EMPOWERING AND STRENGTHENING OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS – ISSUES AND CHALLENGES

 -Dr. S. Vijay Kumar

       Local Governments or local bodies are institutions of the local self-governance, which look after the administration of an area or small community such as villages, towns or cities. The Local bodies in India are broadly classified into two categories. The local bodies constituted for local planning, development and administration in the rural areas are referred as Rural Local Bodies known as Panchayats and the local bodies, which are constituted for local planning, development and administration in the urban areas are referred as Urban Local Bodies, known as Municipalities. Mahatma Gandhi advocated Panchayati Raj as the foundation of India's political system, his term for such a vision was "Gram Swaraj" or “Village Self-governance”, a decentralized form of government in which each village would be responsible for its own affairs. Instead, India developed a highly centralized form of government. However, this has been moderated by the delegation of several administrative functions to the local level, empowering elected gram panchayats. There are significant differences between the traditional Panchayati Raj system, that was envisioned by Gandhi, and the system formalized in India in 1992.

Brief History of Local Governments  in India: Local self-government implies the transference of the power to rule to the lowest level of the political order. It is a form of democratic decentralization where the participation of even the grass root level of the society is ensured in the process of administration. The foundation of the present local self-government in India was laid by the Panchayati Raj System (1992). But, the history of Panchayati Raj starts from the self-sufficient and self-governing village communities. In the time of the Rig - Veda (1700 BC), evidence suggests that self-governing village bodies called ‘Sabhas’ existed. With the passage of time, these bodies became panchayats. The existence of local bodies in ancient India is evident from the decentralization of power in the kingdoms of the Maurya and the Gupta period. Panchayats were functional institutions of grassroots governance in almost every village. The village panchayat, as a system of administration, began in the British days, as their offer to satisfy the demands for local autonomy. They opened up the governance of the lowest levels to the citizens. The Government India Act, 1935 also authorizes the provisions to enact legislations. Even though such minor forms of local governance was evident in India, the framers of the constitutions, unsatisfied with the existing provisions, included Article 40 among the “Directive Principles”, whereby: “The state shall take steps to organize village panchayats and endow them with such powers and authority as may be necessary to enable them to function as units of self-government.” Later, the conceptualization of the system of local self-government in India took place through the formation and effort of four important committees from the year 1957 to 1986. Panchayati Raj is included in the State List of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution. It is the States that have been charged with the responsibility for devolution of powers to the Panchayats. It will be helpful to us, if we take a quick look at the various committees and the important recommendations that were put forth by them.

Balwant Rai Mehta Committee (1957): Appointed by the Government of India to examine the working of two of its earlier programs, the committee submitted its report in November 1957, in which the term “Democratic Decentralization” first appears. The important recommendations are:

·         Establishment of a three-tier Panchayati Raj system – Gram Panchayat at village level (Direct election), Panchayat Samiti at the Block level (Mandal) and Zilla Parishad or Zilla Praja Parishad at the district level (Indirect Election).

·         District Collector to be the Chairman of Zilla Parishad or Zilla Praja Parishad.

·         Transfer of resources and power to these bodies to be ensured.

The existent National Development Council accepted the recommendations. However, it did not insist on a single, definite pattern to be followed in the establishment of these institutions. Rather, it allowed the states to devise their own patterns, while the broad fundamentals were to be the same throughout the country. Rajasthan (1959) adopted the system first, followed by Andhra Pradesh in the same year. Some states even went ahead to create four-tier systems and Nyaya panchayats, which served as judicial bodies.

Ashok Mehta Committee (1977 – 1978): This Committee was constituted by the Janata government to study the Panchayati Raj Institutions in our country. Out of a total of 132 recommendations made by it, the most important ones are:

·         Three-tier system to be replaced by a two-tier system.

·         Political parties should participate at all levels in the elections.

·         Compulsory powers of taxation to be given to these institutions.

·         Zilla Parishad to be made responsible for planning at the state level.

·         A minister for Panchayati Raj to be appointed by the State Council of Ministers.

·         Constitutional recognition to be given to Panchayati Raj institutions.

Unfortunately, the Janata government collapsed before action could be initiated on these recommendations.

GVK Rao Committee (1985): Appointed by the Planning Commission of India, this Committee concluded that the developmental procedures were gradually being taken away from the local self-government institutions, resulting in a system comparable to ‘grass without roots’.

