1

Unemployment Among Marginalised Groups

Dr. Shyam Sunder Singh Chauhan Dr. Deepa Rawat Dr. Kusum Sharma

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes among social groups and Muslims among religious communities are the most deprived and marginalized groups in India. Scheduled castes and Scheduled Tribes are far behind their counterpart nonScheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes in almost all the socio-economic indicators. So is the case with the Muslims who lag far behind their counterpart non-Muslims. These marginalized groups are educationally backward, semi-skilled or unskilled and professionally degraded so their employability in respectable professions of high income generation is very limited. In the context of socio-economic deprivation of marginalized groups, the present paper focuses on the nature of employment and unemployment of these groups. The paper is divided into five sections namely, Introduction, Nature of deprivation in terms Conclusion. Methodology : The present analysis is based on secondary data received from Planning Commission and National Sample Survey Organisation. Data of 66 th round NSS is used extensively. Indicators such as literacy rate, educational level, enrolment ratio, drop out ratio, IMR, MMR and nutritional status have been used to assess the level of deprivation. The economic deprivation has been assessed by using the poverty head count ratio, assets holdings, land ownership and incidence of indebtedness etc. As far as the employment is concerned Labour Force Participation Rates (LFPR) and Work Force Participation rates (WFPR) by Principal and Subsidiary Status have been used. INTRODUCTION Indian society is traditionally divided into various social groups. Caste and class system has been in vogue since times immemorial. The rigid caste system has

of Socio-economic Indicators; Level of Employment of

Marginalised Groups, Causes of Unemployment of Marginalised Groups and

Associate Professor, Department of Economics, Government Girls P.G. College, Sirsaganj, Firozabad (U.P.) Associate Professor, Department of Economics, Agra College, Agra (U.P.) Associate Professor, Department of Education, Sant B.D. Jain P.G. College, Agra (U.P.)

2 divided the entire society into two classes i.e. the upper caste and the lower caste. This system has further divided the occupational pattern of the labour force in so called white collared jobs, earmarked for upper caste and the blue collared jobs or rather the unrespectable jobs, reserved for the so called lower strata of the society. The caste system has finally resulted into a system of exploitation based on the power of knowledge, money and force. The people of lower castes were exploited considerably by the powerful sections of the society. They have been deprived of not only their fundamental rights but also all sorts of necessities required for their survival and development. The employment pattern developed during the past was heavily tilted in favour of the haves ignoring the needs of the have nots. Majority of the people of the deprived class were and are engaged in low paid works which are casual in nature, having no guarantee of the permanency and remuneration in wages. Virtually these groups have not only been marginalized in socio-economic status but also in occupational pattern. With the enactment of the Indian constitution a portion of the public sector jobs was reserved for these marginalized groups such as Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Likewise the reservation facilities was also given in educational institutions, during the early 1990s, other backward castes came into prominence and were successful in obtaining the benefits of the reservation policy in jobs as well as educational institutions. However, the Muslims have so far not been given due weightage in the public sector jobs. Sachchar Committee Report very emphatically exposed the ground realities of the under development of Muslims. Among social groups, SCs, STs and OBCs accounted for 80 per cent of the rural poor in 2004-05, considerably more than their share in the rural population (GOI). In 2004-05, while the head count ratio of the poor in the total population was 28.3 per cent among the SCs, it was 38.8 per cent, in urban areas, the HCR overall was 25.7 per cent but among SCs it was even higher than in rural areas at nearly 40 per cent (Planning Commission, 2008). The proportion of ST population among the rural population living in poverty, was about 15 per cent in 2004-05, double that of their share in the total population in the country. What is peculiar is that in 2004-05 the incidence of poverty among the STs had barely fallen compared to a decade earlier and it was 20 percentage points higher for the SCs for the rest of the population (Planning Commission, 2008). It is pertinent to note that the poverty head count ratio of the STs (47.3%) is higher than that of SCs (36.8%). The STs are more poor in rural areas as compared to their counterpart SCs and non- SCs/STs while in urban areas

