view of the numerous complaints of the deteriorating conditions of roads built under PMGSY after a certain period of time, the

Committee had urged the DoRD to take all measures in order to ensure that the roads built under PMGSY are duly maintained and do not deteriorate soon. While taking into consideration the reply of DoRD in this regard about its efforts in framing of model policy for maintenance of rural roads along with a Guidance Note for the States and the response of the States in notifying and implementing State/Rural Road maintenance policies, the

Committee are still of the view that placing of policies and guidelines alone will not suffice the need of the hour in respect to the deteriorating conditions of the roads built under PMGSY. PMGSY is a Centrally Sponsored Scheme under the aegis of DoRD. The fallacy or credit of the performance of the scheme will be ultimately attributed to the DoRD even though the States have important role in the maintenance aspect. Thus, the role of DoRD assumes greater importance in nurturing and maintaining the roads under

PGMSY. In view of the existing situation, DoRD needs to do much more in ensuring that the policies and guidelines issued by them are ensured to in

'letter and spirit' by all the agencies involved in the maintenance aspect of roads under PMGSY. The Committee, therefore, reiterate its recommendation for the DoRD to take stricter measures so that the quality of roads built under PMGSY are not compromised.

Recommendation (Serial No. 17) Inclusion of leftover beneficiaries

21. The Committee in their afore-said recommendation had recommended as under:-

"Expeditious inclusion of left over beneficiaries from the ambit of PMAY-G is a long pending issue yet to be resolved. The Committee is appalled with the lackadaisical approach of the DoRD in this regard and urges upon them to view the matter in right earnest and ensure all needful action required for the completion of this exercise for the percolation of benefits under PMAY-G to the needy on an early basis."

22. The Ministry in their Action Taken Reply have stated as under:-

"The objective of PMAY-G is to provide assistance for construction of houses to those households who are deprived of housing. Accordingly, beneficiaries of PMAY-G have been identified based on the housing deprivation parameters as per SECC 2011 data subject to exclusion criteria. However, process is on to consider those households, who are otherwise eligible on housing deprivation parameters but left out of SECC 2011 database, for inclusion in the Permanent Wait List (PWL) of PMAY- G. The States have been requested to expedite the process of preparation of listof left out but eligible households and upload the details of those households on AwaasSoft so that a decision could be taken by the Competent Authority for their inclusion in the PWL. For compilation of data in respect of additional beneficiaries for inclusion in PWL, Ministry of Rural Development and NIC has developed a separate mobile application (Awaas+) and module in AwaasSoft wherein, details of the households, geo-tagged photographs of existing land/dwellings of beneficiaries can be captured and stored Gram-Panchayat-wise. The Awaassoft module has a provision for uploading of Gram Sabha Resolution indicating left out households identified for inclusion along with a list of heads of such households. This would be followed by electronic verification of compiled data using space technology and physical verification on sample basis, of identified additional households. Thereafter, approval of the competent authority would be obtained, regarding the additional households that can be provided assistance under PMAY-G."

23. Despite its earlier recommendations on the expeditious inclusion of leftover homeless families from the list of beneficiaries for assistance under

PMAY-G, the Committee were appalled to note that the issue was still pending and yet to be resolved. The Committee had, thus, again recommended for the 13 inclusion of leftover beneficiaries. Yet again, the response of DoRD in this regard has left the Committee perplexed and concerned about the approach of DoRD towards such an important issue. No process can go on endlessly. There has to be a logical conclusion to an exercise if the efforts are done with nobler and rationale approach. Merely outlining the measures that have been decided to be done in future and requests to the States would not do any good in the realization of the dream of 'Housing for All, by 2022'. The impediments need to be dealt with firmly to mitigate the obstacles in the way on inclusion of eligible left over beneficiaries in the ambit of PMAY-G. The Committee, vehemently implore upon

DoRD to take this issue in right earnest and pro-actively resolve this issue without any further delay so that the needy and genuine left over beneficiaries are included in the universe of PMAY-G.

Recommendation (Serial No. 21)

DISHA Mandatory holding of meetings of DISHA

24. The Committee in their afore-said recommendation had recommended as under:-

"The Committee were apprised about the non-holding of regular/mandatory meetings of DISHA in various quarters of the country. The Committee have taken this very seriously and feel that such platforms need to be actively maintained effectively for the efficious supervision and monitoring of the status of Schemes/Yojanas being run in the constituencies of the Members of Parliament. Any undermining of such facility is a serious breach of protocol and thus, the Committee recommend the DoRD to ensure that no callousness creeps in the holding of DISHA meetings and all officials required to attend the meeting are present mandatorily."

25. The Ministry in their Action Taken Reply have stated as under:- "The Ministry of Rural Development vigoursly pursuing with State Governments for holding DISHA meetings as stipulated in the Guidelines. The issue is raised with State Governments from time to time including in Performance Review Committee (PRC) meetings. Hon’ble MRD had 14

written a letter No. Q-13016/06/2016-VMC (pt) dated 27th March, 2017 and 27th February, 2018 to Chief Ministers/Administrators of States/UTs to instruct concerned officers to ensure that the meetings of DISHA are held as per the Guidelines. Secretary (Rural Development) vide letters. No. Q-13016/2/2016-VMC dated 26th July, 2016 and No. Q- 13016/1/2016-VMC(Pt) dated 12th January, 2017, 15th March, 2017 and 30th January, 2018 had requested states to ensure holding of DISHA meetings as per guidelines. Thus, the matter has been taken with the States/UTs at the highest level and efforts will be further continued this regard In order to strengthen the Monitoring through DISHA Committees, the meeting management software has been piloted in 3 districts for the purpose of DISHA Meetings. This will enable DISHA committee to plan, setup, and record and monitor the proceedings of the meetings."

26. Taking note of the non-holding of regular/mandatory meetings of DISHA in various quarters of the country, the Committee had recommended the DoRD to ensure that no slackness is involved in the holding of DISHA meetings. However, the reply of DoRD in this regard suggests of mere completion of formalities and lacks the sincere earnest to streamline and smoothen the usage of the platform of

DISHA. The meetings of DISHA with the mandatory presence of the officials allow the overhauling and supervision of teething problems being faced in the running of schemes/yojanas at the ground level. Non-holding of such meetings coupled with the absence of officials during the meetings needs to be dealt with in much stricter way. Alongwith the issuance of directives, the DoRD needs to 'bring to book' the erring officials for their lapses to such a platform and thus, the

Committee strongly reiterate DoRD to ensure stricter measures for compliance of the regular holding of DISHA meetings with the presence of officials.

CHAPTER II RECOMMENDATION WHICH HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE GOVERNMENT

Recommendation (Serial No. 1)

The examination of Demands for Grants 2018-19 revealed that till 2nd February, 2018, an expenditure of about Rs.94,553.48 crore has been incurred by the DoRD, which is 89.67% of the revised and increased allocation for 2017-18. It also come to the fore that there were huge amount of unspent balances against various schemes of the DoRD. Taking into note, the change in funding pattern and release of States share contribution also as a major factor in unspent balance accrual, the Committee feel that DoRD should ensure better coordination with the States for the timely release of States' share in funding of Schemes. Moreover, the Committee also recommend the DoRD to expedite fund utilisation during the remaining period of the financial year (2017-18) so as to meet the target and desired result while also reducing the quantum of unspent balances in future. REPLY OF THE GOVERNMENT

MGNREGA- The funds utilization in the programme has been more than 98% in FY 2017-18 under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. This has been possible by planning the budget in advance and following a phased and required release of funds. Strong vigilance has ensured that the matching State share has been received and utilized in time.

PMAY-G- An amount of Rs 29889.86 crores has been released under Pradhan Mantri Awaas Yojana Gramin(PMAY-G) in the Financial Year 2017-18. This includes Rs. 7329.43 crores availed as loan from NABARD and Rs. 22832.31 Crore through budgetary support. Therefore, the release of funds is 130.9% of the R.E 2017-18. An amount of Rs 9964.78 crores is lying unspent as on 31.03.2018 with the 33 States/UTs where the programme is being implemented. Funds releases are being monitored through online monitoring system Awaassoft which helped in improving transparency in implementation of the scheme. Other steps such as Electronic transfer of assistance to the beneficiary under Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT), continuous follow up with the States/ UTs etc. have also helped in minimizing the unspent balance available with them.

PMGSY- PMGSY was allocated an amount of Rs. 19,000 cr at BE stage which was revised to Rs 16,900 cr at RE stage. PMGSY, with its dedicated efforts, exhausted 99.9% of its revised allocation, thereby nullifying the chances of high quantum of unspent balances in next fiscal year.

