The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA)

-
The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) , introduced in 2005 by the Ministry of Rural Development , is one of the world's largest work guarantee programs.  It aims to strengthen livelihood security in rural areas by providing 100 days of assured wage employment each year to adult members of rural households willing to engage in unskilled manual labor. This initiative plays a vital role in promoting economic stability, empowering communities, and fostering sustainable development across India's rural landscape. The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) stands as a monumental testament to India's commitment to social welfare and rural empowerment. Enacted in 2005, this groundbreaking initiative has evolved into one of the most significant pillars of support for rural populations across the country. Imagine a program that guarantees 100 days of wage employment annually to adult members of rural households—this is not jus...
Post a Comment

70 years of independence

-
When i say that i am independent, I doesn't feel like that, because we are still in a boundness, still some people are living under fear of something ,till now people don't feel safe at night walking alone, women's, especially small girls don't feel safe going alone outside, why.. I think that there is nothing to say about it, because everyone is known by the circumstances of today's modern world ,i don't know why people say it a modern world because if we observe the situations of today's world, the ridiculous thinking about someone, or we can say people are free to say anything to anybody's character. We are not safe, we are living in various fears, the crimes which are increasing day by day doesn't make us feel safe..., what to do no answers... Till now. The old citizens of our society who must be the roots of our family, our society are not safe today, the so-called modern people don't even want to stay with them, our parents who have given us  more than our needs, by cutting their desire s fulfilled ours then why we are not holding their hand when they need us. What we are showing to the new generation. what we are doing, for what we are running for, every one wants money, name, fame... But what about love, what about mental peace, everyone is in competition right now ,all want to be a topper, winner,but in result of that what we are doing to ourselves, why one can not understand that being a loser is not a big crime, if you failed no matter in what field but thing is that losing yourself is a big failure then a winner for once ,just do hard work on the thing which gives you peace, so that your mental peace can contribute a ....000.5 per cent to the peace of the world, if we talk about happiness our India is in 125 positions before it was in 188 so you can only analyse what had happened to us even we have so many festivals and cultures then also we are unhappy..so think about it .it can save a 0.5 percent population of our country from destroying their future.  "Because we want a healthy life not wealthy but happy a  life " and our nation deserve to be the most beautiful country of this world so please contribute a little to make it a large happy and healthy environment.
Jai Hind.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is the Sanctity of Parliamentary Debate, Which Lies at the Core of Democratic Decision-Making, Being Compromised?

-
From the historical view where the core of parliamentary debates was based on public welfare, the utilitarianism principle where every individual was very much aware of being responsible for his/her words towards the public, their actions and reactions were under the basic rule. The decorum of parliament was maintained and the politicians were public servants thinking of a collective decision where the core value was to take a step in the public welfare way. Thinking of that era when like-minded people were making decisions for a common vision that was devoted to a well-developed nation as a whole. But if we talk about today's debates they sound to be senseless.   Fighting with the elders, breaking public property, unethical slogans, and quotations to put-down the individual's public and private image is not at all the act of the responsible member of parliament. The core value is dying with the baseless debates where logical thinking and analytical norms are missing. There wa...
Read more

‘India had parliamentary institutions when people of Europe were mere nomads’

-
Image
The quote by  Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, "India had parliamentary institutions when people of Europe were mere nomads,"  is a powerful testament to the ancient civilization's early advancements in governance and societal structures. It speaks volumes about the historical context of India's political systems, which were far more developed than often recognized in the common Eurocentric narrative of history. This essay will delve into the implications of Ambedkar's statement, exploring its historical accuracy, its significance in the context of Indian pride and identity, and its relevance in contemporary discussions about the origins and evolution of democratic institutions. Firstly, various historical records and scholarly research support the assertion that India had parliamentary institutions in ancient times. The 'sabha' and 'samiti' of the Vedic period, for instance, are indicative of consultative assemblies that played a role in governance. These bodie...
Read more

Dr. D.C. Wadhwa & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Ors. case of 1986

-
 The Dr. D.C. Wadhwa & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Ors. case of 1986 is a cornerstone in the Indian judicial history, highlighting the delicate balance of power between the executive and legislative branches of government . The case stemmed from a practice that had become routine for the Bihar government: the re-promulgation of ordinances without legislative approval, a process that Dr. D.C. Wadhwa, an economics professor, found to be a subversion of democratic principles . The Supreme Court's decision in this case was a resounding affirmation of constitutional law and its supremacy over executive convenience. By declaring the practice of re-promulgating ordinances without legislative consent as unconstitutional, the court reinforced the necessity of legislative scrutiny and the impermanence of ordinances, which are meant to be emergency measures, not a backdoor for enacting laws. This landmark judgment serves as a reminder of the importance of checks and balances within ...
Read more