Background and Context
Under the Member of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS; in common parlance the "MP fund"), MPs recommend development works in their constituencies, which fall under a scheme of the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI). This article is based solely on one Lok Sabha answer and its two annexures.
Why in the News
On 22 July 2026 (Wednesday), the Minister of State (Independent Charge) for Statistics and Programme Implementation, Shri Rao Inderjit Singh, answered Shri Kalyan Banerjee's Lok Sabha Unstarred Question 500 ("Projects Sanction under MPLADS"). Part (a) sought state-wise details of projects sanctioned under MPLADS and the achievement of MPs in spending and utilising the fund; part (b) sought state-wise details of reports on the PLFS, HCES, the Comprehensive Annual Modular Survey, the ASI and the Support for Statistical Strengthening (SSS) over the last five financial years.
Key Facts and Figures
| Annexure I's main rows (printed) | Uttar Pradesh: 17,481 works recommended (Rs 829.46 crore), 13,647 sanctioned (Rs 704.12 crore), 5,317 completed (Rs 259.23 crore), 8,330 in progress (Rs 444.89 crore), expenditure Rs 527.71 crore. Gujarat: 6,070 sanctioned; Madhya Pradesh: 5,064; West Bengal: 4,424; Bihar: 4,148. The annexure has no total row. |
|---|---|
| Our addition (36 rows, no printed total) | 96,305 works recommended (Rs 5,227.21 crore); 72,601 sanctioned (Rs 3,833.43 crore); 22,728 completed (Rs 1,093.56 crore); 49,873 in progress (Rs 2,739.82 crore); expenditure Rs 2,489.59 crore. The sum of completed and in-progress works (22,728 + 49,873) equals the sanctioned count of 72,601. |
| Share of completed within sanctioned (our calculation, on counts) | Of a total 72,601 sanctioned, 22,728 are completed, that is about 31.3%. By state this varies greatly: Bihar 2,446/4,148 (about 59.0%), Tamil Nadu 1,859/3,831 (about 48.5%), Assam 88/1,471 (about 6.0%), Delhi 34/442 (about 7.7%), Jharkhand 348/3,304 (about 10.5%); completed works are zero in Andaman & Nicobar and Ladakh. In Nagaland, 38 of 44 sanctioned are completed (about 86.4%). |
| Where sanction is zero (printed) | Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu: 58 works recommended (Rs 25.05 crore); sanctioned, completed and in progress zero; expenditure 0.00. |
| Answer to part (b) (Annexure II) | A list of all-India reports: five PLFS annual reports (2020-21 to 2023-24 and 2025), 19 quarterly bulletins (April-June 2021 to October-December 2024) and 12 monthly bulletins from April 2025 to March 2026; HCES (August 2022 - July 2023 and August 2023 - July 2024); CAMS 2022-23; CMS: Telecom 2025 and Education 2025; ASI reports from 2018-19 to 2023-24. On SSS there is only a description of the scheme, no state-wise amount or count. |
Checking the Figures: What Adds Up and What Does Not
What adds up (our calculation, from text and the page image): Annexure I has 36 state-wise serials, and in all of them the sum of completed and in-progress works equals the sanctioned count. In every row the sanctioned count and amount do not exceed the recommended ones, and in every row expenditure does not exceed the sanctioned amount.
What does not add up or is unclear: In seven rows (Chandigarh, Delhi, Goa, Haryana, Jammu & Kashmir, Karnataka, Uttarakhand) the sum of the completed and in-progress amounts differs from the printed sanctioned amount by 0.01 crore. In our totals, the sum of completed and in-progress amounts is Rs 3,833.38 crore, while the sum of sanctioned amounts is Rs 3,833.43 crore. The answer gives no reason for this difference and we have assumed none. In addition, in 35 states/Union Territories expenditure exceeds the amount of completed works; the answer does not define expenditure.
Date inconsistency: The question is dated 22.07.2026, but the headers of both annexures print the answer date as "22.07.2024"; we have recorded this as a printing inconsistency in the source and taken the question date as 22.07.2026.
Asked versus given: Part (a) asked for the "achievement of Member of Parliaments in spending and utilisation"; Annexure I gives state-wise figures, not MP-wise. Part (b) asked for state-wise details; Annexure II gives an all-India list of reports, not state-wise.
Period: Annexure I says "during the 18th Lok Sabha" and "as on 20.07.2026"; the answer does not give its computation date from the start of the 18th Lok Sabha or details of funds from earlier years.
Significance: Read the Sanction, Completion and Expenditure Figures Separately
State of implementation: By our addition, of 72,601 sanctioned works, 22,728 are completed and 49,873 in progress. This is the position as on 20 July 2026, not the final one.
Uneven completion across states: The share of completed works is about 59.0% in Bihar, about 48.5% in Tamil Nadu and about 6.0% in Assam (our calculation). The answer does not give reasons.
Challenges and What the Answer Does Not Contain
Asked for, but not received: MP-wise utilisation and expenditure; the state-wise details of part (b); the state-wise amount for SSS.
Unresolved points: The absence of totals in the annexure; the basis of the 0.01 crore difference in seven rows and the 0.05 crore difference in the totals; the meaning of expenditure; the 2024 date in the annexure headers; the basis of the completion differences between states.
What we did not read: We read only the official text of Lok Sabha Unstarred Question 500 and its annexures; the MPLADS guidelines, the MPLADS website and the MoSPI report links given in Annexure II were not read.
Way Forward
Treat this as dated government information from the answer of 22 July 2026; MP-wise utilisation and the definition of expenditure can be examined when the ministry publishes them.
Distinctions Within the Concept
Keep four things separate: (1) recommended works; (2) sanctioned works; (3) completed and in-progress works; (4) expenditure. Along with these, keep the answer's figures and our calculation separate too.
Mains Perspective
GS-II: government policies and interventions, the role of Parliament and its members, federalism; GS-III: management of public expenditure.
Answer Outline
Introduction: The scheme and Question 500 (22.07.2026).
Main Body: Annexure I's four counts and expenditure (as on 20.07.2026); our addition (72,601 sanctioned, 22,728 completed, 49,873 in progress; no printed total); the completed share of about 31.3% (our calculation) and its variation across states; the definition of expenditure and the 0.01/0.05 crore differences are unclear; no MP-wise figures or state-wise figures for part (b); the additional data needed.
Conclusion: Assess performance by keeping sanction, completion and expenditure separate. Without MP-wise utilisation and a clear definition of expenditure, do not treat state-wise differences as final proof of the scheme's success or failure.
Source
Source: The official text of Lok Sabha Unstarred Question 500 and Annexure I were read, the additions checked and the annexure's page image viewed. The guidelines and MoSPI reports were not read.
Remember: According to the Lok Sabha answer, MPLADS works sanctioned in the 18th Lok Sabha up to 20 July 2026 total 72,601 by our addition (22,728 completed, 49,873 in progress; no printed total); MP-wise utilisation and state-wise survey-report figures are not in the answer.
Download This Article: PDF
