The Supreme Court disposed of a 2015 PIL challenging delayed wage compensation under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, praising MGNREGA as doing a 'wonderful job.' The bench, led by CJI Sanjiv Khanna, granted the petitioner liberty to file a fresh plea challenging the Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar Ajeevika Mission Act and its compliance with minimum wage norms, leaving the substantive compensation question unresolved but open.

MGNREGA, enacted in 2005, is a demand-driven, rights-based wage employment law guaranteeing 100 days of unskilled manual work annually to rural households. Section 3 creates a justiciable legal entitlement — not a welfare benefit — which is the constitutional distinction that makes it PIL-worthy. When wages are delayed beyond the statutory 15-day payment period, Schedule II of the Act mandates compensation at 0.05% of unpaid wages per day of delay, payable by the implementing state government. The 2015 PIL targeted non-payment of this compensation, exposing a systemic enforcement gap between the statute's promise and administrative reality.

The Court's disposal without deciding the merits, while granting liberty to challenge the new Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar Ajeevika Mission Act, signals two things examiners will probe. First, PIL maintainability: the Court treated the petition as legitimate public interest litigation because it raised a systemic grievance about a legal entitlement, not a private dispute. Second, the new Mission Act's relationship to MGNREGA — whether it dilutes minimum wage protections — is a live constitutional question. The examiner will test whether aspirants can distinguish MGNREGA's statutory guarantee from a discretionary scheme, and whether delayed-wage compensation is a right or a concession. The answer is unambiguously a right, enforceable through writ jurisdiction.