sa ori.12.gp papdahandi

8/7/2019 SA Ori.12.GP Papdahandi

1/23

Report of the Social Audit on NREGS, Orissa of Papdaha ndi panchayat 1

CONTENT

Topic Page No

Background of Social Audit 2

Volunteer of Social Audit 2

The Gram Panchayat Details 2

Public Meeting of Social Audit 3

Disgrace to social audit 3

Process of Social Audit 5

Gram Panchayat Details 6

Project wise reports

Cashew plantation at Disariguda 12

Imp. of Road with Drain at Dokraguda to P.S 15

Improvement of Road from Dokraguda to Ekori 19

Conclusion20

Annexure 1 21

Annexure 2 22


2/23


Report of Social Audit of Papdahandi Gram Panchayat

Background of Social Audit

Social Audit was faci l i tated by volunteers across Nabarangpur distr ic t at the

Papdahandi Panchayat and the whole process took 15 days to complete.Papdahandi Panchayat comes under, Papdahandi block of Nabrangpur Distr ic t.Papdahandi, the GP headquarter can be considered as one of the semi urbanareas of Nabarangpur distr ic t. Aound 60% of the populat ion of the GP l ives inPapdahandi. Papdahandi is 10 Km far away from distr ic t headquarter.

A local NGOs network named Nabchetana Network having members of morethan 10 NGOs was assigned to faci l i tate the social audit . Around 15 volunteerswere mobil ized from dif ferent NGOs and they underwent 2 days training thenthey moved to their respective GPs (two in Nabarangpur) for faci l i tat ing socialaudit process. During the process they tr ied to veri fy the functioning of NREGA

by checking the documents, interact ing with dif ferent stakeholders ( i .e.benefic iaries, implementing off ic ia l , and non benefic iaries). The volunteersvis i ted every household of the GP to know the fact and to help the social auditthat was convened by the Gram Sabha.

Volunteer of Social Audit

1- Habib Mohammad, CO-IDEA2- Simadri Majhi, Netaj i Yuvak Sangh3- Ghanashyam Suna, S.A.R.D4- Bhimsen Nayak, S.A.R.D

5- Susanta Ku. Suna, S.A.R.D6- Souma Manas Dash, S.A.R.D7- Arun Bi las Mohanty, S.A.R.D8- Jyoshna Rani Khora, S.A.R.D9- Romakant Panj ia, Netaj i Yuvak Sangh10- Ruchen Bag, Sangrami Sramik Sanghathan

The Gram Panchayat Details

Name of the Gram Panchayat : PapdahandiName of the Block : Papdahandi

Distr ic t : NabrangpurNumber of wards : 13wardsNumber of Revenue Vi l lages : 3Total number of households : 2046


3/23


Gram Panchayat Authorities

Gram Panchayat Executive Off icer : Mr. Pranati DashGram Rozgar Sewak : Mr. Saswat Mishra

Sarpanch : Mr. Ramchandra BhatraNaib-Sarpanch : Mrs.Taruni Nayak

Public Meeting of Social Audit

On date-13-03-08, the ten days f ie ld v is i t and veri f icat ion culminated when thesocial audit was organized in front of the Panchayat off ice. In the social audit ,a l l the f indings were presented and were substantiated by test imonies to gainunderstanding on the functioning of the NREG Act. Three recently completedworks were taken up for veri f icat ion during the social audit .

Panel ist and Implementing off icials part icipated:

1- Mr. N.Ahmmad, lawyer and Trade Union Leader2- Mrs. Jyoti Pradhan, BDO, papdahandi3- Mr.Bimbadhar sethi, APD(MIS)4- Asst. Soi l Conservations Off icer, Soi l-Conservation Dept.5- Mrs. Majhi, Chairman, Papdahandi

Panchayat off ic ial

1-Mr. Ramchandra Bhatra, Sarpanch2- Mrs. Pranati Dash, PEO, Papdahandi3-Mr. Saswat Mishra, GRS, Papdahandi

Disgrace to social audit

When the publ ic hearing had just begun, suddenly Mr. Somnath Bisoi, Vice-Chairman, who was an uninvited guest and Mr. Ramchandra Bhatra, Sarpanchcame by shouting towards the volunteers who were presenting the f indings andforceful ly took away the speaker from their hand, the duo with their 4 fo l lowers(local touts) successful ly tr ied to disturb the social audit . They were shoutingand scolding the volunteers by saying that what you people are doing, you arecreating problem in our path, they said the benefic iaries those part ic ipated inthe social audit that, these people (volunteers) can not provide you work, we arethe people who wil l provide you the work, ask them, can they? So thisprogramme should not be conducted; th is is not your programme. Then Mr. Bisoistarted his pol i t ical speech and tr ied to divert the audience and forceful ly tr iedto stop the programme. Even they did not give the speaker to the faci l i tator.They were desperately try ing to misguide the benefic iaries about the social auditand volunteers, by insist ing the gathered laborer to demand for work to thevolunteers not to the Panchayat or Govt.