DAY-NRLM- The State-wise Central Allocations under DAY-NRLM are communicated to the States before the commencement of each Financial Year to enable the States to make provisions for State share in their budget. The DAY-NRLM Guidelines provide for penal deduction from Central Grants for shortfalls in State share to discourage delay in release of State share. 16

During the Financial Year 2017-18, all the States barring a few have been able to receive both the installments of the Central share due. As a result, the total release out of the provision of Rs.4350 crore for DAY-NRLM in RE 2017-18, the actual releases at the end of the Financial Year amounted to Rs.4327.82 crore which is 99.49% of the RE provision.

As regards unspent balances, the programme guidelines have necessary provisions to prevent accumulation of balances by adjusting the excess carryover of funds from previous Financial Year, while releasing the 2nd installment of the following Financial Year.

DDU-GKY- DDU-GKY is now being implemented through 3 year Action Plans. The current plan is from 2016-19. As per DDU-GKY guidelines, when a State spends 60% of the funds released to it (which includes both Central and State share) it becomes eligible to receive funds again. The scheme has shifted from a fixed percentage transfer to a demand based funds release, i.e, the States have to forecast their fund requirement for the upcoming fiscal period, they have to estimate the funds requirement for new sanctions, and the 2nd , 3rd and 4th Installment payable project wise. The proposal for release includes the utilization (which has to be 60% or more) till date, the audit reports, project wise estimate of funds which the State would disburse, and all other financial documents such as Bank Statement, Fund and Bank reconciliation etc. All this is done to reduce the quantum of unspent balances in future.

NSAP- During the financial year 2017-18, an amount of Rs.9500.00 crore has been allocated to NSAP schemes as B.E, which was reduced to Rs.8744.57 crore at R.E. stage. During 2017-18, an amount of Rs..8695.56 crore (99.44%) was released.

States/UTs have been requested at regular intervals to expedite the timely furnishing of requisite documents which would mitigate the problem of unspent balance.

[O.M. No. H-11020/05/2018-GC(P) dated 20 August, 2018]

Recommendation (Serial No. 2)

The Committee while examining the progress of the Schemes observed gaps in progress of the Schemes across different States. While few States elicited satisfactory progress, few States lagged behind alarmingly. Be it the Schemes of DAY-NRLM, DDU- GKY, PMGSY, etc. the alarming and unsettling situation remained as it is. It is the utmost responsibility of the DoRD to keep a hawkish eye over the progress and growth of its Schemes uniformly across the States for the holistic development of the country. The skewed pattern of Schemes' performance is not acceptable and the Committee strongly recommends the DoRD to take all out efforts in bringing the lagging States on board and get them at par with the better performing States. The Committee may be duly apprised of the steps taken by the DoRD in this regard.

REPLY OF THE GOVERNMENT

MGNREGA- MGNREGA implementation across the country has been satisfactory with 12 States exceeding their approved Labour Budget. These States include States with high poverty like Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan and West Bengal along with others like Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Jammu & Kashmir and Punjab. Even the North East States achieved an average in excess of 90% of their approved budget.

PMAY-G- The PMAY-G aims to provide pucca houses to all houseless households living in kuchcha and dilapidated houses, by extending a financial assistance of Rs.1.2 lakh (Rs.1.3 lakh for hilly areas etc.) to beneficiaries. The cost of assistance is shared between the Centre and the States in the ratio 60:40 (for plain areas) and 90:10 in the case of NE states and Himalyan states. For UTs it is 100% funding by Government of India.

In order to monitor the implementation of PMAY-G, all the transactions from identification of the beneficiary till completion of the house are done on real time basis using Management Information System – AwaasSoft (MIS – AwaasSoft). Further, each stage of construction of the house is monitored through geo-tagged photograph taken through mobile application “AwaasApp”. The release of assistance to the beneficiaries is made in installments and each installment is linked to the specific stage of construction of the house. The installment is released to the beneficiary only after the geo-tagged photograph of the pre-determined stage of house construction is captured, uploaded and approved.

In addition to the above, for easy and effective monitoring of implementation of the scheme and to foster healthy competition among states, a Performance Index Dashboard of PMAY-G was launched by the Hon’ble Minister of Rural Development on 15.12.2017. The dashboard provides real time numerical, graphical and cartographic summary of progress in PMAY-G right down to the Gram Panchayat level on eight different parameters. The dashboard also identifies areas in which a particular State, district, block or panchayat is lagging behind, enabling the officers implementing the scheme to pin point the area of intervention and take appropriate action. The above rigorous monitoring has helped in achieving construction of 44.54 lakh houses during the financial year 2017-18.

PMGSY- The general reasons affecting the programme’s efficacy in various States are the diverse relief features, inadequate executing capacity of the contractors, non-availability of land and forest clearances before and during construction, considerable shortage of construction/ raw materials like stone aggregates, sand, gravel etc. due to the directions of various courts/tribunal, unfavorable weather condition, frequent landslides and law & order problems. Amidst searching feasible solutions to these problems, Ministry actively/pro-actively monitors PMGSY’s progress from various fronts in order to attain balanced development:

1-Various meetings to confront States and discuss the bottlenecks/impediments/progress/other issues: Pre-EC chaired by Joint Secretary, 18

EC chaired by Secretary, PRC chaired by Secretary, Special review meeting chaired by Minister/Secretary etc.

2. Online Monitoring tool: OMMAS, PMGSY’s MIS, is a huge database with techniques to lock the module at the disposal of our technical wing, NRRDA. The States are required to input the progress data directly on OMMAS which is facilitates NRRDA follow up with laggard States.

3. Use of Satellite Imagery: We engaged ‘use of Geo-Informatics’ for capturing the variance between data captured by OMMAS and actual construction/coverage.

4. GIS mapping: The Ministry of Rural Development entered into a MoU, through the National Rural Roads Development Agency (NRRDA), with the Centre for Development of Advance Computing (CDAC), Pune for the implementation of web based GIS under PMGSY. The PMGSY National GIS can be accessed from www.pmgsy-grris.nic.in. As on date, the GIS work has been completed in the 20 states.

DAY-NRLM- In order to ensure uniformity in the quality and pace of implementation, among all States, the following measures have been taken 1. State Rural Livelihoods Missions (SRLM) who have greater experience and exposure to the programme and have already developed sufficient Social Capital have been designated as National Resource Organisations for providing support to the other States, wherever required. 2. The Ministry has also set up an Autonomous Society named National Rural Livelihoods Promotion Society (NRLPS) with a cadre of thematic experts to provide necessary guidance and handholding support to the State Missions. 3. The progress of implementation of the Scheme is reviewed with the State Government and SRLMs on quarterly performance review committee meetings chaired by Secretary (RD). Any bottlenecks in implementation of the Scheme are identified for taking suitable remedial actions. Technical support by way of capacity building is also provided to the States to improve their level of performance.

DDU-GKY- Under DDU-GKY, monthly reviews are done with States. MIS has been developed to capture the progress of the scheme state-wise. Region wise reviews are done so that issues specific to a region may be addressed. However, there is still an imbalance in State wise performance which implies that certain states are more forthcoming and active in implementation and also they have the required infrastructure and human resources for better management of the scheme. Continuous Handholding and support are being given to States who are lagging behind.

NSAP- As part of the Government’s decision pension schemes under NSAP are included under Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT). In the financial year ending 31stMarch, 2018, twenty two States/UTs i.e Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Daman & Diu, Dadra & Nagar Haveli, Delhi, Gujarat, Haryana, Jharkhand, Lakshadweep Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Meghalaya, Puducherry, Karnataka, West Bengal, 19

Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Telangana, Tripura and Uttar Pradesh, have reported total transactions of 10.73 crore through DBT mode. Hence, in comparison to digital transactions through DBT in 2016-17, there has been a quantum jump of 520% in 2017-18. In the year 2017-18, value of digital transactions stood at Rs.6791.70 crore, which is about 78% of the total releases in the year.

[O.M. No. H-11020/05/2018-GC(P) dated 20 August, 2018]

Recommendation (Serial No. 4)

The Committee have taken a serious note of the frequent complaints brought to the fore by the Members of Parliament regarding the non-compliance and non-take up by the DoRD of the irregularities/glaring malfeasance issues pertaining to the implementation of any specific Yojanas/Schemes duly informed to them by the Members of Parliament. On umpteen occasion, Members of Parliament bring to the notice of the officials of DoRD, incidents of corruption/malfeasance/irregularities/non compliance with norms evident in the implementation of Schemes at the ground level. However, to utter dismay of the Committee, more often than not, the complains fall on deaf ears with no action or at best, mere completion of formality at the end of the DoRD with no genuine yield as to the redressal of grievance. The Members of Parliament echo the sentiments of the public at grass root level and any irregularity brought to the forefront by them need to be dealt with in an upright and serious manner. Thus, the Committee, strongly viewing this situation, implores upon the DoRD to take suitable action at their end whenever such issues are reported by the Members of Parliament.

