Congress Protests Against Renaming of MGNREGA

The Congress party, led by Udit Raj, staged protests against the government's decision to rename MGNREGA, accusing it of undermining Mahatma Gandhi's legacy. The move sparked nationwide protests focusing on the dissolution of a landmark welfare scheme. The proposed bill promises increased employment days but has met fierce opposition.


Devdiscourse News Desk | Updated: 17-12-2025 15:21 IST | Created: 17-12-2025 15:21 IST
Congress Protests Against Renaming of MGNREGA
Udit Raj burns copies of the VB-G Ram G Bill (Photo/ANI). Image Credit: ANI
  • Country:
  • India

The Congress Leader Udit Raj spearheaded protests against the government's decision to rename the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) to Viksit Bharat-Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Bill. During the demonstration, Raj burnt a copy of the bill, arguing that it conspires to terminate a historically crucial scheme for rural unemployment eradication.

In Karnataka, Minister Dinesh Gundu Rao criticized the government's decision, claiming it reflects the BJP and RSS's ideological rift with Mahatma Gandhi. Speaking in Belagavi, Rao labeled the renaming an affront, stating, 'It was a renowned employment generation program, celebrated globally.'

Further protests by Karnataka Congress leaders occurred at Suvarna Soudha. Chief Minister Siddaramaiah and Deputy CM DK Shivakumar decried the move, linking the National Herald case's symbolism to India's freedom movement. Shivakumar questioned the central agencies' motives, alleging impaired enforcement integrity.

Karnataka Minister M B Patil argued the renaming undermines Gandhi's legacy, claiming MGNREGA's success in generating local rural employment. Congress announced nationwide protests asserting that the BJP aims to replace rights-based welfare with charity. The bill, however, proposes extended wage employment days for rural households.

The bill outlined a fund-sharing structure of 60:40 between central and state governments, with special provisions for certain states reaching 90:10. State governments would now announce periods exempt from work to accommodate agricultural seasons. Despite increased employment day promises, opposition remains firm.

(With inputs from agencies.)

Give Feedback