4/23


Mr. Somnath Bisoi most of the time at his speech in the programme wasmentioning a particular word, i .e, I will provide you work, I will give youwage in time, dont worry and help us. This statement and his activitiesaround clearly stated that he is the real Contractor in disguise.

After that some of our volunteer, tr ied to convince the audience to stay at theprogramme and to hear the f indings. Then people sat s i lent ly.

Statement of APD

Mr. Bimbadhar Sethi supported Mr. Somnath Bisoi, Mr. Ramchandra Bhatra andtheir group (creating disturbances) by stat ing that th is NREG Act is not f i t for thelaborers and work cannot be provided to al l , because fund is not avai lable withthe DRDA. Further he was seen indulged in arguments with the volunteers that

100 days guarantee is maximum not minimum. He straight away al leged thecentral Govt. that i t is not providing suff ic ient fund as per need, then how canwe make NREGA successful. I t was observed that he was al l the way inst igatingMr. Bisoi by direct ly handing him over t he microphone after his version.

Reality behind this disturbance

As mentioned earl ier, three projects had been taken for veri f icat ion. Out of thesethree projects two projects i .e. Improvement of road from Dokraguda to Ekoriand Improvement of road with drain at Dokraguda to PS l ink road wasimplemented by Mr. Somnath Bisoi and Sarpanch as disguised contractors andthat was carr ied out in connivance with local implementing off ic ia l . So, the wholedisturbance was a wel l p lanned strategy. They had tr ied their level-best to stopthe social audit . As last d i tch they {Mr. Ramchandra Bhatra (Sarapanch) andMrs. Pranati Dash with the help of Mr. Somnath Bisoi and Group} also holdmeetings before the social audit in v i l lages to dissuade the v i l lagers for notturning up to the social audit . When the v i l lagers gathered in large number theyare forced to create such nuisance and they f inal ly succeeded in stopping thesocial audit half way. But one could real ize the desperation from the vestedinterest to stop people from knowing their r ights and enti t lements. Any waymessage has been clear that the interest of vested interest is going to be over.They tr ied to just i fy their exploitat ion by saying that the (volunteers) have comefor few days but we wil l s tay with you for forever do they mean theirexploitat ion wi l l continue for ever?

Statement of BDO

After that, BDO was given a chance to put her v iew. She tackled the disturbancein a professional manner and requested the gathering to support the volunteerand let them conduct the social audit . She was also convinced of the output of


5/23


the social audit and how i t secures the r ight of the common man. Final ly , shesensit ized the gathering about NREG Act and role of social audit in NREGA shealso spoke about the enti t lement of labourers.

Statement of Chairman

She remained si lent during the period of d isturbance and stated that; socialaudit is a posit ive s ign for the rural people as i t ensures part ic ipati on in decis ionmaking and also acquir ing enti t lements.

Statement of Panelist

Mr. N. Ahmed stated that real ly i t is unfortunate that s ince 60 year ofindependence, common men are being deprived from their r ights and also notgiven a chance to put their experiences on the table. So this could be the bestexample how exploitat ion going on in th is tr ibal belt . Again he appealed the

publ ic, not to to lerate th is k ind of d isturbance in publ ic meeting and also hemade clear about the real sense of democracy. He reminded how the freedomfighter had scari f ied their l ives with a v is ion of wel l / self governed country. Heconcluded by saying that; better implementation of NREGA would help toimprove the condit ion of rural poor.

At last, the vested interest created such problem that the programme had to stopafter presentat ion of only one project (cashew plantat ion).

Process of Social Audit

A process of social Audit has been in i t iated with the help of some trainedvolunteers hai l ing from dif ferent part of Nabarangpur distr ic t and also bymobil iz ing the local youth. During the process volunteers undertook householdsurvey across the Panchayat. The main object ive behind this survey is to col lectinformation, f inding out the implementation of the scheme as wel l as to createawareness among the v i l lagers.

The volunteers have put their best effort to sensit ize the v i l lagers on variousaspects of NREGA through various processes l ike organiz ing v i l lage meetings,distr ibut ing leaflets to every household and organiz ing publ ic meetings. Theprocess of sensit izat ion not only helped the v i l lagers to have betterunderstanding of NREGA but also helped in creating an environment for thePubl ic Hearing. The level of awareness has defin i te ly increased among thevi l lagers. As a result 134 new appl icat ions were made by households forregistrat ion.