REPLY OF THE GOVERNMENT

MGNREGA- The status of implementation of MGNREGS is reviewed on a regular basis of all States/UTs. National Level Monitors, Common Review Missions and Officers of the Ministry visit States at regular intervals to review implementation of the programme. After the field visits, the findings/shortcomings and recommendations are shared with the States for appropriate action at their end. Performance Review Committee Meetings of the Ministry and regular Video Conferencing on specific issues are also important tools of monitoring.

PMAY-G- Utmost care is being taken in RH Division to dispose off/redress the complaints received from VIPs. Depending upon the nature of complaint, National Level Monitors or Officers from the Ministry are deputed to inquire the matter and if any irregularities are found, the matter is being taken up with the State Govt. concerned who are, implementing agency for PMAY-G.

The Framework for Implementation of PMAY-G -states that there shall be a grievance redressal mechanism set up at different levels of administration viz., Gram Panchayat, Block, District and the State. An official of the State Government needs to be designated at each level to ensure disposal of grievances to the satisfaction of the complainant. The official who is designated at each level would be responsible for 20

disposing off the grievance / complaint within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the grievance / complaint.

PMGSY- Under PMGSY, a protocol is being followed wherein on complaints brought to the fore by Hon’ble MPs, wherever required, NQMs are deputed to probe into the matter. The details of the NQMs deputed on complaints of Hon’ble MPs are enclosed in Annexure-I.

DAY-NRLM- So far as DAY-NRLM is concerned no letter from Member of Parliament is pending.

DDU-GKY- Action is always taken promptly on receipt of any complaint received from Hon’ble Members of Parliament.

NSAP- The implementation of the schemes under NSAP is reviewed on regular basis in all States/UTs through periodic Performance Review Committee (PRC) and Nodal Officers Meetings. Schemes are also monitored by National Level Monitors(NLMs) and through Area Officers Visits.

[O.M. No. H-11020/05/2018-GC(P) dated 20 August, 2018]

Recommendation (Serial No. 6)

The Committee is not oblivious of the fact reported in the media regarding the blatant grafting cases surfacing at the ground level in the implementation of MGNREGA. Be it the issue of fake job cards or delay in wage payment or the fudging of list of beneficiaries to name a few. Issues of corruption in MGNREGA are never ending and growing day by day. The Committee feel that until & unless strong action against the corrupt and erring officials/person engaged in the implementation of MGNREGA at ground level is taken on regular basis, the issues will remain unresolved. In this context, the Committee strongly recommends that stern disciplinary action be taken against anyone found undermining the credibility and efficiency of MGNREGA by engaging in nonjustifiable and corrupt activities. The Committee may also be apprised of the penal action taken by the DoRD in this regard case-wise.

REPLY OF THE GOVERNMENT

The Ministry has taken several initiatives to strengthen the conduct of Social Audits of works done under Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS). The various issues affecting the credibility and efficiency of the programme are being identified through Social Audits and appropriate actions are being taken up by the States. The details of action taken based on the Social Audit Reports are given at Annexure- II.

[O.M. No. H-11020/05/2018-GC(P) dated 20 August, 2018] 21

Recommendation (Serial No. 8)

Detailed Project Reports (DPRs) are the most essential framework upon which a project flourishes. In most of the cases, the success or failure of a project depends upon the quality of DPR preparation which would inter-alia include the geographical challenges and incorporates the sentiments & knowledge of local population residing there. The Committee was aghast to learn that while the DoRD proudly talks about the PMGSY-II & PMGSY-III phases yet there are large numbers of sites/projects under PMGSY wherein the DPRs have still not been made or haphazardly/inadequately made not taking into consideration the local terrain and their requirements. The Committee, citing examples of such NE States wherein rivers & mountains are in abundance, DPRs for PMGSY have still not been made. Taken aback due to such callous approach of the DoRD in this regard, the Committee strongly recommends DoRD to get the proper DPRs finalised/prepared for such NE States alongwith any other places where it has not been done yet and strictly adhere to the quality consideration in the DPRs for the success of PMGSY projects.

REPLY OF THE GOVERNMENT

The committee has come out with two different contentions here, one is that the DPRs are not being prepared taking into local requirements and the other is about DPRs not prepared or pending, particularly in the NE states. The committee may be well aware of the provisions that have been made in the scheme guidelines and the detailed processes that have been made mandatory as part of the project submission under PMGSY. The operations manual, scheme guidelines, DPR template and advisories issued by MoRD/NRRDA on these aspects are more than sufficient to understand the quality of DPRs that are envisioned and expected under the PMGSY programme.

The PMGSY Guidelines require the PIUs to undertake ‘Transect Walk’ to determine the most suitable alignment for the proposed road and also take into account the suggestions and inputs from the local community. The ethos of the Transect Walk is the involvement of the local community and also takes into account their local knowledge of the proposed alignment. The Ministry has issued advisory to the States to ensure that this procedure is followed. Further, during the sample scrutiny of DPRs by NRRDA, this aspect is being ensured by verifying the photos uploaded by the States on OMMAS, as well as the certificate furnished by the States, in relevant DPRs. Also, all the States are providing the Photographs along the alignment at every 100 m interval with summary of observations for engineering design of proposed road. Every DPR goes through a rigorous process scrutiny by PIU, SRRDA and the State Technical Agencies (STAs) nominated by the State Government. STAs are independent institutions such as IITs, NITs, State Engineering Colleges for scrutiny of DPRs. All efforts are made including sample ground verification to ensure that the DPRs are prepared as per the guidelines of IRC thus ensuring that neither there is undue expenditure nor the sustainability of roads is adversely affected.

Further, In order to prepare sound DPRs considering all the features of site condition, a DPR template has also been prescribed by the Ministry. To speed up the process of DPR preparation, the State Governments have been permitted to prepare the DPRs through qualified consultants for which MoRD has prescribed guidelines for selection of Quality cum cost based DPR consultants. In respect of Bridge works, joint Inspection of State Technical Agency (STA) and Superintending Engineer is mandated for each bridge site. The committee will also be aware that the PMGSY targets have been brought forward to March, 2019 and MoRD is working on this revised timeline mandated by the Government. Hence, accordingly the Ministry has received DPRs from most of the states including the NE states and has accorded clearance. Only a few residual cases are pending to be cleared and the states are being urged to submit these DPRs and most likely these would be cleared shortly.

[O.M. No. H-11020/05/2018-GC(P) dated 20 August, 2018]

Recommendation (Serial No. 9)

During the examination of DFG (2018-19), it also surfaced before the Committee that a marquee scheme such as PMGSY has been suffering due to slackened pace of projects in different States, particularly in hilly States such as Uttarakhand, etc. The Committee are apprehensive of the slow pace of growth of the scheme and fathoms whether the change in funding pattern of the project to 60:40 is resulting into non release/delay in the release of shares by the States at appropriate time. Thus, the Committee, recommends DoRD to hasten the pace of completion of targets in PMGSY projects, especially in the hilly States and resolve any issue of non release/delay in the release of funds with the States appropriately.

REPLY OF THE GOVERNMENT

At the time of release of Central share under PMGSY to the States, the M inistry specifically mentions in the Sanction Order that the corresponding State Share should be released within 3 working days from the date of receipt of Central funds. The Ministry keeps a track of the release of corresponding State Share through OMMAS. Wherever, there is a delay, the Ministry requests the concerned Chief Secretary/Principal Secretary of the State to intervene in the matter. As per programme Guidelines also, it is mandatory to release corresponding State Share before next set of installment. Progress has been relatively slow in some of the States due to following reasons:-

8. Inadequate execution and contracting capacity. 9. Less working season and difficult terrain particularly in Hill States. 10. Scarcity of the construction materials. 11. Security concerns particularly in LWE areas. 12. Some works are held up due to delay in obtaining clearance under Forest Conservation Act 1980. 23

13. Insufficient availability of the construction materials such as gravel, morum, sand, stone aggregate bitumen, machinery, personnel to handle machinery etc. 14. Banning of morum/ gravel/ sand / Stone quarries.

