In its report, the Committee on empowerment of Women in Rural areas said that due to this confusion the scheme was not reaching its targeted beneficiaries.
The panel noted that as per the operational guidelines of MGNREGA, 'household' meant "a nuclear family comprising the mother, the father and their children and may include any person wholly or substantially dependent on the head of the family."
"There is still a lot of confusion about the definition of this critical term as reports of denial of registration to the joint families and handicaps by the gram panchayats of many villages are still coming on," the panel added.
The panel also said the provision of work to one person of the family under MGNREGA was being misinterpreted to suit the male head of the household.
The panel said the definition of the term household should be clearly structured as "twist in the interpretations" by vested interests "will continue in the same fashion denying a large chunk of genuine employment-demanding population from their legal right of livelihood."
The Committee's report also noted that participation of women under the scheme was high in certain states but abysmally low in others and has asked also asked for an inter-state comparison-based study to evaluate the participation of women under the scheme.
"When states like Kerala and Tamil Nadu register 90.39 percent and 82.59 percent women's participation in MGNREGA, Uttar Pradesh shows just 21.42 percent, Assam 26.51 percent and Bihar 28.49 percent," the report said. (MORE)