Activ i t ies undertaken by the Social Audit Team in the Gram Panchayat:1. Household survey2. Verif icat ion of three randomly selected worksites3. Collect ion of a l l the Gram Panchayat information related to NREGA


6/23


4. Awareness Generation

Process:1. Indiv idual Meeting2. Group meetings at the v i l lage level

3.

Verif icat ion of the documents with the statement of the laborers4. Distr ibut ion of the leaflet5. Public Hearing

For the purpose of social audit , three completed NREGA works have beenselected randomly. Out of these three works, one has been implemented by theSoil Conservation Department and one by Papdahandi Panchayat Samit and lastone by Gram Panchayat. After the col lect ion of the case records, the social auditteam had consol idated the muster rol ls and other information and veri f ied themwith the statement of the laborers. Along with th is the team has surveyed eachhousehold of the Gram Panchayat and a general f inding of the status of NREGA

was prepared. This report has prepared on the basis of information anddocuments, provided by the Panchayat and block off ice, results of muster rol lveri f icat ion and the household survey, v iews and responses of the benefic iariesand as wel l as on the basis of the publ ic hearing which has held on 13 March2008 at the Papdahandi Gram Panchayat off ice.

As mentioned earl ier, the publ ic hearing could not be conducted in propermanner and the f indings could not be presented before the publ ic, due todisturbances. But the efforts of volunteers shed l ight on the functioning of theAct. Al l the f indings have been given below:

Gram Panchayat Details

Panchayat Off ice was v is i ted and volunteers veri f ied al l the records and otherdocuments relat ing to NREGA. One posit ive th ing, which founded GramPanchayat off ices wal ls are fu l l of information in the form of wal l paint ingregarding NREGA for the common people. Of course there is scope forimprovement l ike the information needs to be updated. Panchayat statusaccording to survey:

PAPADAHANDI PANCHAYAT

Total v i l lages / hamlet s- 9, Revenue vi l lage- 3Name of the vil lages

1. Papdahandi2. Dokraguda3. Dokribeda4. Disariguda5. Kheduguda6. Daleiguda7. Miriguda8. Majhi guda


7/23


9. Tandaguda

Total house holdsurveyed

Registered HH Job card holderHH

Employment HH

1103 754 718 120

If total surveyed HH is considered to be 100%Registered HH = 68% Job Card holder HH = 65%Yet to be Registered = 32% Yet to get Job Cards= 35%

Panchayat Documents veri f icat ion: NREGA has prescribed the maintenance of some records at the Panchayat off icein order to maintain transparency in the execution of the works. The social Auditteam physical ly veri f ied al l the documents and the f indings are as fo l lows.

The team struggled for three days to col lect the information because the PEOand GRS could not be contacted in t ime. After long wait the team able to met

Mrs. Pranati Dash, PEO of Papdahandi Panchayat, she played di l ly dal ly with usby saying according to Rule, GRS would bear al l the authori ty to provideinformation, so go to him and said I do not keep any records. (Though, a PEO isthe prime authori ty of a Panchayat st i l l she is avoiding to provide information).Final ly , we were able to meet the Gram Rozgar Sebak, Mr. Saswat Mishra, herepl ied that the PEO has not del ivered any records except Registarat ionRegister job card issue Register and Employment Register and rest records l ike:Asset register, cash records of the work is kept at her.

Registrat ion Register:During the veri f icat ion the social audit team found the Registrat ion Register in

the Gram Panchayat off ice. I t was wel l maintained.

Job Card Register:The Job Card Register found in the Gram Panchayat off ice but names of a l l thehouseholds provided job cards are not l is ted in the register. The job cardregister is found to be incomplete and not updated.

Employment Register:Though, there is employment register found in the Gram Panchayat off ice. Butthe contents, which were mentioned in the register, were missing the actualinformation and i t was seemed to be maintained just before few hours.

Asset Register:The social audit team could not f ind any asset register from the Panchayatoff ice. The team was informed by the GRS that, th is document basical ly keptwith PEO.

Unemployment Al lowance Register: -There was no any unemployment register at Panchayat.


8/23


Gram Sabha Register: -This register was not avai lable.

Case Records of other works: -

The team could not f ind any case record of the project, from rel iable source theteam (i .e. GRS) came to know that, a l l the case records are kept always with thePEO. He has kept these records in his custody not at Panchayat.

