Customer Care Phone Number

New Delhi, February 6, 2026: In a key development concerning public health funding, the Lok Sabha today addressed a critical question regarding the financial support to Punjab under the National Health Mission (NHM). The query and the government’s detailed response shed light on the allocation trends and the centre-state dynamics in healthcare financing.

The Question in Parliament

The issue was raised by Dr. Raj Kumar Chabbewal through a starred question (No. 110) directed at the Minister of Health and Family Welfare, Shri Jagat Prakash Nadda. The question had four specific parts:

(a) Whether it is a fact that there has been a significant reduction in the allocation of funds under the National Health Mission (NHM) for the State of Punjab.

(b) If so, the details thereof along with the reasons.

(c) Whether the Government is taking any measures to restore and further increase the allocation to the State of Punjab.

(d) If so, the details thereof and if not, the reasons.

The Government’s Official Response

In a written statement laid on the table of the House, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare provided a comprehensive reply.

On Federal Structure: The statement began by reiterating that “Public Health is a State subject.” It emphasized that the primary responsibility for providing basic health services lies with the respective State and Union Territory governments.

On NHM’s Objective: The Centre’s role, through the NHM, is to provide “technical and financial support” to states for improving health infrastructure, ensuring adequate human resources, and enhancing the availability and accessibility of quality healthcare, especially for underserved and marginalized groups.

Crucial Data on Punjab’s Funding: In its most significant revelation, the government provided concrete data to counter the premise of a reduction. The statement declared:

“Under NHM over the period FY 2020-21 to FY 2024-25, the Central Release to the State of Punjab has increased from Rs. 568.14 Crore to Rs. 878.21 Crore i.e. 55%.”

Analysis of the Reply

1. Direct Refutation of Cut: By presenting a 55% increase in central releases over a five-year period, the government’s data directly refutes the core question of a “significant reduction.” Instead, it shows a substantial upward trend in funding.
2. Focus on Central Release: The answer specifies “Central Release,” which is the actual amount disbursed, not just the budgeted allocation. This is a more concrete measure of funds reaching the state.
3. Context of State Responsibility: By first stating that health is a state subject, the response frames the centre’s contribution as supplementary support. This places the onus of primary service delivery and optimal utilization of NHM funds on the Punjab state government.

Conclusion: A Matter of Perspective

For the common citizen of Punjab, the health of the NHM funding is directly linked to the quality and reach of services in primary health centres, sub-centres, and community health initiatives. This parliamentary exchange clarifies that at the macro level, central funding has seen a significant rise.

The debate, therefore, may shift from the amount of central funds to their utilization, the state’s own health budget priorities, and the tangible outcomes on the ground. The government’s statement underscores a partnership model, where increased central support is designed to enable states to strengthen their public health systems for the benefit of all citizens.