Madras High Court Closes Plea Challenging Provisions Of Centre’s New Law Replacing MGNREGA

menu_bar
Live Law
home-iconTop StoriesNews UpdatesColumnsInterviewsForeign/InternationalRTIKnow the LawLaw SchoolsLaw FirmsJob UpdatesBook ReviewsEvents CornerVideosSponsoredContact UsAdvertise with UsRound UpsIBC NewsEnvironmental LawCartoonsTaxArbitrationConsumer Cases
Home > High Courts > Madras High Court > Madras High Court Closes…
Madras High Court Closes Plea Challenging Provisions Of Centre’s New Law Replacing MGNREGAஉ
By – Upasana SajeevUpdate: 2026-03-19 04:38 GMT
madras high court suspends one month imprisonment on ias officer in contempt plea
facebook icontwitter iconlinkedin icontubmlr iconpinterest icon
whatsapp icon
Click the Play button to listen to article
The Madras High Court on Wednesday (18th March) closed a public interest litigation challenging the provisions of the Centre’s new law replacing the MGREGA, the Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Act [VB-G-RAM G].

The bench of Chief Justice SA Dharmadhikari and Justice G Arul Murugan closed the case after the petitioner informed the bench that he would withdraw the case.

The plea, filed by Advocate T Sivagnanasambandan, alleges that the provisions of the new Act, which is replacing the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), are anti-federal and ultra vires to Article 245 and Article 246 of the Constitution.

The plea argues that the provisions legislate on matters falling under the State List and the Concurrent List, including rural employment, agriculture labour, panchayatraj administration, local self-government and give exclusive control to the Union Government.

The provisions that have been challenged are the following:

Section 3(1) of the Act, which calls upon the State Government to make a scheme consistent with the provisions of the Act within 6 months from the date of commencement of the Act.

Section 4(5) of the Act, which states that the Central Government shall determine the State-wise normative allocation for each financial year, based on objective parameters as may be prescribed by the Central Government.

Section 5(1) of the Act, which states that the State Government shall, in such rural area in the state as notified by the Central Government, provide to every household whose adult member volunteer to do unskilled manual work, not less than 125 days of guaranteed employment in a financial year in accordance with the Scheme made under the Act.

Section 6(2) of the Act, which states that the State Government shall notify in advance, a period aggregating to 60 days in a financial year, covering the peak agricultural seasons of sowing and harvesting, during which works under the Act shall not be undertaken.

Section 22 of the Act, which states the nature of scheme and the fund sharing pattern

Section 34 of the Act, which talks about the power of State Government to make rules.

Section 30 of the Act, which states that the Act or Scheme made under the Act would have an overriding effect.

Section 37 of the Act, which states that from the date when the Act is notified, the MGNREGA would stand repealed.

When the case was taken up on Wednesday, the bench asked the petitioner if the legality of certain provisions of a law could be challenged by way of a public interest litigation.

When the petitioner failed to answer the query, the bench gave the petitioner liberty to withdraw the plea and file fresh plea, if needed, after due research. The petitioner agreed to this and thus, the bench dismissed the plea as withdrawn.

Case Title: T Sivagnanasambandan v. The Secretary and Others

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 121

Case No: WP 4965 of 2026

Tags:
Madras High Court Chief Justice SA Dharmadhikari Justice G Arul Murugan Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin): VB-G RAM G Bill MGNREGA
Similar News
Plea In Madras High Court To Restore FIR Against TVKs Aadhav Arjuna Over Social Media Post Allegedly Inciting Violence
Plea In Madras High Court To Restore FIR Against TVK’s Aadhav Arjuna Over Social Media Post Allegedly Inciting Violence
2026-03-19 05:10 GMT
If Wife Elopes With Another Man, Habeas Corpus Petition No Remedy : Madras High Court
If Wife Elopes With Another Man, Habeas Corpus Petition No Remedy : Madras High Court
2026-03-19 03:58 GMT
Madras High Court Stays Contempt Proceedings Over Thiruparankundram Deepam Row
Madras High Court Stays Contempt Proceedings Over Thiruparankundram Deepam Row
2026-03-17 14:09 GMT
Residence In Forest Area And Doing Cultivation For Livelihood Necessary To Be Declared As Forest Dwellers: Madras High Court
Residence In Forest Area And Doing Cultivation For Livelihood Necessary To Be Declared As Forest Dwellers: Madras High Court
2026-03-17 12:09 GMT
Mere Possession Of Combustible Material Without Ignition Not Mischief: Madras High Court Quashes Case U/S 435 IPC
Mere Possession Of Combustible Material Without Ignition Not ‘Mischief’: Madras High Court Quashes Case U/S 435 IPC
2026-03-17 09:40 GMT
Husband Being A Drunkard Cant Lead To Presumption That He Killed Wife Over Strained Relationship: Madras High Court Sets Aside Conviction
Husband Being A ‘Drunkard’ Can’t Lead To Presumption That He Killed Wife Over Strained Relationship: Madras High Court Sets Aside Conviction
2026-03-17 07:45 GMT
One Person Cant Have Two Dearness Allowances: Madras High Court On Woman Claiming DA On Regular Pension Despite Receiving Family Pension
One Person Can’t Have Two Dearness Allowances: Madras High Court On Woman Claiming DA On Regular Pension Despite Receiving Family Pension
2026-03-16 15:40 GMT
Boney Kapoor And Daughters Move Madras High Court To Reject Plaint Claiming Sridevis Property
Boney Kapoor And Daughters Move Madras High Court To Reject Plaint Claiming Sridevi’s Property
2026-03-16 15:26 GMT
Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: March 09 – March 15, 2026
Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: March 09 – March 15, 2026
2026-03-16 11:30 GMT
SC/ST Act Enacted To Safeguard Interest Of Community Members, Not To Be Used As Tool Against Citizens: Madras High Court
SC/ST Act Enacted To Safeguard Interest Of Community Members, Not To Be Used As Tool Against Citizens: Madras High Court
2026-03-16 10:25 GMT
“Conducted Parallel Trial”: Madras High Court Quashes Tamil Nadu SHRC Order Against Police In Lois Sofia Case
“Conducted Parallel Trial”: Madras High Court Quashes Tamil Nadu SHRC Order Against Police In Lois Sofia Case
2026-03-16 06:00 GMT
Follow: twitterinstagramlinkedin
Copyright @2025Powered by Blink CM