Muster rol l issue RegisterThis register was not found at the Panchayat off ice.

Complaint Register:-There is no complaint register avai lable in the Gram Panchayat off ice. PEO andGRS are unaware regarding this register.

Registrat ion/Job Demand/Employment Notice Forms: -Gram Rojgar Sebak was in v iew that there are no forms avai lable in the GramPanchayat , despi te several demand at b lock of f ice.

NREGS work Status in Papdahandi Gram Panchayat :As, the team could not f ind case records of other projects of NREGA and the PEO alsounable to descr ibe about the detai l of project , wh ich has been undertaken under Act .

Observation on various stages of implementation under NREGA : All the primary stages under NREGA were cross checked by the social auditvolunteers at the social audit , some irregulari t ies and some general f indingswere revealed, which are mentioned below by producing complaints on specif ic

cases:

Registration People are not aware regarding the registrat ion procedure. Panchayat off ice is not opened regularly Registrat ion form is not always avai lable at Panchayat off ice

(By the effort of the volunteers more than 134 HH within the Panchayat wereregistered through due procedure )

Issue of job card

Out of 1103 surveyed HH, 385 HH are yet to get job card Many HH has been provided with job card but i t is not f i l led up properly:

without job s l ip, no information, no s ignature and seal etc. Most of job card are not with the job card holder, i t was found with the

contractor, people representat ive, and Panchayat off ic ia ls. Fake entr ies in job cards.


9/23


During the social audit process so many irregulari t ies have been found in regardto job card, which were stated by the aggrieved laborer. Few irregulari t ies thatbrought to the notice of the surveyor are given in Annex - 1

Work application Most of the people from this Panchayat are not aware regarding the job

demand procedure. Un-ski l led job demand form is not avai lable at the Panchayat I f , in some cases job has been demanded, job s l ip is not being provided.

(By the effort of the volunteers, more than 65 households demanded forwork by following due procedure)

Employment Out of 1103 surveyed HH, only 120 HH have been engaged in NREGA

work so far in the GP. (according to veri f icat ion of job cards andstatement of labor)

Contractor involvement st i l l exists in the Panchayat Most of the works are conducted on contractual basis, even though the

work should be in piece rate basis. Suff ic ient employment has not been generated in the Panchayat. Use of machinery in NREGA work, has also affected the employment

status if the GP. Employment to the laborers in NREGA work is not being according to due

procedure, st i l l the old pract ice is in i ts existence.( i .e., asked by the contractors to jo in work)

The job demand has been increased but suff ic ient work is not avai lable atthe Panchayat.

1/3 rd part ic ipation of women in NREGA work is not being ensured. In some NREGA work, more than the f ixed t ime ( i .e. 8 hours) in a day, the

laborers have been forced to work with the same less than minimumwage.

Unemployment allowances Most of the labors are unaware about th is procedure. Based on laborer statement they have demanded for work oral ly and in

some cases in due procedure but unfortunately they were not provided thereceipt from the Panchayat.

Panchayat off ic ia ls are not showing interest to promote the job demand.

Wage payment: Labor are not aware about the current minimum wage. Minimum and equal wage is not being paid Discrimination in wage payment between male and female has been found

in NREGA work. Labor has worked in piece rate basis but the payment has been made in

less than the minimum wage.


10/23

Report of the Social Audit on NREGS, Orissa of Papdahandi panchayat 10

In some cases labor are st i l l to get their wages / cases of delayed andnon-payment.

Muster rol l and job card is not avai lable at t he work s i te; payment is beingmade without reading out the muster rol l .

Reference Complain Testimonies

Case-1 Women Labor has worked atDakribeda C.C road at Hari jan Sahiwith drain during 07-08 and got onlyRs.30 per labor day

Mass aff idavit with thevolunteers

Muster roll Fake entr ies in the MR, though the laborers have not worked False thumb impression has taken in place of signature People who are absent in the v i l lage s ince last 3-4 years are found in the

muster rol l . Person who are already died, their name has been f igured in the muster

rol l The laborers have not been sensit ized regarding t he importance of muster

rol l . In most the cases, the muster rol l has seemed to be manufactured.

Worksite facilit ies No worksite faci l i ty is found in any NREGA work carr ied out with in the

Panchayat. Though, Worksite faci l i ty has shown in the est imate but in pract ical ly i t

has not been provided.

Transparency There is no any muster rol l or voluntary discloser at the Panchayat to

make the common man understand NREGA The bi l l and vouchers, which has been attached with the records of the

work, are not authentic. Pall i Sabhas are not conducted in a proper manner; the resolut ions are

taken without quorum, which ult imately proves non-part ic ipation of thepeople.