The Ministry of Rural Development has taken a number of initiatives to meet the above challenges faced by the States. The Ministry has engaged Central Public Sector Undertakings (CPSUs) in some of the States to augment execution capacity of the States. The Ministry has also conducted number of Contractor’s Outreach Programmes in the States to attract the Contractors in the implementation of the programme. Further, in order to encourage locally available materials and use of green technologies, guidelines were issued by the Ministry, wherein the State Governments are required to propose minimum 15% of total length of annual proposals under New technologies such as Cement stabilization, Lime stabilization, Cold mix, Waste plastics, Cell filled concrete, Panelled cement concrete pavement, Fly ash etc. The Ministry is also in constant touch with the State Governments and other stake holders to address the security concerns for smooth implementation of PMGSY.

Programme funds under PMGSY are released on the basis of certain mandatory documents, as specified in the Programme Guidelines. If the documents are in order, the funds are immediately released by the Ministry with the concurrence of IFD. Funds are only delayed when States fail to submit the compliance on time. As and when satisfactory compliance is received from the States , funds are released by the Ministry with due concurrence of IFD.

During 2017-18, Rs. 15,650.29 crore were released under PMGSY for implementation of the Programme, out of which Rs. 686.31 crore were released to Uttarakhand. Further, during the year 2017-18, 48,759.66 km rural roads were constructed with an average of 134 km per day. During 2018-19, total national targets of 61,000 km of road length to be constructed has been fixed and communicated to all the States.

[O.M. No. H-11020/05/2018-GC(P) dated 20 August, 2018]

Recommendation (Serial No. 10)

Attention of the Committee was drawn towards the quality of materials used in the projects of PMGSY and its non-availability due to various reasons which was one of the primary reasons behind the slow pace of growth of projects under PMGSY. Examining in detail, the Committee got to know that this was a practical problem in various States which warranted special consideration of the DoRD. Such problems surfacing at ground level work as a retarding force and impediment in the forward passage of the projects and thus, realising the gravity of the situation, the Committee, hereby recommends DoRD to ensure that all needful steps be taken for the special 24 consideration of the raw materials used in the projects both in terms of availability and quality so that the credibility aspect and speed of project completion do not get derailed.

REPLY OF THE GOVERNMENT

Quality of Materials to be used for road construction is prescribed in the IRC manuals and Quality Assurance Hand books published by NRRDA. It is well established that the availability of material within reasonable distance of requisite quality and quantity has a direct bearing on the progress and quality of works. It is also widely acknowledged that the continuous dependence on the conventional resources for the burgeoning developmental activity as resulted in the complete depletion of the conventional materials. Thus in most parts of the country the conventional materials required for road construction are not available within economical lead distance. This has also increased the construction cost considerably. Considering, this the Ministry has detailed new technology initiative guidelines in 2013 to construct roads using locally available materials and new technologies such as Cement Stabilization, Lime Stabilization, Bitumen, Fly ash and other commercial products accredited by IRC. These technologies do not require costly conventional aggregates and in-situ soil/locally available materials can be utilized by improved using these stabilizers which reduce cost of construction and time. In order, to encourage new materials in road construction, Ministry has mandated that the states should adopt these technologies in at least 15% of the annual proposals. Necessary steps have also been taken to build confidence among the executing agencies through training programme, brochures, do it yourself guidelines etc. to further enhance the scope of these works under PMGSY. Moreover, MoRD specifications have also been relaxed in respect of grading of materials for GSB layer in order to encourage the usage of locally available/naturally occurring materials/marginal materials.

The CRRI has completed a pilot project for Data-base preparation of conventional and locally available materials for 4 districts (Gwalior and Jabalpur in Madhya Pradesh, Darbanga and Bhagalpur in Bihar).

Through these MoRD has been taking efforts to address the issue of materials shortage and also to expedite the works under PMGSY.

[O.M. No. H-11020/05/2018-GC(P) dated 20 August, 2018]

Recommendation (Serial No. 11)

One of the practical constraint that the Committee felt the Members of Parliament generally face in their constituency is regarding the finalization of projects and list preparation. Members of Parliament find that they are not able to suggest sites or projects on public demands to be incorporated in the project list as they had been already approved and this leads to many genuine area left ignored from the project perimeter. The Committee feels that scope should be there so that Members of Parliament may also suggest projects to be taken up under the scheme. Thus, the Committee urges the DoRD to revisit its norms and make due provisions so that the 25 inputs/suggestions are duly incorporated at the time of finalization of projects under PMGSY-II & PMGSY-III.

REPLY OF THE GOVERNMENT

As per the mandates of guidelines, in the identification of the Core Network, the priorities of elected representatives, including MPs and MLAs, were taken into account and given full consideration, to the extent possible. The role of MPs has been further enhanced with the issuance of following advisories to the States reiterating the following: i. Provisions regarding consultation with Hon’ble MPs issued on 23rd July, 2015. ii. Submission of filled up formats i.e. MP-I, MP-II and MP-III made mandatory along with Annual Proposals from the States, issued on 31st July, 2015. Core Network (CN), as you are aware, is a minimum network of roads necessary to provide rural road infrastructure. CN is basis for PMGSY-I and DRRP, a broader concept underlies PMGSY-II. At this juncture, when PMGSY has to meet its targets upto 2019, no changes can be made in CN and DRRP. But, while framing CN and DRRP, Hon’ble MPs suggestions were solicited.

[O.M. No. H-11020/05/2018-GC(P) dated 20 August, 2018]

Recommendation (Serial No. 12)

One of the pertinent issue regarding PMGSY which came to the fore during the examination of Demands for Grants (2018-19) was the non-linkage of roads built under PMGSY leaving stretches of roads unconnected and causing problem to the habitations. Due to administrative domain of different districts or State jurisdiction regarding boundaries, there were various cases galore wherein stretches of roads remained unconnected. Moreover, there are also issues of connectivity of roads with major landmarks in the habitations like schools, Post Offices, Hospitals which seem to be ignored and are not taken into consideration. Considering this ground reality as a lacuna in the implementation of PMGSY Scheme, the Committee recommends DoRD to survey all the non-linked roads and also make all out effort in providing full linkages alongwith connectivity to major thorough points of public interest.

REPLY OF THE GOVERNMENT

The task of connecting 1,78,184 eligible unconnected habitations under the PMGSY-I is on its way towards completion by March, 2019. So far, 95% of habitations have been sanctioned, of which 91% habitations connected (including State scheme 26 connected habitations). So far, connectivity has been provided to 87% habitations. Only around 13% habitations remain and connecting them is being brought forward to March, 2019. Under PMGSY-II, against target length of 50,000 Km, by March, 2018, works of upgradation for about 32,100 Km length have been sanctioned. 13 States viz. Haryana, Punjab, Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Telangana and Uttar Pradesh, which have transited to PMGSY-II have been benefitted from this Programme by upgradation of about 12,000 km length till March 2018.

The proposed PMGSY-III would cater to such grievances like landmarks connectivity etc. It aims to focus on consolidation of existing Through Routes and Major Rural Links that connect habitations to Agriculture and Rural Markets (GrAMs), Higher Secondary Schools and Hospitals by widening and strengthening from single-lane to intermediate- lane width, strengthening of pavement of those Through Routes which are found to have suffered serious damage due to heavy traffic, Improvement of Riding Quality of road surface, construction of long span bridges on roads proposed for upgradation etc.

[O.M. No. H-11020/05/2018-GC(P) dated 20 August, 2018]

Recommendation (Serial No. 14)

Pertaining to the issue of non-completion of roads/slow pace of work in the NE States under PMGSY, one of the primary reason that came before the Committee was the lack of capacity of the resource personnel employed with the projects in those areas. This resulted in non-realization of goals of PMGSY and could further retard the pace of the projects under PMGSY. Taking note of this situation, the Committee recommend DoRD to ensure all remedial measures in order to augment & strengthen the capacity building exercises in the NE States for expeditious pick up of the pace of projects.

REPLY OF THE GOVERNMENT

For accelerated execution of PMGSY in NE States, the Ministry advised the States to formulate an action plan to complete all sanctioned PMGSY road works within the stipulated time frame, by preparing month-wise, Project Implementation Unit (PIU) wise completion targets of road works. From time to time, State Governments are advised through various Regional Review meetings & Empowered Committee meetings 27 to take suitable necessary action to expedite timely completion of road works under PMGSY. The following additional steps have been taken by the Ministry to ensure effective and timely implementation of PMGSY:

(i) Additional Programme Implementation Units (PIUs) set up for augmenting the execution capacity of the State. (ii) Provisions in the Standard Bidding Document (SBD) rationalized. (iii) Training to field engineers, contractors and their staff, imparted regularly for capacity building. (iv) Regular outreach programmes for contractors, organized at State level.

Most of the States, except Meghalaya have been sanctioned its full entitlement under PMGSY-I and the States have been advised to get balance sanctions by May, 2018 in order to achieve PMGSY-I targets by March 2019.

