From 100 to 125 days: Govt plans major revamp of MGNREGA, proposes renaming law as ‘Pujya Bapu’ Act

The Union government is considering a significant overhaul of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), proposing to raise the guaranteed number of workdays for rural households from the current 100 to 125 and to rename the law as the Pujya Bapu Rural Employment Guarantee Act, sources said.

The proposal was recently discussed by the Union Cabinet and would require a formal amendment to the legislation, enacted originally in 2005. If cleared, the move would mark the most substantial change to India’s flagship rural employment programme in over a decade.

Despite the statutory guarantee of 100 days of work, actual employment under the scheme has remained far lower. In 2024–25, the average number of days of work provided per household was just about 50, government data show. Only 40.70 lakh households completed the full 100 days last year, while in the current financial year, just 6.74 lakh families have reached the 100-day ceiling so far.

The proposed expansion comes alongside the government’s ongoing approval process to continue the scheme under the Sixteenth Finance Commission awards, which will take effect from April 1, 2026. Recently, the Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD) moved a proposal to the Expenditure Finance Committee seeking an outlay of ₹5.23 lakh crore for five years, up to 2029–30.

A ministry-appointed committee constituted in 2022 to review state-wise performance and governance challenges of MGNREGA submitted its report last year, forming part of the policy groundwork for the revamp.

MGNREGA was renamed from the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act to its current title by the UPA government in 2009, associating the scheme with Mahatma Gandhi to underscore its focus on equity, inclusion and support for marginalised communities. Sources said the NDA government will now have to amend the Act both to change its name and to raise the guaranteed workdays.

Several states — including Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Rajasthan — have long demanded an increase in the 100-day limit. While states are permitted to offer employment beyond 100 days, they must finance the additional work themselves, a provision few have been able to utilise extensively.

In 2024–25, of the 290 crore person-days generated under the scheme, only 4.35 crore person-days were funded by states from their own resources. States that have contributed include Maharashtra, Chhattisgarh, Odisha, Himachal Pradesh, Kerala, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Telangana.

Legally, Section 3(1) of the Act provides for “not less than one hundred days” of work per rural household in a financial year. In practice, however, 100 days has become a hard cap, as the NREGA software does not allow entries beyond this limit unless specifically authorised by the state or Union Territory.

The law already permits exceptions. Scheduled Tribe households living in forest areas can receive up to 150 days of work, subject to conditions under the Forest Rights Act, while an additional 50 days can be sanctioned in drought- or disaster-affected areas notified by the Ministry of Home Affairs.

Since its launch, MGNREGA has generated 4,872.16 crore person-days of employment, with cumulative expenditure of ₹11.74 lakh crore. Rolled out initially in 200 backward districts in 2006–07, the scheme was expanded nationwide by 2008–09.

Demand peaked during the Covid-19 crisis, when 7.55 crore rural households sought work in 2020–21 as migrant workers returned to villages amid lockdowns. Since then, participation has steadily declined — from 7.25 crore households in 2021–22 to 5.79 crore in 2024–25. Data for the past three years exclude West Bengal, where the scheme has been suspended since March 2022.

In the ongoing financial year (2025–26), 4.71 crore families, comprising 6.25 crore individuals, have availed work under the programme till December 12.

If approved, the proposed increase in guaranteed days and the renaming of the Act would signal a renewed push by the government to recalibrate the scheme’s role as India’s rural safety net — amid changing employment patterns, fiscal scrutiny and persistent demands from states and workers alike.