Vigi lance committee has not been formed on any work of NREGA Social audit for each work under NREGA has not been done Work is carr ied out by the contractors

Due to disturbance in the hearing, al l the f indings of the work could not bepresented, but in the process so many f indings revealed from the veri f icat ion,which were as fo l lows:


11/23


Project. 1

Name of the project : Cashew plantat ion at DisarigudaEstimated cost : Rs.3,16,000

Area in hector : 40 hectorTotal amount sanctioned : Rs 3, 16,000Amount util ized : Rs.2,50,000P.I.A : Soil Conservation Department (l ine department)Implementer : Asst. soil conservation engineerDuration of work : Starting 07.07.06 and completed 28.11.06Total labor engaged : 81 labors

Particulars Muster roll Plan &estimate

Wage payment Rs251625 2,55,200Fert i l izer and others ( totalut i l ized amount wagepayment)

Rs.64375 60,800

Analysis of wage payment:This analysis has been made on the basis of provided muster rol l

Actual worker : 81 laborsInteracted labor : 35 labors

Out o 81 labor, the team able to meet only 35 labors, rest 46 could not be metbecause:

- All the records were provided at the eleventh hour- There is more confusion between Muster rol l and job card, i t was

not matching- Some households have been already migrated and displaced to

other places- Despite of v is i t ing more than three t imes, we could not able to

meet the people because they were being trapped by vestedinterest.

- some fake name has been wri t ten

Amount paid : Rs.2, 51,625 (to 81 labors basing on muster rol l )

Labour Statement:

Labour statementParticular According tomuster roll Actual

receivedNotreceived

Out comes in percentage


12/23


Payment ofwage to the35 laborer

Rs.1,21,475 Rs.25,060 Rs.86,425 Actual wage paymentmade

25,0601,11,485100= 23% Payment not made

86,4251,11,485100=77%

Remark 1-On payment of wage :According to the statement of the labor, out of 81 labors, 35 laborshave interacted and according to their statement; they have receivedRs. 25,060 as wage, which is only 23% of the total wage mentioned inthe muster rol l in the name of the labor.

The rest Rs. 86,425 has not paid, d irect ly or indirect ly to the saidlabor, i t shows that a huge sum of money has no any just i f ied reasonof expenses.

For the gap of Rs . 86,425 the team col lected suff ic ient evidence. Out of whichsome special cases has been produced who put their vers ion during social auditi tself :

Reference Complain Testimonies

Case no -1 Laborers from Miriguda vi l lage werein complain that, they have workedthat work for few days and left outthe work but after some days thecontractors came and asked for theirjob card and inf lated entr ies of morethan 100days.

Phogunu JaniSahib JaniGhenu JaniNarsingh Jani

And 30 others people

Case no -2 Jadu Bhatra was in complain that, infact he has not worked in the cashewplantat ion work even for a s ingledays but entr ies has been made inthe MR in his name, which is fake,

Jadu Bhatra

At- Majhiguda

Case no -3 Damani Amantya was of thecomplain that her husband Bal i Amantya has already died s ince 5years and I have also not worked onthat work but i t has been entered inthe MR which is fake.

Damani AmantyaAt-Majhiguda

Case no -5 People from Daleiguda were in v iewthat some had migrated at the t imeof work, some have not total ly worked but their name has beenshown in the MR, which is fake.

Mass aff idavit

case no -6 Keaba Jani was in v iew that, he hasnot worked in the work but fakename has been entered in the MR

Kesaba JaniAt-Kaduguda


13/23


Inside story

After detail verification, it was observed that, this work has been done in aconfused manner because in the same name two works was initiated at

same point of time and laborers were engaged from different vil lages.

As, this work was implemented by the line department (i .e., soilconservation dept.) but Panchayat office was not informed by theimplementing dept.

Threat and challenges :The whole social audit process was ful l of chal lenges and threat. These havementioned here:

Information provided at the eleventh hour

Vested interest group were creating many problems at the t ime ofveri f icat ion also during social audit .


14/23


Project. 2Name of the Project : Imp. of Road with Drain at Dokraguda to P.S linkImplementing Agency : Gram Panchayat

Implemented by : Mrs. Pranati DashJunior Engineer : Sri B.K PaniName of the VLL : Sri Sadasib NaikEstimated Cost : Rs 10, 00,000/Sanctioned Amount : Rs, 10, 00,000/Amount util ized (ti l l now) : Rs. 9, 89,733Duration of work : 1s t phase- 07.07.06 to 21.07.06 (15 days)

2n d phase- 22.07.06 to 05.08.07 (15 days)3 r d phase- 16.08.06 to 31.08.06 (15 days)

No of workers : 163 laborers (according to MR)

Particulars Muster roll Plan &estimate

Person days 4195 -

Wage payment Rs.2,40,076 -

Materia l and others ( totalut i l ized amount wagepayment)

Rs.7,49,657 -

* The details of plan and estimate were not provided along with the cashrecords by Panchayat official.