·         Zilla Parishad to be given prime importance and all developmental programs at that level to be handed to it.

·         Post of DDC (District Development Commissioner) to be created acting as the chief executive officer of the Zilla Parishad.

·         Regular elections to be held.

LM Singhvi Committee (1986): Constituted by the Rajiv Gandhi government on ‘Revitalization of Panchayati Raj Institutions  for Democracy and Development’, its important recommendations are:

·         Constitutional recognition for PRI institutions.

·         Nyaya Panchayats to be established for clusters of villages.

Rajiv Gandhi presented the 64th Amendment to the Constitution in the Lok Sabha on 15 May 1989 itself, but Rajya Sabha opposed it. It was only during the P. V. Narasimha Rao Government’s term that the idea finally became a reality in the form of the 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendment acts, 1992. The amendment came into force on 24 April 1993 which, since 2008, has been celebrated as National Panchayat Raj Day.

Panchayati Raj System under 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendment Acts, 1992: In the history of Panchayati Raj, in India, on 24 April 1993, the Constitutional (73^rd Amendment) Act 1992 came into force to provide constitutional status to the Panchayati Raj institutions. This amendment was extended to Panchayats in the tribal areas of eight states, namely: Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Maharashtra, Madya Pradesh, Odisha, and Rajasthan beginning on 24 December 1996. This amendment contains provision for devolution of powers and responsibilities to the panchayats, both for the preparation of economic development plans and social justice, as well as for implementation in relation to 29 subjects listed in the eleventh schedule of the constitution, and the ability to levy and collect appropriate taxes, duties, tolls and fees. The Act aims to provide a three-tier systems of Panchayati Raj for all states having a population of over 2 million, to hold Panchayat elections regularly every five years, to provide seats reserved for SCs, STs and women; to appoint a State Finance Commission to make recommendations regarding the financial powers of the Panchayats and to constitute a District Planning Committee.

The Acts of 1992 added two new parts IX and IX-A  to the Constitution. It also added two new Schedules – 11 and 12 which contains the lists of functional items of Panchayats and Municipalities. It provides for a three-tier system of Panchayati Raj in every state – at the village, intermediate and district levels.

Panchayats and Municipalities:

·         Panchayat and Municipality are the generic terms for the governing body at the local level. Both exist as three tier systems – at the lower, intermediate and upper levels.

·         The 73rd Constitutional Amendment Act provides for a Gram Sabha as the foundation of the Panchayati Raj System. It is essentially a Village Assembly consisting of all the registered voters in the area of the Panchayat. The State has the power to determine what kind of powers it can exercise, and what functions it has to perform at the village level.

·         The 74th Constitutional Amendment act provides three types of Municipalities:

1.      Nagar Panchayat for a transitional area between a rural and urban area.

2.      Municipal Council for a small urban area.

3.      Municipal Corporation for a large urban area and Greater   Municipal Corporations for Metropolitans.

·         Municipalities represent urban local self-government.

·         Most of the provisions of the two acts are parallel, differing only in the fact that they are being applied to either a Panchayat or a Municipality respectively.

·         Each Gram Sabha is the meeting of a particular constituency called Ward.

·         Each Ward has a representative chosen from among the people themselves by Direct Election.

·         The Chairperson of the Panchayat or Municipality at the intermediate and district level are elected from among these representatives at the immediately lower level by Indirect Election.

Types of Urban Local Government: There are eight types of urban local governments currently existing in India:

1.      Municipal Corporations.

2.      Municipality.

3.      Notified area committee.

4.      Town area committee.

5.      Cantonment board.

6.      Township.

7.      Port trust.

8.      Special purpose agency.

Elections Procedure in the Local Government Bodies:

·         All seats of representatives of local bodies are filled by people chosen through Direct Elections.

·         The conduct of elections is vested in the hands of the State Election Commission.

·         The chairpersons at the intermediate and district levels shall be elected indirectly from among the elected representatives at the immediately lower level.

·         At the lowest level, the Chairperson shall be elected in a mode defined by the State Legislature.

·         Seats are reserved for SC and ST proportional to their population.

·         Out of these reserved seats, not less than one-third shall be further reserved for women.

·         There should be a blanket reservation of one-third seats for women in all the constituencies taken together too (which can include the already reserved seats for SC and ST).

·         The Acts bar the interference of Courts in any issue relating to the election to the local bodies.

