Skip to content
PartyReport Cards
SKM

Party report card · current MPs

Sikkim Krantikari Morcha

1 MPs · 1 Lok Sabha · 0 Rajya Sabha · from 1 state

Party score63/100Not ranked (fewer than 3 MPs or no party)
CompareSectors by party

Allocated to its MPs

₹15.20 Cr

1 MPs

Fund utilisation

100%

₹15.16 Cr recommended
Above national figure (72%)

Paid to vendors

₹13.14 Cr

86% of allocation
Above national figure (38%)

Works completed

38

29% of recommended
Below national figure (34%)

From recommendation to completion

All works recommended by this party’s MPs

  1. Recommended by its MPs131 works

    ₹15.16 Cr · 100% of the ₹15.20 Cr allocated

  2. Sanctioned by districts90 works

    69% sanctioned · 2.9 months on average (due within 45 days)

  3. Completed38 works

    ₹7.70 Cr final cost

41 works await sanction, 39 of them for more than 45 days. Sanction is the district authority’s job, not the MP’s.

In plain words

What the numbers say

  • SKM’s 1 MPs were allocated ₹15.20 Cr and recommended works worth ₹15.16 Cr (100%), against 72% for all MPs.
  • ₹13.14 Cr has been paid to vendors, 86% of the allocation (all MPs: 38%).
  • The biggest share of its works’ value went to Education & libraries (49%).
  • Its highest-scoring MPs: Indra Hang Subba.
  • 0 of its MPs have at least one published warning flag.

How the party score is made

63/100 on all its MPs’ works and money combined. The black marks show all MPs together (59/100). Median MP score: 59.

  1. Works completed 25%29Completed ÷ recommended works.
  2. Spending efficiency 18%59Value of completed works ÷ money paid out. Money paid without works finished scores low.
  3. Fund utilisation 15%100Value of works recommended ÷ allocated limit (MoSPI’s measure).
  4. Proof of work 12%34Share of completed works with photos or documents uploaded on eSAKSHI.
  5. Funds spent 10%86Paid to vendors ÷ allocated limit.
  6. Sanction speed 10%78Average days to sanction (full marks within the 45-day guideline, none at a year), and the share of works not overdue.
  7. Vendor diversity 10%
    i

    Members of Parliament (MPs) do not have direct, operational control over the specific vendors selected for government public works. However, they exert significant indirect influence by shaping procurement frameworks, passing supplier diversity laws, and conducting oversight.

    100    How spread out payments are: full marks when no vendor gets over 20% of the money, none when one vendor gets everything.

Activity over time

Recommendations, payments and completions by month, for this party’s MPs

Value of works MPs recommended each month

Sectors

Share of the value of its works, with the share for all MPs

  1. Education & librariesall MPs 12%₹7.49 Cr · 49%
  2. Irrigation, flood & environmentall MPs 2.2%₹5.28 Cr · 35%
  3. Community buildings & public spacesall MPs 26%₹95.5 L · 6.3%
  4. Roads & bridgesall MPs 28%₹53.0 L · 3.5%
  5. Sports & fitnessall MPs 4.3%₹50.5 L · 3.3%
  6. Sanitation & drainageall MPs 2.0%₹30.0 L · 2.0%
  7. Electricity & lightingall MPs 16%₹10.0 L · 0.7%

States

Where its MPs come from

StateMPsUtilisationSpent
Sikkim1100%86%

Its MPs

Ranked by MP score. Each name opens the MP’s full report card on the MPLADS Tracker.

#MPStateAllocatedUtilisationSpentCompletedScore
1Indra Hang Subba Lok Sabha · SikkimSikkim₹15.20 Cr100%86%3859

Source: MoSPI eSAKSHI (eSAKSHI API (mplads.mospi.gov.in)); party from the official Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha member lists. Party totals add up its current MPs. Methodology · Scheme guide