[O.M. No. H-11020/05/2018-GC(P) dated 20 August, 2018]

Recommendation (Serial No. 15)

It was brought to the notice of the Committee that despite repeated complaints, few States are still not complying in letter & spirit the provision under PMGSY wherein only the concerned Member of Parliament of that constituency can lay the foundation stone/inaugurate new roads constructed under PMGSY. This norm has been in many earlier occasion too brought to the notice of DoRD, however, still the practice of ignoring the Member of Parliament in this regard is prevalent in few States. The Committee have taken a serious view of the matter and strongly recommends the DoRD to issue strict directives/take necessary steps for ensuring the compliance with the provisions of PMGSY. REPLY OF THE GOVERNMENT

Since 2008, till date, the Ministry of Rural Development has issued various circulars to all the States, specifying that “the foundation stone for PMGSY roads should be laid and the road should also be inaugurated by the Hon’ble Member of Parliament (Lok Sabha) with the function presided over by the local Hon’ble Minister or other dignitary as per State protocol. All these circulars (in English and Hindi) are available on the official website of PMGSY.

[O.M. No. H-11020/05/2018-GC(P) dated 20 August, 2018]

Recommendation (Serial No. 16)

PMAY-G is a public oriented Scheme comprehensively run by the DoRD to eradicate the problem of rural shelterlessness in our country and to achieve the vision of "Housing for all by 2022". The Committee is of strong opinion that mere completion of targets quantitatively will not serve the purpose envisaged upon with this scheme and 28 thus, the committee stresses upon the quality of materials used in the construction of houses under PMAY-G. The quality of houses constructed under PMAY-G is an omnipresent issue and needs to be looked upon in a serious and scientific manner. Not only the quality of materials need to be maintained, but also the usage of such material, specifically beneficial to the area of house construction by being more stronger and resilient, needs to be encouraged. Therefore, the Committee recommends the DoRD to look into the matter earnestly and ensure that quality of houses under PMAY-G does not get compromised. REPLY OF THE GOVERNMENT

The PMAY-G scheme requires the States/UTs to provide the beneficiaries a bouquet of options of house designs according to local conditions, using appropriate technology suitable to the region of their residence. Towards this end, The Ministry of Rural Development, in collaboration with the UNDP and IIT Delhi has conducted studies in 18 states and developed about 120 locally appropriate, cost effective and disaster resilient housing design typologies for identified housing zones in 18 states. 106 of these typologies for 15 states have been compiled into a book ‘PAHAL’. Apart from the above, the Ministry of Rural Development with IIT Delhi has developed a portal “Rural Housing Knowledge network”, whereby housing technologies, case studies etc. from different parts of the country can be uploaded and made easily available to beneficiaries. Apart from the above, certain states/UTs have also developed house design typologies on their own. In all, the centre and states combined have developed 221 house design typologies in 31 states.

Towards improving the quality of houses, the PMAY-G scheme also provides rural mason training by States using administrative funds available under the scheme. The MoRD, Govt. of India in coordination with the Construction Skills Development Council of India (CSDCI) has developed curriculum approved by the NSDC for undertaking mason training. In order to resolve issues/address queries of State Governments that crop up during field level implementation of Mason Training, the Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD) has prepared and issued comprehensive guidelines on implementation of mason training to all States/UTs. The guidelines contain modalities for undertaking training, assessment and certification of rural masons at the State level. The guidelines also provide for Recognition of

Prior Learning (RPL) in cases where the trainees already have some experience in construction work. Such trainees can proceed to assessment after a short bridge training. The MoRD has also granted permission to States for implementation of mason training through RSETIs. As on 31.03.2018, total enrolment of candidates for rural mason training in various states, stood at 21892, out of which, 13859 candidates have been assessed and 8397 masons certified.

[O.M. No. H-11020/05/2018-GC(P) dated 20 August, 2018]

Recommendation (Serial No. 18)

The formation of Producers Companies to facilitate the DAY-NRLM (Aajeevika) village products in getting its due recognition and market is a commendable step which would go a long way in meeting the vision under DAYNRLM. However, the Committee are of the view that various logistics issue still need to be dealt with judiciously like the transportation and storage capacity space for the village-haats and village produce, alongwith other areas of concern which would require a convergent approach of more than one Ministry/Department. The Committee, Therefore recommends DoRD to view this area of concern pragmatically and involve other stakeholders for a synergistic approach and holistic development of rural population.

REPLY OF THE GOVERNMENT

DAY-NRLM takes note of the view expressed by the Standing Committee on the logistics issues like transportation and storage capacity space for village haats and village produce and also the need for convergent approach of more than one Ministry/Department.

In this regard the following initiatives have been taken up under Ministry of Rural Development for the promotion of rural haats:

1. Setting up of Rural Haats through MGNREGS: The construction of grameen or village haat is a permissible work as per para 4(1) IV Category: D Rural Infrastructure (v) of the Schedule – I of Mahatma Gandhi NREG Act at the village or block level. The repair and maintenance of grameenhaat constructed under MGNREGS is also permissible as per para 4(1) IV Category : D Rural Infrastructure (viii) of the Schedule – I. Village haats may be constructed on GP / government land at the existing place of marketing in the villages or blocks where weekly haats already exists. The basic infrastructure / facilities at these village haats should cover open raised platform & covered platform, separate toilets for men and women, drinking water facilities, drains, brick / stone soling in the moving space, garbage pits, storage, boundary wall with fence, parking space and drinking water facilities for cattle. A typical drawing with 5212.4 sqft area with these facilities has been suggested in the Samarthya Manual prepared by the Ministry of Rural Development. The estimated cost of such village haat will be approximately Rs. 17.92 lakh. However, the area and plan may vary as per functional requirements of the GP. We are working on plan and estimates of smaller sizes also..

2. Setting up of Rural Haats under DAY-NRLM in convergence with MGNREGA: The Ministry has issued notifications outlining the provisions for creating commons assets including haats at the village or block level for the benefit of DAY-NRLM compliant SHGs. In a recent notification the states has further been asked to set up Rural Haats under MGNREGA to give an opportunity to the rural poor to market their products/agriculture produce. The State Rural Livelihoods Missions have been advised to place an effective mechanism to coordinate between MGNREGA to undertake the development of Graminhaats. 30

3. Draft guidelines for development of GraminHaats under DAY-NRLM: A draft guidelines has been developed under DAY-NRLM to set-up graminhaats. Some of the salient features of the haats as outlined in the draft guidelines are:

a. Basic Structure /facilities for the Village Haats The basic structure / facilities which may be provided at these Village/BlocklevelHaats are as under: 1. Open raised,coveredplatforms 2. Toilets (separate facilities for women and men) 3. Drinking water facility 4. Drains 5. Brick soiling in the moving space 6. Garbage pits/corner 7. Office block 8. Warehouse for storage (small) 9. Space for packaging 10. Boundary wall/ fence 11. Parking space

b. Maintenance and Management

A Rural Haats Management Committee may be constituted for management and maintenance of Village and Block levelHaats which may comprise the following: Village Level Haats:

 President of Gram Pachayat or his/her nominee who is a member of the Gram Panchayat  Block Development Officer  Block Mission Manger (NRLM)  Representative of Self Help Group and/or their Federation

[O.M. No. H-11020/05/2018-GC(P) dated 20 August, 2018]

Recommendation (Serial No. 19)

DoRD has also taken onus of developing organic cultivations in 1000 clusters. Finding this initiative of DoRD a novel one, the Committee still feel that DoRD should be aware of the fact that mere development of organic clusters would not suffice but the real task would be to encourage and facilitate the organic products, so generated, to reach market and develop commensurate revenue, only then the exercise would have sustainability. Keeping this in view, the Committee recommends DoRD to employ such strategic approach and steps required for the sustainable success of such organic clusters. REPLY OF THE GOVERNMENT

DAY-NRLM recognizes the concerns raised and recommendation made by the standing committee on developing 1000 organic clusters by DAY-NRLM.

To develop the strategy for the roll-out and implementation of the 1000 organic village clusters, few consultations have been organized by DAY-NRLM with participation of State Rural Livelihoods Missions (SRLMs), field level functionaries of SRLMs, industry representatives, NGOs, government officials and experts on organic farming and certification. These consultations have helped DAY-NRLM to detail out the strategic approachof DAY-NRLM for promotion of organic village clusters in a comprehensive manner including organic cultivation, certification, value addition and market linkage.