Qualifications Required to become a Member of the Panchayat or Municipality: Any person who is qualified to be a member of the State Legislature is eligible to be a member of the Panchayat or Municipality. “But he shall not be disqualified on the ground that he is less than 25 years of age if he has attained the age of 21 years”. This means that unlike the, State Legislature a person needs to attain only 21 years of age to be a member of Panchayat/Municipality.

Duration of the Local Government Bodies:

·         The local governing bodies are elected for a term of Five Years.

·         Fresh elections should be conducted before the expiry of the five-year term.

·         If the Panchayat/Municipality is dissolved before the expiry of its term, elections shall be conducted within six months and the new Panchayat/Municipality will hold office for the remainder of the term if the term has more than six months duration.

·         And for another five years if the remaining term is less than six months.

Powers of Local Government Bodies:

·         The powers of local bodies are not exclusively defined. They can be tailor-fitted by the state governments according to the environment of the States. In general, the State Governments can assign powers to Panchayats and Municipalities that may enable them to prepare plans for economic development and social justice. They may also be authorized to levy, collect, or appropriate taxes.

ISSUES AND CHALLENGES OF LOCAL BODIES IN INDIA: The following are the issues and challenges of local bodies in India..

SCARCITY OF FINANCIAL RESOURCES: Generally, their sources of income are inadequate as compared to their functions. The taxes collected by the local bodies are not sufficient to cover the expenses of the services provided. Though, they can impose certain new taxes, the elected members of these bodies hesitate in doing so for fear of displeasing their electorate. The administrative machinery, at the disposal of these local bodies, is insufficient and ineffective. The staff, which is often underpaid, indulges in corrupt practices which leads to loss of income. Quite often, failure in collecting taxes leads to accumulation of arrears running into crores of rupees. As a result, many local bodies are on the brink of bankruptcy.

AUDIT OBJECTIONS UNATTENDED: In various municipalities, audit objections remain pending for many years and, in some, even audit is not conducted regularly. It is sometimes revealed by audit that the funds borrowed at a high rate of interest lie unutilized. Action is not taken on the audit report on time, with the result that, with the passage of time, no action can be taken.

FUNDS CRUNCH: Because of inadequate finances, the local bodies have not been able to fulfill their obligatory functions. As a result, they suffer a constant outcry from the public as well as the government. The most basic necessity, water is not supplied properly, drainage facilities do not cover the entire city, unplanned colonies and slums develop fast, menace of stray cattle on the roads continues, traffic is hazardous, roads are not properly maintained and unsafe buildings are allowed to continue to exist despite the obvious threat to the inmates and the inhabitants of the area. In short, poor sanitation, poor hygiene and shortage of basic necessities make cities and villages unsafe.

EXCESSIVE STATE CONTROL: The excessively control exercised by the State Government over local bodies is another issue. To ensure proper performance of their functions, the state government exercises legislative, administrative, financial and judicial control. This proves to be more of a curse than a boon, because, instead of providing guidance and support through the control mechanism, the control turns out to be negative, restricting the functioning of these bodies. The Constitution 74th Amendment Act has taken away the power to supersede or suspend the municipal body from the state government. However, the state government can dissolve them. The financial control over the urban bodies has also been so rigid that they have virtually no autonomy left. When the control becomes too oppressive, the relationship of the state government with the urban bodies would naturally be strained. Hopefully, the situation will change because of the Constitution 74th Amendment.

POSTPONEMENT OF ELECTIONS: Elections to the local bodies have suffered constant postponement for indefinite time, for long after the term of an local body has expired, the state governments does not announce fresh elections and extensions are granted to the same body. The state government feels it safer and easier to deal with bureaucracy placed at the helm of the civic administration than with the popularly elected councilors. The Constitution 74th Amendment has prescribed strict conditions in this regard with a view to ensuring regularity of elections.

LACK OF ADQUATE TRAINING FACILITIES AND SCARCITY OF STAFF: The need for adequate training of the staff has not received due emphasis. Several vacancies are not filled for years, corruption, favoritism and nepotism are rampant.

UNPLANNED URBANIZATION: It is generally observed that the urban bodies have failed to perform their primary duty, that is, to check the problems and complications created by rapid urbanization. The shifting of a vast number of the rural population towards cities has led to several problems such as the unplanned growth of towns and cities. In the absence of proper planning, judicious use of land is not being made, colonies are set up without proper facilities such as schools, parks and hospitals, the growth of slums is not checked, there is a shortage of houses, traffic congestion is rampant and hardly any effective steps are taken to check urban poverty and unemployment.