3 the SCs are worst placed as compared to their counterpart STs and non- SCs/STs. The real cause of poverty among SCs and STs lies in the unequal distribution of assets and occupational structure. In rural areas SCs do not have access to land and other economic resources and are, therefore, forced to migrate to urban areas more often. These migrated SC labourers get low quality jobs, casual in nature and poorly paid, because of this, they are poor. Although the STs in rural areas have much better access to land, especially in the forest areas, but the quality of land and its productivity is low, which in turn yields low income. In terms of both income poverty and other indicators of human development such as education and health, the STs are at the bottom. The increasing concentration of tribals among those who suffer from multiple deprivations, is a matter of concern. The occupational pattern of rural and urban areas shows the multiple deprivations of the poor mostly from SCs and STs. Among SCs, 47 per cent were cultivators and more than 25 per cent were agricultural labourers. About 6 to 7 per cent of the SCs were artisan households. Although SCs account for 21.6 per cent of the rural households, they held only 9 per cent of the land. On average SCs barely owned 0.3 per cent hectare of land in rural areas as compared to 1.003 per cent hectare owned by others. The land distribution is even further skewed among SCs in urban areas, because of paucity of funds and assets. The SCs and STs are not able to acquire income generating assets likewise they are not able to borrow funds from public sector financial institutions. Due to these age old problems the SCs and STs are neither able to start no their own business or able to get a permanent job (Planning Commission, 2008). The vulnerability of marginalized groups on the front of health, education and nutrition, reduces their capacity as well as capability to work efficiently. While infant mortality rate was 49 for others, for SCs it was 66, for STs 62 and OBCs 57. Their nutritional status is also worse; the Mean Body Mass Index (BMI) for SCs, STs and OBCs is 5 to 10 per cent below that of their counterparts (Planning Commission, 2008). Although the gross enrolment ratio at primary, secondary and tertiary levels of education has increased during the past 60 years for SCs, STs and Muslims, it is still far below than that of their counterparts. The dropout rate is significantly higher among SCs and STs. The higher dropout rate among marginalized groups is the result of the high incidence of poverty amongst them which forces the people from these groups to employ their children at tender age. The incidence of child labour is much

4 higher among SCs and STs as compared to their counterparts, OBCs and non SC/ST/OBCs. LEVEL OF EMPLOYMENT OF MARGINALISED GROUPS Labour Force Participation Rate (LFPR) and Workforce Participation Rates (WFPR) are the most commonly used indicators of employment. The incidence of employment based on these two indicators is further assessed on the basis of usual principal and subsidiary status, weekly status (CWS) and current daily basis. During the 66th round NSS the employment data has been vigorously used by usual principal and subsidiary basis. The sub group on Creation of Employment opportunities constitution under the chairmanship of Dr. Santosh Mehrotra analysed the employment and unemployment scenario for marginalized groups. Using the data of 66th NSS and found that the labour force participation by usual principal and subsidiary status for SCs, STs and all groups decreased both in rural and urban areas between 1993-94 to 2009-10. For SCs, LFPR by usual principal and subsidiary status was 71.8 per cent in rural areas during 1993-94, for STs it was 81.9 per cent and for all groups 68.6 per cent. These ratios came down to 62.4, 69.9 and 60.4 per cent respectively during 2009-10. Likewise in urban areas the LFPR came down from 59.4 to 53.5 per cent for SCs, 59.3 to 51.5 per cent for STs and 53.5 to 48.8 per cent for all groups. What is disturbing here is that the percentage point decrease between 1993-94 to 2009-10, was 9.4 percentage points in rural areas as compared to 5.9 percentage points in urban areas for SCs. For STs the percentage points decrease during the same period in rural areas was 12.0 and 7.8 per cent in urban areas. For all groups the percentage point decrease in LFPR between 1993-94 to 2009-10 is 8.2 per cent in rural areas and 4.5 per cent in urban areas (Planning Commission, 2011). Thus, the decrease in labour force participation between 1993-94 to 2009-10 is higher for SCs, STs and all groups in rural areas as compared to urban areas, but among the group, the highest decrease is in the case of STs (Table 1). The workforce participation rate by usual principal and subsidiary status for SCs in 1993-94 was 71.1 per cent and for STs it was 81.4 per cent which was much higher than the WFPR for all social groups (68.9 per cent in rural areas), similarly they were higher in 2004-05 and 2009-10. Although urban WFPR is consistently lower for all groups, SCs and STs have a much higher WFPR compared to all groups. The higher WFPR for SCs and STs is the result of lower enrolment ratio of the working age population (15 & above) in secondary schools than other social groups.