The strategic approach developedthrough these consultations and the steps for roll-out the same are:

1. Cluster based approach– production, certification, value addition and marketing integrated in a cluster. a. As building economies of scale is crucial, multiple clusters in a district/state would be selected for collation and effective backward and forward linkages. b. For scale – multiple clusters in a district/state would be developed

2. Market linked interventions - The interventions on organic farming would begin with market identification: a. Development of marketing strategies and the respective certification requirements for the major commodity sub-sectors under DAY-NRLM – fruits & vegetables, spices, cereals, pulses and oilseeds. b. Identification of markets for each of the sub-sectorsand the type of certification adopted would also be linked to the market 3. Promotion of Women owned and women governed producer enterprises would be central to the intervention to enable economies of scale, improved market reach for the organic produce and reduction in transaction costs 4. Develop professional competency at every level and community resource persons for effective implementation of the organic village clusters. a. Placement of qualified manpower at the block and cluster level by the SRLMs b. Identification of community resource persons to provide support at the village level c. Training and capacity building of staff, community resource persons and community on organic farming, certification, value addition and market linkage. 5. Technical support agencies and development of partnerships and convergence: a. Partnerships and convergence resource organization/persons, other ministries, bank, market, certificationagencies. 32

b. Develop a call down list of Technical Support agencies to support the SRLMs in planning and roll-out of the organic village clusters.

[O.M. No. H-11020/05/2018-GC(P) dated 20 August, 2018]

Recommendation (Serial No. 20)

A noble exercise aimed at developing ideal villages involving the Members of Parliament as the main catalytic source has been running under the DoRD. However, the Committee are of the view that despite the full interest and active role played by the Members of Parliament in adopting the villages and contributing to its upliftment, the purpose might not be served untill & unless these villages are provided with priority based scheme implementation approach. The Schemes of the Centre to provide fruits to these villages and its due development requires the systematic facilitation from all the stakeholders and specifically the State bodies. Moreover, it has been felt that the seriousness regarding this Scheme under SAGY-II has depleted as evident from the selection of lesser Panchayats and non-holding of meetings. In the fitness of things, the Committee recommends DoRD to pull up its socks and in right earnest monitor and supervise by ensuring that all necessary steps are taken for the fulfillment of vision of SAGY. REPLY OF THE GOVERNMENT

Saansad Adarsh Gram Yojana (SAGY) is a unique scheme of the Govt. of India, wherein the leadership, capacity, commitment and energy of Hon’ble Members of Parliament are leveraged at the village level for rural development. The scheme aims to provide improved quality of public services to the citizen through convergence and prioritised saturation of various schemes by central and state governments while not depending on additional funds. Towards these ends, the Ministry of Rural Development has acted together with other central Government Ministries to assign priority in respect of certain schemes for the Gram Panchayats identified under SAGY. So far, 15 Ministries / Departments of Govt. of India have amended guidelines / issued advisories to enable priority for SAGY Gram Panchayats in respect of 22 schemes. Further, the Hon’ble Minister of Rural Development has written to all Chief Ministers on 15-02-2018 requesting them to lay emphasis on the seamless convergence of schemes among different state government departments for effective implementation of SAGY.

2. The SAGY Guidelines envisage sound institutional support for the Yojana in the form of State Level Empowered Committees (SLEC) headed by Chief Secretary at State level and District Level Committees under the Chairpersonship of Hon'ble Member of Parliament at the District level. The States have been requested to ensure that SLECs meet at least once a quarter and perform various tasks for effective implementation of SAGY.

3. Further, the the Ministry has recently conveyed to the States/UTs to keep in mind the following points while finalising the State Action Plan for the Financial year 2018-19:-

(i) The concerned officials may be directed to expedite the implementation of the projects proposed under Village Development Plans of the SAGY Gram Panchayats and update the progress in the SAGY portal (http://saanjhi.gov.in).

(ii) The progress of implementation of SAGY may be reviewed at State and District level regularly.

4. Recognising that the implementation of SAGY requires highly motivated and knowledgeable personnel, the Ministry has been organising capacity building exercises for various stakeholders of the scheme i.e. Charge Officers, State Team of Trainers and State Nodal Officers of SAGY during April - June 2018. They are being trained in the different aspects of the Yojana at National Institute of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj (NIRD&PR), Hyderabad / State Institute of Rural Development, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow and NIRD&PR North Eastern Regional Centre, Guwahati. The training is of residential nature, for a duration of two days incorporating the learnings from the SAGY implementation so far.

5. The convergence approach of development under SAGY receives further articulation under the Mission Antyodaya presenting a huge opportunity for the scheme in terms of greater efforts towards saturation of village-level needs, promotion of livelihoods and better monitoring of convergence across ministries by leveraging Antyodaya MIS / Dashboard. There are seven Mission Antyodaya indicators related to various programmes/ schemes of Department of Rural Development. The SAGY Division did a gap analysis of Rural Development Schemes in the SAGY Gram Panchayats based on the parameter-wise scoring in Mission Antyodaya. The Gap analysis reports have been shared with the respective programme divisions of the Ministry and the State Governments requesting them to expedite implementation of their schemes in the SAGY Gram Panchayats with a focus on saturation within the timelines i.e. by March 2019. It is hoped that such a move can bring a significant transformation in the SAGY Gram Panchayats and timely completion of projects planned under Village Development Plans.

6. The Saansad Adarsh Gram Yojana (SAGY) Division is in constant touch with the state governments and district administrations through phone calls and letters for effective implementation of the Yojana. At the national level, a separate web-based monitoring system has been put in place for the scheme which can be accessed from the SAGY website (http://saanjhi.gov.in). The login credentials to this website have been created and circulated among all Members of Parliament, State Nodal Officers, District Collectors and Charge Officers. The Division has also established an online support desk system enabling the Hon'ble MPs and other key stakeholders to give suggestions/comments, and raise queries or complaints which are promptly responded by the implementing authorities.

[O.M. No. H-11020/05/2018-GC(P) dated 20 August, 2018]

Recommendation (Serial No. 22)

The Committee was acquainted of a much prevalent practice wherein the local popular needs and demands are not considered before the finalisation and implementation of any Yojanas/Scheme in that specific area, thus, leaving much to be desired as regards the applicability and success of any scheme in that specific area. Taking note of the practical consequences of the situation, the Committee feel that for any Scheme to be successfully implemented, the local sentiments need to be taken into account and, thus, the Committee recommends that the relevant Gram Sabhas, Gram Panchayats be mandatorily involved before finalisation of any project in the specific area and DoRD should ensure that the role of Gram Sabhas & Gram Panchayats are judiciously taken into account in this regard. REPLY OF THE GOVERNMENT

MGNREGA- Among the core objective of MGNREGA is deepening of democracy by strengthening the Panchayati Raj institutions. This is ensured through the planning process under this programme which starts with Gram Sabha (on 2nd October) where persondays projections for the next financial year along with shelf of work is prepared through a participatory bottoms up approach. Apart from the planning process, it is the GP which executes work from the list prepared by it. The Gram Panchayats play the most crucial role in MGNREGS implementation.

PMAY-G- Under PMAY-G Gram Sabhas & Gram Panchayats have the following roles:-

 The Gram Panchayats, through Gram Sabhas, select prioritize and finalize the Permanent Wait List of eligible beneficiaries prepared on the basis of SECC-2011, and prepare a list of households not included in the system generated priority list, but otherwise found eligible.  The Gram Panchayats facilitate orientation of beneficiaries on different aspects of the scheme.  The Gram Panchayats identify the families who are unable to construct houses on their own and help in getting the houses of these families taken up for construction as a part of the mason training program.  The Gram Panchayats -assist in identifying common land available for allotment to the landless beneficiaries.  The Gram Panchayats may facilitate beneficiaries in accessing materials required for construction at reasonable rates and help in identification of trained masons.  The Gram Panchayats - facilitate beneficiaries in availing benefits of other schemes of the Centre and State Government through convergence .  The Gram Panchayats to discuss the progress of the scheme in their scheduled meetings and help resolve the problems being faced by the beneficiaries. The Gram Panchayats should also proactively assist the social audit teams to conduct Social Audit.  The Gram Panchayat may assist in identifying the local level functionary to be tagged with each PMAY-G house for ensuring their timely completion. 35

PMGSY- As per PMGSY Guidelines, the priorities of elected representatives including Members of Parliament (M.P.) and Members of Legislative Assemblies (M.L.A.) are duly taken into account and given full consideration while finalizing District Rural Roads Plan (DRRP) and Core Network. List of road works to be taken up under the PMGSY are finalized each year by the District Panchayat in accordance with the Allocation of funds communicated to the District, and the District Panchayat finalizes the list through a consultative process involving lower level Panchayati Raj Institutions and elected representatives. As per PMGSY guidelines, public representatives are associated while finalizing the selection of road works in the annual proposals in the Core Network. The proposals of the Members of Parliament are given full consideration under PMGSY.