CIVIC RESPONSIBIILITY IS POOR: Most of the citizens in cities and towns are least bothered even to cast their vote in municipal elections. Thus, forgetting their social responsibility. They are also very careless with regard to the maintenance of  neatness at home and on roads.

LOW LEVEL OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: Due to lack of civic consciousness, public participation in local bodies has been negligible. When compared with village, population in cities are of heterogeneous groups and they are alienated from one another. Most of the city population was once rural and, even now, it looks at the city merely as a place to earn a livelihood and has little attachment with it. Despite, a relatively higher level of literacy and educational standards, city-dwellers do not take adequate interest in the functioning of the urban government bodies. It is ironical that the urban population has rarely, if ever, raised its voice against cases of prolonged supersession of democratic municipal bodies. The urban leadership also fails to inspire any confidence among the people and, once elected, they hardly visit their wards to learn about the gravity of the problems in their constituencies. Moreover, the urban bodies do not have a proper public relations machinery, through which the achievements of the urban bodies can be communicated to the people.

Briefly Some Other Important Issues and Challenges:

·         Elected representatives at the city­ level are rendered powerless by making them subservient to the State Government.

·         In most municipal corporations, while the mayor is the ceremonial head, the executive powers of the corporation are vested with the State government appointed commissioner.

·         Municipal corporations are further denied their political role by the continued operation of various parastatal agencies created by the State government. These may take the form of urban development authorities (which build infrastructure) and public corporations (which provide services such as water, electricity and transportation). These agencies, which function with a certain autonomy, are accountable only to the State government, not the local government.

·         Even urban planning and land­ use regulation (globally a quintessential local government function) is with State Government-­controlled development authorities.

·         Central government programmes such as the Smart Cities Mission seek to guarantee that funds allocated will not be spent on any other projects from local government.

·         The creation of parallel institutions that disempower the elected local government.

·         Even for performing functions that are within its purview (such as levying local taxes or undertaking civic projects above a certain budget) the local government requires State government permissions.

·         Failure of States to implement the provisions of the 74th Amendment.

·         Failure in implementation. [Local governments are financially constrained and do not have the administrative capacity to carry out its functions.]

·         Many of its (74th amendment) key provisions are not mandatory for the State government.

·         Massive corruption in local bodies

·         The audit of local bodies is a sham.

·         District administration with overlapping functions.

·         Mis-utilization of funds.

·         Domination of senior political leaders in local body process.

SUGGESTIONS FOR EMPOWERMENT AND STRENGTHENING OF LOCAL BODIES (LOCAL GOVERNMENTS) IN INDIA: The landmark 73rd and 74th amendments to the Constitution, which empowered the rural and urban local bodies, respectively. The amendments and Acts gave them taxation powers and powers to finance basic services that the populace needed. But have they really transformed governance in India? We should look into this  aspect very seriously. We need the following measures for strengthening and empowerment of local bodies in India.

·         Local governments should have functional autonomy

·         They should have financial autonomy and should aim to be financially viable.

·         Parastatals should not be allowed to undermine the authority of ULBs.

·         Need to establish a dedicated and a specialized trained cadre to serve and cater to the complex needs of local bodies governance.

·         Creating an enabling framework for public-private-people partnerships, privatization and out-sourcing, where beneficial and feasible.

·         Mobilization of resources is an acute problem of the local bodies. In this context, Raja Chelliah Taxation expert advocates that the hands of urban authorities should be adequately strengthened to mobilize resources, take independent investment decisions and exercise a high degree of self-discipline.

·         Political and administrative autonomy to local bodies.

·         Devolution of revenues to local bodies and empowering them to levy taxes to fund part of their expenditure.

·         Periodic local body elections. Reservation of seats on local bodies for weaker social sections.

·         Local database on administration.

·         Local voluntary and private sector organizations collaborate with local governments in addressing development issues.

·         Build local human capacities through improved access to health care, education and productive assets to ensure that decentralization empowers the poor.

·         Fixing user charge for a service to equate the cost of its provision at the margin as far as possible, for example: Water Supply.

·         Adopting "beneficiaries pay" and "polluters pay" principles; fiscal instruments to address both direct and indirect beneficiaries.