Analysis of wage payment:Out of Rs. 10, 00,000 of executed amount Rs. 2, 40,076 was ut i l ized for wagepayment and rest Rs.7, 49,657 for materia ls and other expenses.

Labor engaged : 163 personsLabor interacted : 80 personsActual ly worked : 57 personNot worked : 23 person

Labour Statement:

Labour statementParticular According to

muster roll Actualworked/received

Notworked/received

Out comes in

percentage


15/23


Person daysof 80interactedlaborers

2334 404 1930 *person days actualworked

4042334x100=17%

*person days notworked19302334x100=83%


out of whichonly 23 haveworked andrest 57has notworked, basedon theirstatement

1,51,150 36551 114599 *Actual wagepayment made

36551151150x100=25%

*No payment ofwage made

114599151150x100

=75%

Remark - On person days:In fact, only 17% person days has been created in th is workbecause only 404days have been worked by the laborerbasing on their statement, which was recorded from thelabor.The reason behind i t , i t might be:

Wok has done on contractual basis though i tshould be on dai ly wage basis.

More days has been mentioned, where as labormay work for less than the mentioned days.

Work may not have been properly carr ied out-On payment of wage :

According to the statement of the labor, only 23laborers haveworked on that work and received only Rs. 36551 as wage,which is only 25% of the total wage mentioned in the musterrol l against the name of the labor.

The rest Rs. 114599/ has not been gone to the laborersdirect ly or indirect ly, i t shows that a huge sum of money has

no any just i f ied reason of expenses.

So, for th is the fo l lowing could be the reason: Less no of labor have been engaged Muster rol l is manufactured and total muster rol l

has been prepared by one person The work has been carr ied out with the help of

outs ider / sk i l led labor with lesser payment to


16/23


them Labor who has worked, they have received less

than the minimum wage but more than actualreceived has been entered in the muster rol l .

The bi l l voucher, which were attached with the

cash records is also seems manufactured I t seems the dif ferentia l amount has ut i l ized for any

unjust i f ied cause. Though, the women labor has worked but under

payment has been made to them and more than theactual amount has been entered in the MR in theirname

Analysis of material and other component basing on Running billOut of Rs10, 00, 000, executed amount Rs.7, 49,657was ut i l ized for materia l andother component.

Budget Head According tobills andvouchers

Reality check Differenceamount Testimonies

Cost ofd isplay board

Rs.1000 Avai lable - -

Wage of VLL Rs. 2100 - - -

Cement (1969bags @Rs.183)

Rs.3,60,323(1969bags @Rs.180)

-- - -

Iron rod Rs.7325 - - -

Royalty Rs,23,323 - - -

Securi tydeposit (2%)

20,000 - - -

medic ine 506 Not avai lable 506 Actual Workedlabors

Box 150 Not avai lable 150 Actual workedlabors

Temporarytent

2500 Not avai lable 2500 Actual workedlabors

Metal, chips,sand & others 3,32,430

Total Rs . 7, 49,657 Rs.3156

Remarks :* In th is work according to the records, i t is shown that fo r 1s t 4 c.m the rat io ofcement, chips and sand rat io was (1:4:8) and for rest 12mm it was (1:2:4) butthe labor were in v iew that 1969 bags of cement was not used on that part icularwork because.* The rat io maintained in the materia ls used is far below the prescribed norm.* pract ical veri f icat ion of work suggest that, the amount of materia ls used onwork, does not ref lect from the work


17/23


* Actual laborers were in v iew that, medic ine, tent and other faci l i ty was notprovided in the worksite.

For th is analysis, the social audit team met al l the laborers (mentioned in therecord) indiv idual ly also in group and recorded their statement. Out of which

some specif ic has been presented, here:

Reference Complain TestimonyCase-1 Dal imba Bhatra complained that, her

age is 65 years and she has neverworked in any NREGA even in th iswork but i t has been mentioned 22days, Rs1210 as wage in MR, whichis fake.

Dal imba BhatraAt-DakragudaM.R No- 256152Sl no- 111

Case-2 Ni la Bhatra complained that, in factshe has worked for 6 days and

received only Rs.110 as wage ( i .e,Rs18 per day) but in her name 36days and Rs.2050 has beenmentioned in the MR, which is fake.

