Karnataka's Struggles in Implementing JJM and MGNREGA: CAG Report Unveils Gaps

The CAG report highlights Karnataka's challenges in utilizing allocated funds for the Jal Jeevan Mission, focusing on infrastructure gaps and community participation. The report also reveals issues with the MGNREGA scheme, noting low employment days provided and lack of compliance with guidelines, impacting beneficiary entitlements.


Devdiscourse News Desk | Bengaluru | Updated: 24-03-2026 22:42 IST | Created: 24-03-2026 22:42 IST
Karnataka's Struggles in Implementing JJM and MGNREGA: CAG Report Unveils Gaps
This image is AI-generated and does not depict any real-life event or location. It is a fictional representation created for illustrative purposes only.
  • Country:
  • India

The latest report by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) paints a concerning picture of Karnataka's performance under the Jal Jeevan Mission (JJM), a pivotal project for water access in the state. According to the report, Karnataka received just 45% of its central allocation due to poor fund utilization. This shortfall has left noticeable infrastructural gaps, including inadequate water quality monitoring facilities and a lack of community engagement, with negligible contributions collected against expected figures.

Moreover, the state's failure to meet Functional House Tap Connections targets is attributed to delays stemming from a series of administrative inefficiencies. Critical factors include complications in tender processes, land clearance delays, and incomplete execution of planned projects. In some cases, even the misreporting of project completion status was noted, underlining the challenges faced by Karnataka in adhering to JJM mandates.

In parallel, the CAG's audit of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) in Karnataka reveals a dismal scenario. Only 5% of households were provided the promised 100 days of employment between 2019-24, with significant discrepancies observed in job card issuance and the enrollment of eligible beneficiaries. These inefficiencies have impeded the scheme's effectiveness, limiting essential rural employment opportunities and delaying unemployment allowance disbursements.

(With inputs from agencies.)

Give Feedback