5 The adolescents of SCs and STs are forced to involve themselves in any type of employment because of poor income of the households. The WFPR in 2009-10 is 61.4 per cent SCs, 68.9 per cent for STs and 59.9 per cent for all groups in rural areas. In urban areas these figures are 51.8, 49.2 and 47.2 per cent respectively for SCs, STs and all groups (Table 2). Higher LFPRs and WFPRs for SCs and STs as compared to non- SCs/STs is the outcome of engagement of people of these groups in income generating activation at lower age, dropping out from the schools. Labour force participation rates by usual principal and subsidiary status by religious groups have been presented in Table 3 and 4. Table 3 shows that LFPR is lowest for Muslims both in rural and urban areas as compared to Hindus, Christians and Sikhs. Likewise the WFPR for Muslims has remained lower than their counterparts. Hindus, Christians and Sikhs during all three reference periods i.e. 1993-94, 2004-05, 2009-10, both for urban and rural areas. It shows that Muslims are worse placed so far as their employment is concerned. The workforce participation rate for the single largest minority groups, Muslims, happens to be much lower than for any other religious community at 55.7 per cent in rural and 49.5 per cent in urban areas. This WFPR for Muslims is much lower than that of SCs and STs, the other two major vulnerable groups in Indian society. This significantly lower WFPR for Muslims appears puzzling at first sight because enrolment rates of Muslims of working age in secondary or higher secondary education is also known to be relatively low, a situation that prevails among SCs and STs as well. But the latter two groups have, as we noted earlier, much higher WFPR than other social groups in the Indian labour market. The probable explanation for the simultaneous existence of low secondary enrolment rates and low WFPR among Muslims lies in the rather low status of Muslim women, as compared to any other social group or religious community in Indian society (Planning Commission, 2012, p.90). Unemployment rate by usual principal and subsidiary status for SCs, STs and Muslims has been presented in Table 5. Data in this table reveals that unemployment rate is highest among Christians both in rural and urban areas, but what is significant is that unemployment rate among Christians in urban areas came down from 8.5 per cent in 2004-05 to 2.9 per cent in 2009-10. This decrease is highest amongst all the social and religious groups. Among the social groups, the unemployment rate is higher for SCs/STs in rural areas, but in urban areas STs are the worst sufferers. For Muslims the unemployment rate was 2.1 per cent in 1993-94

6 in rural areas which came down to 1.9 per cent in 2009-10. Unemployment rate of Muslims in urban areas was 3.6 per cent in 1993-94 which came down to 3.1 per cent in 2009-10 (Table 5). The unemployment rate according to the current daily status is a far more sensitive indicator of unemployment situation in the country than the usual principal status indicator. The trends in unemployment rate by current daily status have been presented in Table 6 and 7 for various social groups and religious groups respectively. Unemployment rate by current daily status increased for two largest religious groupsthe Hindus and the Muslims in rural areas in 2007-08 as compared to 2004-05, before falling in 2009-10. For all other religious communities there was a continuous decline in the unemployment between 2004-05 to 2009-10 (Table 7). In urban area, however, the decline in unemployment rate was observed even in the case of Hindus and Muslims. About 25 per cent of the Muslims of India live in West Bengal and Kerala, the unemployment rate by current daily status among Muslims was as high as 18 per cent in rural areas of Kerala and 25 per cent in urban Kerala against the all India average of 9 per cent and 7 per cent (Planning Commission 2011, India Human Development Report p 10.3). Similarly the unemployment rate by current daily status was the highest for SCs in rural areas (9.4 per cent) and STs in urban areas (7 per cent) as against this the unemployment rate for others in rural and urban areas were 5.3 per cent and 4.6 per cent respectively in 2009-10. The unemployment rate for STs increased in both rural and urban areas between 2004-05 to 2007-08, thereafter the unemployment rate for STs declined to 6.3 per cent in rural areas and 7.8 per cent in urban areas in 2009-10. As far as the concentration of ST population is concerned 38 per cent of the population is residing in Andhra Pradesh, Jharkand and Madhya Pradesh. Unfortunately the unemployment rate by current daily status among STs was much higher than the national average in these states, in both rural and urban areas (Planning Commission, 2011). CAUSES OF UNEMPLOYMENT OF MARGINALIZED GROUPS People of marginalized groups are engaged in low paid works. They are facing the brunt of disguised and seasonal unemployment. Causes of under employment or unemployment among marginalized groups are easy to identify. Some of the factors have been discussed as under