As part of the PMGSY process, “transect walk” is organized by the Assistant Engineer at the time of preparation of DPRs, wherein, the Panchayat Pradhan, local patwari, the JE, Women PRI members representatives of Women Self Help Group (SHGs) participate. Further, the Ministry has also amended the PMGSY guidelines to accord priority to the roads leading to the Gram Panchayats identified by the Members of Parliament under Sansad Adarsh Gram Yojana (SAGY).

DAY-NRLM- DAY-NRLM is always facilitating the Women SHGs and their Federations to participate in the Gram Sabhas and raise local development issues and needs in that forum. SHG federations are also encouraged to visit to Gram Panchayats, acquire information about various rural development schemes and programmes and to negotiate for accessing various rights and entitlements for their members. This is one of the interventions under DAY-NRLM.

Apart from this, under PRI-CBO Convergence Project special mentoring support has been given to selected GPs and Blocks in selected SRLMs on convergence initiatives. Trainings of SHG members and their federations on major entitlements, process to access entitlements, role of Gram Sabhas and role of CBOs in Gram Sabha and local development etc. Women federations are preparing Gram Panchayat Poverty Reduction Plan and sharing it in the Gram Sabha for incorporating relevant activities in Gram Panchayat Development Plan. On the other hand, PRI members, mainly Gram Panchayat elected members and key officials are also oriented about SHG initiatives, steps to involve them in GPDP and role of CBOs in local development etc. Joint meeting and exposure visits are conducted with representatives from GP and SHG federations for common understanding and better role clarity.

DAY-NRLM has already requested all State Missions to ensure participation of women SHGs in the Gram Sabha. Under Mission Antyodaya special thrust will be given to selected Clusters and GPs to work in close partnership with Gram Panchayat and 36 provide necessary support in effective implementation of all rural development programmes.

As recommended by the Standing Committee, DAY-NRLM will further try to ensure more effective partnership with PRIs, specially Gram Panchayats in all areas where DAY-NRLM interventions are going on.

DDU-GKY- DDU-GKY recognizes that every Gram Panchayat (GP) has a key role in the successful implementation of a skill development program, especially to enhance the reach of the program to the poorest households within its jurisdiction. Further, DDU-GKY adopts a village saturation approach for skilling, which requires GPs to generate awareness about the skill development programs in their panchayat. The role of GPs is also directly seen in facilitating mobilization of candidates, creating databases for skill demand and placement, assistance to State Government in conducting the Job melas and supporting the skill providers in all stages of implementation.

NSAP Panchayat Raj Institutions (PRI) play a vital role in the implementation of the schemes under NSAP. They generate awareness regarding eligibility and application process, facilitate application and assist in grievance redressal. The report of the verification team with the list of eligible applicants are to be placed before the Gram Sabha and their comments communicated to the sanctioning authority. If the GramSabha is not conducted within the required time period the verifying officer may submit the report to the sanctioning officer under intimation to the Gram Panchayat.

[O.M. No. H-11020/05/2018-GC(P) dated 20 August, 2018]

CHAPTER III

RECOMMENDATIONS WHICH THE COMMITTEE DO NOT DESIRE TO PURSUE IN VIEW OF GOVERNMENT’S REPLIES

- NIL -

CHAPTER IV

RECOMMENDATIONS IN RESPECT OF WHICH REPLY OF THE GOVERNMENT HAVE NOT BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE COMMITTEE

Recommendation (Serial No. 3)

REPLY OF THE GOVERNMENT

MGNREGA- MGNREGA is a demand driven scheme and the local bodies are involved in planning and execution of works. Even in coastal areas, the bottom up approach in deciding the types of works to be taken up is being implemented. Among the list of permissible works under MGNREGS a number of activities are being planned and implemented across the coastal regions.

PMAY-G- Under PMAY-G assistance of Rs.1.3 lakh in hilly states, difficult areas, and IAP districts, as opposed to 1.2 lakh in plain areas is provided for construction of pucca house.

Difficult areas are those where due to reasons of poor availability of materials, poor connectivity, adverse geo-morphological and climatic conditions etc., the cost of construction is higher. The classification of difficult areas is to be done by State Governments based on an existing classification in the state or through the use of a methodology based on objective criteria. The Empowered Committee of the Ministry of Rural Development approves the difficult areas in a particular state on the basis of higher cost of construction. Coastal areas classified as difficult areas if approved by the Empowered Committee would be able to get higher unit assistance under the scheme.

Further, there is a provision under ‘Special Project’ of PMAY-G for financial assistance to states for rehabilitation/relocation of families whose houses have been affected by natural calamities, provided that the households appear in the Permanent Wait List. The proposal in this regard is required to be submitted by the respective State / UT Government.

In so far as Rural Housing is concerned, no separate evaluation study has been conducted or proposed to be conducted for coastal areas.

PMGSY- Ministry truly applauds the Committee’s concern for coastal areas. The Ministry has directed NRRDA to engage some reputed organization to conduct 39 feasibility studies on randomly selected coastal districts. The random distribution studies’ conclusions would be brainstormed at reaching roadmap aimed at fulfilling demand of rural coastal populace.

DAY-NRLM- An advisory will be issued to the States to take appropriate action to cover the rural populace of Coastal habitations in the fold of DAY-NRLM by organizing them into Self Help Groups.

DDU-GKY- Ministry of Rural Development and Ministry of Shipping have entered into an MoU for convergence of Sagarmala, which focuses on ‘port-led development’, with DDU-GKY to enable skilling of coastal population for growing maritime industry, thereby leading to sustainable inclusive growth in the coastal areas. Fresh projects have been invited under Sagarmala and approved for implementation.

NSAP- It has been decided to conduct a concurrent evaluation study for National Social Assistance Programme (NSAP) with the objective to assess the extent to which the programme has achieved its objectives and to suggest the solutions thereof that need to be applied to improve the implementation processes in all the States/UTs including coastal areas.

[O.M. No. H-11020/05/2018-GC(P) dated 20 August, 2018]

Comments of the Committee

(Please see Paragraph No. 8 of Chapter I of the Report)

Recommendation (Serial No. 5)

Reply of the Government

Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), 2005 provides at least one hundred days of guaranteed wage employment in every financial year to every household whose adult members volunteer to do unskilled manual work. The status of implementation of MGNREGS is reviewed on a regular basis with all States/UTs. National Level Monitors, Common Review Missions internal audit team and 40

Officers of the Ministry visit States at regular intervals to review implementation of the programme. After the field visits, the findings/shortcomings and recommendations are shared with the States for appropriate action at their end. Performance Review Committee meetings of the Ministry and Regular Video Conferencing on specific issues are also important tools of monitoring.

[O.M. No. H-11020/05/2018-GC(P) dated 20 August, 2018]

Comments of the Committee

(Please see Paragraph No. 11 of Chapter I of the Report)

Recommendation (Serial No. 7)

Effective Auditing System in MGNREGA is an utmost essential requirement of such a diversified Scheme (both in terms of geographical area concerned and financial aspects involved). The Committee are of the view that it is high time when a regular and periodic internal audit mechanism be effectively put in place in all the Gram Panchayat level or facets of third party audit be explored with its report published regularly in the public domain to bring more transparency and credibility to scheme of such magnitude. Rs.55,000 crore is a huge amount and the DoRD requisitioning such an amount for MGNREGA need to spruce up its all avenues for the accountability of each rupee spend in the scheme. It is, therefore, recommended that the DoRD without any further delay put in place a robust auditing system in MGNREGA and usher in greatest level of transparency.

Reply of the Government

The Ministry in pursuance with the Section 17(1) of the MGNREG Act, 2005 has been stressing upon all the States to conduct Social Audits of works taken up under MGNREGS. The Ministry in consultation with C&AG notified Audit of Scheme Rules 2011 and Auditing Standards for Social Audits which laid down minimum principles and standards for conducting Social Audits

Further, States have been instructed to set up independent Social Audit Units (SAUs) with its own Governing Body, independent Director and minimum core staff in the SAUs resource persons to facilitate Gram Panchayats in conducting effective Social Audits. As of now, 26 States have set up independent SAUs. The Ministry in collaboration with National Institute of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj, Hyderabad and Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS), Mumbai, has also taken up several capacity building initiatives. The Ministry has also improved the Social Audit MIS. The new MIS System has provisions for analysis of Social Audit findings and action taken thereof, which will be made available in public domain. Beside, internal audit teams of the Ministry are being sent to states for carrying out audit exercises.

