Gurugram: A feel-good scheme launched by the Haryana government to provide free college education to women from poor families has inadvertently triggered a debate over income disparity in the state. While some critics point out that Haryana’s high per capita income masks widespread poverty, others claim that the government’s figures for the poor seem ‘inflated’.
The scheme, announced by Chief Minister Manohar Lal Khattar Sunday, offers free government and private college education for women if their family income is below Rs 1.80 lakh per annum. Additionally, women with family incomes between Rs 1.80-3 lakh will receive a 50 percent reimbursement of their fees for private colleges.
During the announcement, the CM noted that 50 percent of the state’s population falls into the category of the poorest of poor with an annual family income less than 1.80 lakh per annum. He also said that the rest of the population, “barring the upper 5-7 percent”, belongs to the income group of up to Rs 3 lakh per annum.
This acknowledgment immediately attracted criticism from opposition leaders, who argue that despite having one of India’s highest per capita incomes, Haryana’s economic prosperity is heavily concentrated in cities like Gurugram.
Speaking to ThePrint, Congress leader and former Haryana CM Bhupinder Singh pointed to the fact that 50 percent of families in Haryana earn less than Rs. 15,000 monthly, attributing this to the state’s high unemployment rate.
“When the Congress was in power, Haryana was at the number one position in the country in per capita income, per capita investment, and several other fields. But now, Haryana is at number one in the unemployment rate,” he said.
Hooda also accused the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)- Jannayak Janta Party (BJP) government of masking the true economic picture by highlighting the state’s relatively high per capita income. According to him, these figures were inflated due to the income of districts like Gurugram and Faridabad in the national capital region (NCR).
Indian National Lok Dal (INLD) leader Abhay Singh Chautala echoed these sentiments, attributing the state’s income disparities to a soaring unemployment rate. Like Hooda, he also maintained that the high per capita income is because of the NCR region while most people in other districts continue to be poor.
Presenting the budget earlier this year, Khattar had said that the national per capita income at current prices had grown from Rs 86,647 in 2014-15 to 1,70,620 in 2022-23 while for Haryana it grew from 1,47,382 in 2014-15 to Rs 2,96,685 in 2022-23.
Haryana economists, however, point out that the situation is more nuanced. While acknowledging that some districts contribute disproportionately to per capita income, they maintained that the government’s figures for the poor were “too high”. Some also said this might be linked with the 2024 state and Lok Sabha elections.
Asked about this, Praveen Attrey, media secretary to the Haryana government, said that the government’s information was “correct” and based on data from the Parivar Pehchan Patra (PPP), an eight-digit ID issued to Haryana families to avail of various government services and social security schemes.
Also Read: Celebration of past icons or caste outreach before polls? What’s behind Khattar’s Mahapurush scheme
‘Inflated number of poor’
Haryana’s income inequality is a complex issue, with different experts offering varying perspectives.
Madan Mohan Goel, a former professor of economics from Kurukshetra University, told ThePrint that while income disparities were indeed high, the state could be over-estimating the number of poor families by relying on self-reported data from the PPP scheme.
“It is true that a major contribution to Haryana’s overall per capita income comes from the NCR districts like Gurugram, Faridabad, Sonipat, Panipat, and Jhajjar due to heavy industrialisation. The real estate business has widened the inequality because a few people have amassed huge money with land becoming costlier by the day because of the state’s proximity to Delhi,” Goel said.
However, he added that though many people in the rest of the state continue to be poor because of a lack of jobs and meagre landholdings, “the figures of the poor mentioned by the government seem to be too high”.
NK Bishnoi, an economics professor at Guru Jambheshwar University of Science and Technology in Hisar, highlighted that Haryana’s reported per capita income of Rs 3 lakh per annum translates to an average family income of around 15 lakh.
“The methodology to estimate state gross domestic product (SGDP) or the per capita income is quite robust and verifiable. It is true that in Haryana regional inequalities are high and growing, but still, so much disparity as given in the government data seems a bit far-fetched,” said Bishnoi when contacted by The Print on Tuesday.
He said that the Haryana government’s figures show that either the SGDP data is overestimated or the state government’s data on family income is under-reported.
According to him, famers report lower income in the PPP data since they omit the value of farm produce and milk reserved for their own consumption. Similarly, informal business owners exclude rent from self-owned property as income in PPP data. This contrasts with per capita SGDP calculations that consider these factors.
Bishnoi said that it would be advisable for the government to validate the family income data under the PPP scheme by collating it with the GDP database.
Meanwhile, Mahabir Jaglan, a former geography professor at Kurukshetra University, speculated that the government’s “inflated number of poor” serves political interests during elections, particularly in the face of rising unemployment and declining farm income.
“Prime Minister Narendra Modi has often expressed his aversion to rewadi or freebies to the people, but while contesting state elections, the BJP always competes with the opposition parties in promising social wellbeing schemes,” Jaglan said. “At present, the all-out emphasis on the social wellbeing agenda in election manifestos is the result of increasing unemployment, declining real-time wages, and continuing impoverishment of people.”
Haryana media secretary Attrey, however, maintained that the PPP data is reliable, with mechanisms for verification and cross-checking.
“Whenever there is a complaint about any incorrect entry in data, the government gets it checked. Also, the government has several other sources to cross verify the self-declaration, like data of the income tax department, bank account details, and the monthly electricity bills being paid by the families,” he said.
But Attrey did acknowledge the difficulty in “judging with precision” the income of the 65 percent of Haryana’s population engaged in farming, as there is no tax on agricultural income.
He clarified that while the figures indicating 1.25 crore people falling under the income group of up to 1.80 lakh per annum are accurate, the Chief Minister’s statement about nearly the entire population, except for 5 to 7 percent, falling under the income group of up to Rs 3 lakh was based on a rough estimate and not precise figures.
(Edited by Asavari Singh)