7 (i). Geographical concentration and casual nature of employment : Population of SCs/STs and Muslims is concentrated in 8 states, most of which have experienced low GDP growth rates in comparison to national average. 60 per cent of countrys SCs are concentrated in Uttar Pradesh (17. 0 per cent) ;Bihar (11.7 per cent ), West Bengal (9.2 per cent), Tamil Nadu (7.1 per cent), Rajasthan (5.6 per cent) and Andhra Pradesh (9.3 per cent) (Planning Commission, 2012, p.254). Average growth rates of state domestic product in Bihar, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu during the last five years are higher than national average, the remaining states have lower than average growth rates. As per established tradeoff between growth and employment, lower growth results into poor employment creation. Since majority of SC workers are engaged in agriculture and allied sectors, which have low employment elasticity, the chances of higher growth employment in these states are minimal. The distribution of ST population in the country shows that a high proportion of ST population resides in NE-States, however these states have small portion of total ST population compared to rest of the states. 83.1 per cent ST population is concentrated in 10 states i.e. Madhya Pradesh (11.1 per cent), Maharashtra (7.0%), Odisha (9.7%), Gujarat (12.5%), Jharkhand (9.6%), Rajasthan (8.7%), Chhattisgarh (10.0%), Andhra Pradesh (7.7%), West Bengal (3.8%) and Assam (4.0). Although, Chhattisgarh, Odisha and Jharkhand have registered higher growth rates, but it is unlikely to have been very high employment intensive, primarily because the development in these states has been dependent upon mining, and has been confined to certain pockets within the states. More specifically, employment in these states is not likely to grow very fast except in mining. Another factor that requires attention, is the casual nature of employment in mining where majority of SCs/STs workers are employed, that too through contractors. Employment opportunities in tribal areas are likely to appear in mining and construction activities, but the nature of employment in both these sectors along with agriculture and allied sector is casual. About 71 per cent of the countrys Muslim population is concentrated in Uttar Pradesh (19.2%), West Bengal (14.8%), Bihar (13.4%), Maharashtra (6.3%), Assam (5.8%), Kerala (5.5%) and Andhra Pradesh (5.6%) (Planning Commission, 2012, p.256). West Bengal and Kerala together accounted for 20.2 per cent of the Muslims in India. The unemployment rate (by current daily status) was higher than the national average in rural and urban areas of both the states in 2007-08 (Planning Commission 2012, p.264-265). The unemployment rate among Muslims was particularly high in rural Kerala (18.0 per cent) against the all India rural average of

8 9.0 per cent and in urban Kerala (25.0 per cent) against on all India average of 7.0 per cent (Planning Commission, 2012, p0.103). 300 districts of the country have Muslim population in sizeable number. Traditionally Muslims are engaged in handloom, shoe making, marble work, locks and knives, brasswares, automobile repair, carpet weaving and other such labour industries which employ labour on contract basis. Thus, as employees, Muslims generally work as casual labourers and they are poorly represented in regular, salaried employment (GOI, 2012 : Report of Sub-Group P.92). Thus, Muslims are even more disadvantaged than SCs and STs for whom, affirmative action in the form of reservation have improved their occupation standard. Only about 27 per cent of Muslim workers in urban areas, where the concentration of Muslims is higher, are engaged in regular work, against 40 per cent SCs, 36 per cent STs, 49 per cent non- SCs/STs (Sachchar Committee Report : 93). In formal sector, Muslims employment is far less than the national average. Muslim men are over-represented in street vending (their share is more than 12 per cent as opposed to the national average of less than 8 per cent). 70 per cent Muslim women workers work in their home as compared to 51 per cent of national average (GOI, 2012): Report of SubGroup P.92. (ii) Educational level and skill: Educational level and skillness of a person not only enhance his/her employability, but also improve his/her capability to work more efficiently. Since the level of literacy among SCs/STs, and Muslims is far below than their counter past non-SCs/STs and non-Muslim religious groups respectively, the representation of these groups in regular jobs is limited. As per data of Census 2001, nearly one third of SCs literate have not completed Primary level of education while over one-fourth have attained the Primary Level. One among ten SC literates has completed Matriculation, only 3.1 per cent of the SCs are graduate and above. Sex wise differentials are significant among the educational levels of Matriculation/ Secondary and Higher Secondary where percentage for males is higher than females both in rural and urban areas (Census of India 2001; Social and Cultural Tables). It is the STs that are most excluded, since they have lowest educational indicators of all the three vulnerable groups. More than 40 per cent of literate STs could not complete the Primary Level and more than a-quarter could attain the Primary Level. But their share in higher education and technical educational is as low as 2.4 per cent. Literacy rate among the Muslims is the lowest among all religious groups. Muslim women are worst sufferer on this account. Although the Muslims are not