[O.M. No. H-11020/05/2018-GC(P) dated 20 August, 2018] 41

Comments of the Committee

(Please see Paragraph No. 14 of Chapter I of the Report)

Recommendation (Serial No. 13)

Time and again the Committee have received complaints about the deteriorating conditions of roads built under PMGSY after a certain period of time. This is a serious obstacle in the success of PMGSY Scheme and it is high time that the issue of maintenance of roads constructed under PMGSY need to be dealt with an 'iron fist'. The officials/machinery responsible for the maintenance ought to be made accountable and due culpability be fixed in case of non-adherence to the provision. Therefore, the Committee once again urges the DoRD to take all measures in order to ensure that the roads built under PMGSY are duly maintained and do not deteriorate soon.

Reply of the Government

National Rural Roads Development Agency (NRRDA) and the Ministry of Rural Development have extended support to the States in the maintenance management of rural roads. Accordingly, a Model Policy Framework for Maintenance of Rural Roads along with a Guidance Note for the States has been finalized in close consultation with the States and circulated among all States. Based on these documents, the States are required to formulate, notify and implement State Rural Road Maintenance Policies to suit State specific needs. So far, 24 States (Assam, Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Odisha, Punjab, Rajasthan, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand and West Bengal) have notified such rural road maintenance policies. In addition, National Quality Monitors (NQMs) are regularly deputed, by the Ministry/NRRDA to all the States to inspect the quality of roads not only under the five year maintenance period but sample inspections of post five year roads. The States are required to submit Action Taken Reports (ATR), in respect of such inspections of the NQMs. The provision of upload of ATR on OMMAS also placed which has been regularly monitored by NRRDA. In the Financial year 2017-18, the 2651 nos. roads under five year maintenance got inspected by NQMs.

[O.M. No. H-11020/05/2018-GC(P) dated 20 August, 2018]

Comments of the Committee

(Please see Paragraph No. 17 of Chapter I of the Report)

Recommendation (Serial No. 17)

Expeditious inclusion of left over beneficiaries from the ambit of PMAY-G is a long pending issue yet to be resolved. The Committee is appalled with the lackadaisical 42 approach of the DoRD in this regard and urges upon them to view the matter in right earnest and ensure all needful action required for the completion of this exercise for the percolation of benefits under PMAY-G to the needy on an early basis.

Reply of the Government The objective of PMAY-G is to provide assistance for construction of houses to those households who are deprived of housing. Accordingly, beneficiaries of PMAY-G have been identified based on the housing deprivation parameters as per SECC 2011 data subject to exclusion criteria. However, process is on to consider those households, who are otherwise eligible on housing deprivation parameters but left out of SECC 2011 database, for inclusion in the Permanent Wait List (PWL) of PMAY-G. The States have been requested to expedite the process of preparation of listof left out but eligible households and upload the details of those households on AwaasSoft so that a decision could be taken by the Competent Authority for their inclusion in the PWL.

For compilation of data in respect of additional beneficiaries for inclusion in PWL, Ministry of Rural Development and NIC has developed a separate mobile application (Awaas+) and module in AwaasSoft wherein, details of the households, geo-tagged photographs of existing land/dwellings of beneficiaries can be captured and stored Gram-Panchayat-wise. The Awaassoft module has a provision for uploading of Gram Sabha Resolution indicating left out households identified for inclusion along with a list of heads of such households. This would be followed by electronic verification of compiled data using space technology and physical verification on sample basis, of identified additional households. Thereafter, approval of the competent authority would be obtained, regarding the additional households that can be provided assistance under PMAY-G.

[O.M. No. H-11020/05/2018-GC(P) dated 20 August, 2018]

Comments of the Committee

(Please see Paragraph No. 20 of Chapter I of the Report)

Recommendation (Serial No. 21)

The Committee were apprised about the non-holding of regular/mandatory meetings of DISHA in various quarters of the country. The Committee have taken this very seriously and feel that such platforms need to be actively maintained effectively for the efficious supervision and monitoring of the status of Schemes/Yojanas being run in the constituencies of the Members of Parliament. Any undermining of such facility is a serious breach of protocol and thus, the Committee recommend the DoRD to ensure that no callousness creeps in the holding of DISHA meetings and all officials required to attend the meeting are present mandatorily.

Reply of the Government The Ministry of Rural Development vigoursly pursuing with State Governments for holding DISHA meetings as stipulated in the Guidelines. The issue is raised with State Governments from time to time including in Performance Review Committee (PRC) meetings. Hon’ble MRD had written a letter No. Q-13016/06/2016-VMC (pt) dated 27th March, 2017 and 27th February, 2018 to Chief Ministers/Administrators of States/UTs to instruct concerned officers to ensure that the meetings of DISHA are held as per the Guidelines. Secretary (Rural Development) vide letters. No. Q- 13016/2/2016-VMC dated 26th July, 2016 and No. Q-13016/1/2016-VMC(Pt) dated 12th January, 2017, 15th March, 2017 and 30th January, 2018 had requested states to ensure holding of DISHA meetings as per guidelines. Thus, the matter has been taken with the States/UTs at the highest level and efforts will be further continued this regard

In order to strengthen the Monitoring through DISHA Committees, the meeting management software has been piloted in 3 districts for the purpose of DISHA Meetings. This will enable DISHA committee to plan, setup, and record and monitor the proceedings of the meetings.

[O.M. No. H-11020/05/2018-GC(P) dated 20 August, 2018]

Comments of the Committee

(Please see Paragraph No. 23 of Chapter I of the Report)

CHAPTER V

RECOMMENDATIONS IN RESPECT OF WHICH FINAL REPLIES OF THE GOVERNMENT ARE STILL AWAITED

- NIL -

NEW DELHI; DR. P. VENUGOPAL 27 December, 2018 Chairperson, 06 Pausa, 1940 (Saka) Standing Committee on Rural Development

APPENDIX I COMMITTEE ON RURAL DEVELOPMENT (2018-2019) MINUTES OF THE FOURTH SITTING OF THE COMMITTEE HELD ON THURSDAY, THE 27 DECEMBER, 2018

The Committee sat from 1500 hrs. to 1520 hrs. in Committee Room 'B', Ground Floor, Parliament House Annexe, New Delhi.

Dr. P. Venugopal - Chairperson

MEMBERS

LOK SABHA

2. Shri Kirti Azad 3. Shri Vijay Kumar Hansdak 4. Shri Jugal Kishore Sharma 5. Dr. Ramesh Pokhriyal "Nishank" 6. Shri Prahlad Singh Patel 7. Dr. Yashwant Singh 8. Shri Ajay Misra (Teni)

RAJYA SABHA

9. Shri Ajay Pratap Singh 10. Shri Shamsher Singh Dullo 11. Shri Rathwa Naranbhai Jemlabhai 12. Shri A.K. Selvaraj 13. Shri Prashanta Nanda 14. Shri Lal Sinh Vadodia SECRETARIAT

1. Shri Abhijit Kumar - Additional Secretary 2. Shri Shilpi Chatterjee - Director 3. Smt. Emma C. Barwa - Deputy Secertary

2. At the outset, the Chairperson welcomed the Members to the sitting of the Committee convened for consideration of four Draft Reports of the Committee on action taken by the Government on the recommendations contained on Demands for Grants (2018-19) in respect of Department of Rural Development (Ministry of Rural Development), XXX XXX XXX XXX.

3. The Committee then took up for consideration the following Draft Reports:- (i) Draft Action taken on the recommendations contained in the Forty-Sixth Report (Sixteenth Lok Sabha) on 'Demands for Grants (2018-19) of the Department of Rural Development (Ministry of Rural Development)';

XXX XXX XXX XXX.

4. Draft Reports were taken up for consideration one-by-one and after discussions, the Committee adopted the Draft Reports at SI. Nos. (i), XXX XXX XXX XXX. The Committee then authorized the Chairperson to finalize the aforesaid Draft Reports and present the same to the Parliament.

The Committee then adjourned.

______

______XXX : Not related to the Draft Report 47

APPENDIX – II [Vide para 4 of Introduction of Report]

ANALYSIS OF THE ACTION TAKEN BY THE GOVERNMENT ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THE FORTY SIXTH REPORT (16TH LOK SABHA) OF THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON RURAL DEVELOPMENT

I. Total number of recommendations: 22

II. Recommendations that have been accepted by the Government : Serial Nos. 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20 and 22

Total: 16 Percentage: 72.7 %

III. Recommendations which the Committee do not desire to pursue in view of the Government’s replies : NIL

Total: 00 Percentage: 0 %

IV. Recommendations in respect of which replies of the Government have not been accepted by the Committee :

Serial No. 3, 5, 7, 13, 17 and 21

Total: 6 Percentage: 27.3 %

V. Recommendations in respect of which final replies of the Government are still awaited : NIL

Total: 00 Percentage: 0 %