Ni la BhatraAt- Dakraguda

M.R No- 256006Sl no- 76

Case-3 Chakra Bhatra and his wife werecomplained that, in fact they havenot worked but 26 days and 1430has been entered in the MR. which isfake

Chakra BhatraAt Dakraguda

Case-4 Some female complained that, theyhave worked for 28 days and

received Rs.700 each, which isRs.28 per days, th is total ly v io lat ionof law. But more than actualreceived amount has been entered inthe MR in their name.

Tulabati AmanatyaKuni Amanatya

Baidi BhatraAnd 7 other female

Case-5 Tula Bati Amantya, she is di f ferentlyabled women, she worked for 25days and received Rs.700 as wage ,which is Rs,28 per day.

Tulabati AmantyaAt- Dakraguda

Inside Story:

When the worksite was visited by the social auditors it was found that thework has been done but not properly. Forcefully and by threatening thelabourers, less wage payment has been made. It was very clear from thebeneficiaries and villagers that they were being forced to work more than 8hours in a day by the contractors with the under minimum wage, even somework was carried out during night time with the same wage. Reality checkshows that, in this work less than the budgeted amount has been util ized.


18/23


Project. 3

Name of the work : Improvement o f Road from Dokraguda to Ekori Estimated cost : Rs.2, 50,000

Total sanctioned : Rs2, 50,000Amount util ized : Rs.2, 50,000P.I.A : Panchaya t SamitiName of VLL : Mr. Nanda MajhiName of J.E : Mr. A.K PuhanDuration of work : 1 s t phase- 29 /12 /06 to 12 /01 /07 (14 days)

2 n d phase-20 /01 /07 to 03 /02 /07 (14 days)3 r d phase-03 /03 /07 to 17 /03 /07 (14 days)

Total labor engaged : 129 labors

Particulars Muster roll Plan &

estimateWage payment Rs. 2, 30,942 -

Materia l and others ( totalut i l ized amount wagepayment)

Rs.19058 -

*As, the details of material component and labor component has not beenprovided. So, it could not be analyzed with the actual estimate. Details ofestimate have also not been provided.

Analysis of wage payment:

This work has been done in piece rate basis, This analysis has been conducted on the basis of provided muster rol lActual worked labor: 129 laborsInteracted labor : 80laborsActual work : 60 labors (out of 80)

Out of 129 only, the team able to meet only 8 0 labor, rest could be because:- were not present at the v i l lage at the t ime of veri f icat ion- some have gone outs ide in search of work- some fake name has been wri t ten

Amount paid: Rs.2, 30,942 (for 129 labors basing on muster rol l )

Labour Statement: Labour statementParticular According to

muster roll Actualreceived

Notreceived

Out comes in percentage


19/23



Rs.1,02,771 Rs.35,352 Rs.67,419 Actual wage paymentmade

35,3521,02,771100= 35%

No payment of wagemade

67,4191,02,771100=65%

Remark 1-On payment of wage :According to the statement of the labor, out 80 interacted labors, 60labors have worked on that work and received only Rs.35, 352 aswage, which is only 35% of the total wage mentioned in the muster rol lin the name of the labor.

-

The rest Rs.67, 419 has not paid, d irect ly or indirect ly to thesaid labor, i t shows that a huge sum of money has not reachedthe benefic iaries

For th is analysis, the team met the labor indiv idual ly and recorded theirstatement. To just i fy the reason for which a gape of huge scale of amount i .e.,Rs.67, 419 the teams have suff ic ient evidence. Out of which some special caseshas been produced who put their vers ion in publ ic hearing:

Reference Complain Testimony

case no -1 Narasingh Majhi complained that,

not only he himself but a lso his sonhad not worked but 43 days andRs.2365 each booked as wage in theMR.

Narasingh Majhi

At-DakragudaMr no-256362Sl no-31,34

Inside story

When the vil lage labor leader of this work Mr. Nanda Majhi was interviewedby the social audit team members, he shared the fol lowing informationrelated to this work.

First , he was of the view that he was total ly unaware that he was the labor

leader of that work. Second, in the Bi l l i t has been shown that Rs.975 hasbeen received by Mr.Nanda Majhi as wage but in fact he has not received asingle paisa from that part icular work. Third, he does not know about thedetai ls of the work l ike: how many labor had engaged, material used, aboutpreparation of Muster roll . Finally, he was of the view that Mr. Trinath Bisoiwas the contractor of that work and he had prepared the whole muster rol l with fake entr ies.


