Delay in action on MGNREGA scam sparks criticism in Gurdaspur
Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium
Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only BenefitsDespite the fact that five months have elapsed after it was proved that MGNREGA funds were being misused, the district administration has taken no action against the guilty.
Whistle blower Pawan Kumar had made a formal complaint to former Deputy Commissioner (DC) Dalwinderjit Singh on May 23 last year. At the same time, he had informed Dinanagar MLA Aruna Chaudhary of the anomaly. A few days later, the legislator had flagged the issue in a meeting of the District Vigilance Committee.
He had complained that the playground of a Gurdaspur government school ground was turned into a cash cow by a village sarpanch who was misappropriating MGNREGA funds. He claimed that the Sarpanch, Ganesh Kumar, had facilitated payments to these octogenarian parents, wife, parents, uncles, aunts, cousins and supporters who voted for him in the panchayat elections, thus ignoring poor labourers who were in dire need of work and for whom the scheme is actually meant.
Pawan, in his petition to the DC, had also said that whenever any work is done in the school ground, Ganesh gets it allocated to immediate kin and loyalists. “The school ground has come in handy for him to make his family rich. Ganesh’s parents are more than 80 years old yet both were shown to work as labourers. Rules say only those people who are between 18 and 60 years can work,” says Pawan Kumar.
MLA Chaudhary had brought this lapse to the notice of the DC, the SDM (Dinanagar) and other senior officials.
On August 19 last year, the Dinanagar SDM, after conducting a probe, had found several anomalies in the version of Ganesh Kumar. Subsequently, he had asked the ADC (Development) to commence disciplinary proceedings against him under the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994.
The legislator says she is unable to comprehend why action is not being taken when the SDM’s inquiry says it is a clear-cut case of embezzlement.