9 technically qualified or highly educated, they attain skillness through their involvement in family occupation from tender age. (iii) Caste based Discrimination : Although the constitutional safeguards completely prohibit any type of discrimination based on caste, religion, class, race, region etc. SCs/STs worker are discriminated against both in the public and the private sector, but that the discrimination effect is much smaller in the public sector because of constitutional safeguards. In unorganized sector, certain jobs-such as scavenging, cloth washing, shoe making. Conclusion : The scheduled castes, the scheduled tribes along with the Muslims are said to be marginalized by taking into consideration any indicator of socio-economic growth and human development. The socio-economic deprivation and poor state of health and education of the people of these groups has resulted into high unemployment rate by usual principal and subsidiary status as well as current daily status. The high order of GDP growth during the last decade or so has not been inclusive in the sense that it could not create that much number of job-opportunities which were necessary to absorb the unemployed people of these groups. The public work programmes like MNREGA have certainly benefitted the rural poor creating employment through unskilled manual work during the lean season. Due to the implementation of MNREGA there has been a considerable increase in the wage rales of the rural labourers, however, the effectiveness of the public works programme is always at question because of their ad-hocness. The challenge to provide gainful employment on permanent basis is as severe as it was earlier. The solution lies in the educational and skill development of the rural masses. There is a need to heavily invest in the formation of human capital, only then India can reap the advantages of Demographic dividend.

10 Table 1 : Labour force participation rate by usual principal and subsidiary status among various social group (per cent) Social groups Rural Areas Urban areas 1993-94 2004-05 2009-10 1993-94 2004-05 2009-10 Scheduled castes 71.8 69.8 62.4 59.4 57.1 53.5 Scheduled Tribes 81.9 79.8 69.9 59.3 56.7 51.5 All groups 68.6 67.7 60.4 53.3 53.0 48.8 Source : GOI (2012): Report of the sub-group on Creation of Employment opportunities in 12th Plan, Planning Commission, New Delhi, p.89.

Table 2 :

Workforce participation rates by usual principal and subsidiary status among various social groups (per cent) Social groups Rural Areas Urban areas 1993-94 2004-05 2009-10 1993-94 2004-05 2009-10 Scheduled castes 71.1 68.7 61.4 56.8 54.1 51.8 Scheduled Tribes 81.9 79.1 68.9 57.0 54.9 49.2 All groups 67.8 66.6 59.5 50.9 50.6 47.7 Source : GOI (2012): Report of the sub-group on Creation of Employment opportunities in 12th Plan, Planning Commission, New Delhi, p.89.

Table 3 :

Labour force participation rates by usual principal and subsidiary status by religious groups (per cent) Religious groups Rural Areas Urban areas 1993-94 2004-05 2009-10 1993-94 2004-05 2009-10 Hindus 69.8 68.9 61.4 53.5 53.3 49.0 Muslims 58.0 57.1 52.8 52.8 51.6 47.4 Christians 67.8 67.8 62.3 55.6 54.9 51.1 Sikhs 61.0 67.7 56.3 47.9 49.6 48.3 Source : GOI (2012): Report of the sub-group on Creation of Employment opportunities in 12th Plan, Planning Commission, New Delhi, p.90.

Table 4 :

Work force participation rates by usual principal and subsidiary status by religious groups (per cent) Religious groups Rural Areas Urban areas 1993-94 2004-05 2009-10 1993-94 2004-05 2009-10 Hindus 69.0 67.9 60.5 51.0 50.9 47.4 Muslims 56.8 55.7 51.8 50.9 49.5 45.9 Christians 65.2 64.9 59.9 50.8 50.2 49.6 Sikhs 60.6 65.5 54.9 45.7 47.3 45.5 Source : GOI (2012): Report of the sub-group on Creation of Employment opportunities in 12th Plan, Planning Commission, New Delhi, p.91.

11 Table 5 : Unemployment rate by usual and subsidiary status by major social/ religious groups (per cent) Social/Religious Rural Areas Urban areas groups 1993-94 2004-05 2009-10 1993-94 2004-05 2009-10 Scheduled castes 1.0 1.6 1.6 4.4 5.3 3.2 Scheduled tribes 0.6 0.8 1.4 3.9 3.1 4.4 All groups 1.2 1.7 1.6 4.5 4.4 3.4 Hindus 1.1 1.5 1.5 4.7 4.4 3.4 Muslims 2.1 2.3 1.9 3.6 4.0 3.1 Christians 3.8 4.3 3.9 8.6 8.5 2.9 Sikhs 0.7 3.3 2.4 4.6 4.5 5.9 Source : GOI (2012): Report of the sub-group on Creation of Employment opportunities in 12th Plan, Planning Commission, New Delhi, p.90-91.