20/23


Conclusion

The last but not the least NREGA is focused to create sustainable l ivel ihoodassets, but in Papdahandi Panchayat the social audit team could not f ind anywork which would in real i ty create an asset for the v i l lagers and s imultaneously

also strengthen rural l ivel ihoods. NREGA banned contractors but the contractorsare not only act ive but fu l ly act ive in the GP. Sti l l the laborers are beingexploited by these contractors, pol i t ic ian and are being deprived from their legalenti t lements in various c ircumstances. Al l the above statements and the entirereport are based on v iews and statements of the people who have worked inNREGS and who also attended the publ ic hearing. There is clear col lusionbetween the local pol i t ic ians, implementing off icials and above al l thecontractors in this G P.


21/23


Annex - 1

Cases of irregularities on job card

During v i l lage meeting and household survey in the v i l lages the fol lowing

irregulari t ies were found relat ing to job card matter:

Complainant DetailIrregularities

Name Village

He has not worked but in job-card 42days f igured against h is name.

Fagunu JaniJ.C no 27579

Meriguda

Already person has died but in hi s name,i t has been entered 45 days work in thedeceaseds job card.

Late RupsinghMjani

Meriguda

Actual ly, r ight now he has been migratedto Hyderabad. In fact, he has worked for

3 days only but in job card, i t has beenentered 40 days against h is name.

Mandai JaniJ.c no-28420

Meriguda

One Mangu Jani and his wife has beenworked in cashew plantat ion underNREGA for 3 days but in their job card, i thas been entered as i f they hademployed in other works.

Mangu JaniJ.C no- 27827

Meriguda

One Jai Singh Jani and his wife havenever worked in any NREGA work butst i l l i t has been entered 143 days in theirname.

Jai Singh JaniJ.C no-27897

Meriguda

He has worked for 3 days and re ceivedRs.165 as wage but entered 104 days inthe job card.

Narasingh JaniJ.C no-28416 Meriguda

He has never worked but in his name i thas been entered 100 days.

Gangadhar JaniJ.C no-277739

Meriguda

She has not worked even for a s ingledays but i t has been entered 39 days inher name.

Suati BhatraJ.C no-28025

Disariguda

He has worked for 7 days and re ceivedRs.300 but in his name i t has beenentered 100days.

Samaru BhatraJ.C no-27615

Disariguda

Deba Bhatra, is d i f ferently abled person,and have not worked, in his name 31days entered.

Deba BhatraJ.C no-28321

Majhiguda


22/23


Annex - 2Papdahandi Gram Panchayat : Total vil lages- 9, Revenue village- 3Name of the Revenue village with hamlet:

10.Papdahandi11.Dokraguda

12.

Dokribeda13.Disariguda14.Kheduguda15.Daleiguda16.Miriguda17.Majhi guda18.Tandaguda

Name of the v i l lage: Papdahandi



Employment HH

292 220 183 0

If, total HH surveyed is consider to be 100%Registered HH = 75% Job card holder HH = 63%Yet to be Registered = 25% Yet to get Job Cards= 37%

Name of the v i l lage: DakragudaTotal house hold

surveyedRegistered HH Job card holder

HHEmployment HH

135 107 107 17

If, total HH surveyed is consider to be 100%Registered HH = 79% Job card holder HH = 79%

Yet to be Registered = 21% Yet to get Job Cards= 21%

Name of the v i l lage : Dakribeda



Employment HH

60 49 49 0If , total HH surveyed is consider to be 100%Registered HH = 82% Job card holder HH = 82%Yet to be Registered = 18% Yet to get Job Cards= 18%

Name of the v i l lage: Disariguda



Employment HH

35 33 33 10

If, total HH surveyed is consider to be 100%Registered HH = 94% Job Card holder HH = 94%Yet to be Registered = 6% Yet to get Job Cards= 6%

Name of the v i l lage: Kheduguda


23/23



Employment HH

52 34 34 22

If, total HH surveyed is consider to be 100%Registered HH = 65% Job Card holder HH = 65%

Yet to be Registered = 35% Yet to get Job Cards= 35%

Name of the v i l lage: Daleiguda



Employment HH

213 150 147 7


Name of the v i l lage: Miriguda



Employment HH

70 56 56 45


Name of the v i l lage: Tandaguda



Employment HH

173 69 69 12


Name of the v i l lage: Majhiguda



Employment HH

73 47 47 17


PAPADAHANDI PANCHAYATTotal house hold

surveyedRegistered HH Job card holder

HHEmployment HH

1103 754 718 120
