Tripura
The CPI-M leader said that although Mahatma Gandhi and the Left had ideological differences, Gandhiโ€™s views on rural development, secularism and social pluralism were respected across political and social spectrums. (Photo Source: X)

Agartala: CPI-M Politburo member and Tripura Leader of the Opposition Jitendra Chaudhury on Monday alleged that the RSS and the BJP consider all secular and democratic voices in the country as their ideological rivals and are continuously working to eliminate them.

Chaudhury was addressing a protest rally-cum-public meeting organised by the Left Front here to condemn the recently enacted GRAMG Act, which has replaced the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA).

The CPI-M leader said that despite ideological differences between Mahatma Gandhi and the Left, people across political and social spectrums respected Gandhiโ€™s views on rural development, secularism, and social pluralism.

โ€œHe is regarded as the father of the nation. When the UPA government introduced MGNREGA, the Left parties welcomed the initiative. Replacing that legislation and renaming it under a different scheme amounts to disrespect towards Gandhi ji and the values he stood for,โ€ Chaudhury said.

He further alleged that Nathuram Godse was ideologically aligned with the RSS and BJP.

โ€œRarely does one hear any BJP leader criticising Godse. On the contrary, some leaders openly praise him. In such a situation, the party in power could not tolerate a centrally sponsored scheme named after Gandhi ji benefiting nearly 70 crore people,โ€ he claimed.

Criticising the BJPโ€™s governance record, Chaudhury said the partyโ€™s 2018 election manifesto promised 200 days of employment with a daily wage of Rs 340 under the scheme.

He said the government has withdrawn the guaranteed employment provision, noting that earlier beneficiaries could demand work and receive it within 15 days under a legal mandate that now stands repealed.

He also alleged that the revised act widened the scope for fund misappropriation and criticised the provision allowing suspension of work for two months, claiming it would enable exploitation of rural labourers during peak agricultural seasons.