Unemployment rate by current daily status (2004-05 to 2009-10) for various social groups (per cent) Year SCs STs OBCs Others All Rural Urban Rural Urban Rural Urban Rural Urban Rural Urban 2004-05 12 11.4 6.5 7.5 7.7 8.5 6.6 7.1 8.2 8.3 2007-08 12 10.1 7.5 10.0 7.9 7.7 6.4 6.0 8.4 7.4 2009-10 9.4 7.8 6.3 7.0 6.5 6.2 5.3 4.6 6.8 5.8 Source: Planning Commission (2011): India Human Development Report 2011; Towards social inclusion, Institute of Applied Manpower Research, New Delhi, Oxford University Press, p.6.

Table 6 :

Unemployment rate by current daily status (2004-05 to 2009-10) for various religious groups (per cent) Year Hindu Muslims Christians Sikhs Rural Urban Rural Urban Rural Urban Rural Urban 2004-05 8.0 8.1 8.4 8.1 12.0 12.6 10.3 8.7 2007-08 8.3 7.3 8.8 7.3 9.8 10.2 6.9 5.1 2009-10 6.8 7.0 6.4 7.8 9.2 6.2 5.1 4.6 Source: Planning Commission (2011): India Human Development Report 2011; Towards social inclusion, Institute of Applied Manpower Research, New Delhi, Oxford University Press, p.6.

Table 7 :

12

Reference : Census Commission of India (2006); Census of India 2001; Social and Cultural Tables, Controller of Publications, New Delhi, p.L-LIV. Government of India (2006); Report on Working Group on Poverty. Planning Commission, New Delhi. Government of India (2011); Report of Working Group on Employment, Planning & Policy for the Twelfth Five Year Plan (2012-2017). Labour, Employment and Manpower Division, Planning Commission, New Delhi. Government of India (2011); Employment and unemployment situation in India 2009-10, NSS 66th Round National Sample Survey Organisation, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, New Delhi. Nov. Government of India (2011); Report of Sub-Group on Creation of Employment Opportunities, Labour, Employment and Manpower, Division, Planning Commission, New Delhi. Government of India (2006); Social, Economic and Educational Status of Muslim Community of India, Prime Ministers High Level Committee, Cabinet Secretariat, New Delhi. Planning Commission (2008); Eleventh Five Year Plan 2007-12, Vol. III, New Delhi, p.81. Planning Commission (2011); India Human Development Report 2011, Institute of Applied Manpower Research, New Delhi. Planning Commission (2006); Report of the XI Plan Working Group on Poverty Elimination Programmes, New Delhi.

13

Unemployment Among Marginalised Groups

Dr. Shyam Sunder Singh Chauhan Dr. Deepa Rawat Dr. Kusum Sharma ABSTRACT Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes among social groups and Muslims among religious communities are the most deprived and marginalized groups in India. Scheduled castes and Scheduled Tribes are far behind their counterpart nonScheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes in almost all the socio-economic indicators. So is the case with the Muslims who lag far behind their counterpart non-Muslims. These marginalized groups are educationally backward, semi-skilled or unskilled and professionally degraded so their employability in respectable professions of high income generation is very limited. In the context of socio-economic deprivation of marginalized groups, the present paper focuses on the nature of employment and unemployment of these groups. The scheduled castes, the scheduled tribes along with the Muslims are said to be marginalized by taking into consideration any indicator of socio-economic growth and human development. The socio-economic deprivation and poor state of health and education of the people of these groups has resulted into high unemployment rate by usual principal and subsidiary status as well as current daily status. The high order of GDP growth during the last decade or so has not been inclusive in the sense that it could not create that much number of job-opportunities which were necessary to absorb the unemployed people of these groups. The public work programmes like MNREGA have certainly benefitted the rural poor creating employment through unskilled manual work during the lean season. Due to the implementation of MNREGA there has been a considerable increase in the wage rales of the rural labourers, however, the effectiveness of the public works programme is always at question because of their ad-hocness. The challenge to provide gainful employment on permanent basis is as severe as it was earlier. The solution lies in the educational and skill development of the rural masses. There is a need to heavily invest in the formation of human capital, only then India can reap the advantages of Demographic dividend.

Associate Professor, Department of Economics, Government Girls P.G. College, Sirsaganj, Firozabad (U.P.) Associate Professor, Department of Economics, Agra College, Agra (U.P.) Associate Professor, Department of Education, Sant B.D. Jain P.G. College, Agra (U.P.)