The Calcutta High Court on Wednesday directed the center to implement the MGNREGA scheme prospectively in West Bengal from August 1.
The HC said the center is empowered to impose special conditions, restrictions, and regulations, which have not been imposed in other states of the country, so as to ensure that no illegality or irregularity occurs when the scheme is being implemented in the state.
Allowing the center to continue its inquiry into the allegations of irregularities in some districts of the state, a division bench presided over by Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam directed that the scheme be implemented prospectively with effect from August 1.
The court directed that the authorities in charge of the implementation of the scheme are entitled to impose special conditions to ensure that whatever had occurred three years prior should not recur.
The court said that it is not in dispute that certain irregularities have been pointed out by the Centre in the disbursement of wages under the MGNREGA (Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act) scheme.
The bench, also comprising Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das), noted that with regard to allegations of irregularities, action has been initiated, recoveries made and that such amount is being maintained in a bank account of the state nodal agency of MGNREGS, West Bengal.
The division bench said that at this juncture, the endeavour of the court is to ensure implementation of the scheme, which has been kept in abeyance for the past close to three years in the state.
The court said that no one can allow a person who illegally took advantage of the scheme to go scot-free.
"At this juncture, the court is concerned about the implementation of the scheme in West Bengal prospectively," the bench observed.
"The scheme of the Act does not envisage a situation where the scheme would be put to cold storage for eternity," it said.
The bench said that the Centre has sufficient powers to inquire into irregularities or illegalities in the manner of disbursement of the wages.
The court said that there can, however, be a line drawn between past actions and future steps to be taken to implement the scheme.
It said that this would be "in public interest" and subserve the object and purpose for which the central law was enacted.