·         Reforming budgeting, accounting and auditing procedures so as to promote accountability.

·         Enabling preparation of city perspective, development and annual action plans, capital investment plan and capital budget and making a clear distinction between capital and revenue budgets.

·         Developing a transparent system of accountability and disclosure to the public and the higher levels of government through laws and regulations.

·         Developing laws and guidelines on information gathering, dissemination, budgeting, accounting, financial reporting, contracts, dispute settlement, design of user charges and grants, audit evaluation, etc., to fully inform the public about the consequences of decisions taken by the concerned local body.

·         Enabling the public to have free information and full knowledge of the role of the service providers, the cost of the services, the sources of their financing and the distribution of responsibilities, keeping in view the Freedom of Information Act.

·         Defining state-municipal administrative and fiscal relationships clearly on the principle of local autonomy without ambiguity and providing for state intervention in municipal affairs only in exceptional cases.

·         Clarity of vision, objectives and commitment to address the overall challenges of urban sector at the highest authority levels.

·         for improving efficiency of the municipal organization there is a need for decentralization of authority and a greater decision-making capability at the grassroots levels.

·         Financial management of a large public agency like a municipal organization deserves integrated direction by managers with a professional training and commitment. Financial viability based on vigorous exploitation of the local revenue base and sound financial management cannot be compromised.

·         Improving technical competence in the choice, design and execution of investment in infrastructure, and in its operation and maintenance.

·         Improving human resources through training, process consultation, action research methods and role workshop.

·         Improving responsiveness to the needs arising from urban growth, with the ability to plan development of the city and its services ahead of, or at least in pace with demand.

·         Sensitivity to the needs of the urban poor, and a weighting of public interventions to promote their access to shelter, basic services, employment and concern for environmental protection, through public service provision and regulation of the private sector.

·         Leadership and teamwork are essential.

·         Keeping tax rates low and emphasizing enforcement and compliance will lead to significant increases in the property tax collection.

·         Services like education, health care and social security, the public distribution system and old-age pension are inadequately provided to the urban poor. While designated agencies exist in rural India to address these issues, urban local bodies have not oriented themselves to ensuring that these universal services reach the urban poor. The Ministry of Urban Employment and Poverty Alleviation has to work to ensure that basic services are indeed provided to the urban poor.

·         Timely elections

·         Public participation especially of women should increase in Gram Sabha meetings.

·         Women headed panchayats should increase so that  social evils like child marriage, liquor ban etc. will reduce.

·         Women raising their voice in Panchayats should increase, so that it will impact gender elections positively.

·         Though, some studies in Tamil Nadu, Gujarat, Joint Andhra revealed a significant contribution of PRI’s to boosting agriculture production, but in some States like Karnataka, several schemes were transferred to PRIs from the departments such as Agriculture, Animal Husbandry etc. and as a consequence the schemes suffered due to lack of technical guidance. Hence, this problem should be addressed.

·         The biggest impact has been political. In most States PRI’s have appointed committees to address weaker section concern but the Parji, Guj & Sadik Ali Committee of Rajasthan have concluded by and large PRI’s have underperformed with regard to weaker sections issues. Hence, weaker sections concerns should be addressed.

·         In many States, Primary and Secondary education has been transferred to PRI’s but, progress is not up to the mark. Hence, measures to be taken in this regard.

·         A comprehensive exercise should be done for broadening & deepening the revenue base of local bodies.

State Governments should concentrate and prepare appropriate plans for rapid Urban development and strengthen the Urban local bodies in view of the following:

·         By 2021, 41% of the population would be in urban areas.

·         Presently, urban areas contribute 65% of GDP.

·         Review of Property Tax

·         High cost of administration.

The following Basic Problems of Urban Local Bodies (Urban Local Governments) should be addressed.

·         Rising levels of unplanned urbanization

·         Overcrowding of cities and crippling infrastructure Increasing slums and Poverty

·         Increasing health related problems

·         Public health issues.

·         Pollution of all kinds- Garbage, Vehicular, Industrial.

·         Power and water shortages.

·         Rising levels of crime particularly against women.

·         Traffic congestion – (Solution- Strengthening of Public Transport).

·         Separate track for Pedestrians.

·         Hiking number of parking places.

·         Abolish Octroi in view of GST introduction.

·         Fast-track property tax reforms.

·         Cost of  Local tax collection and compliance should be reduced. Ceiling on profession tax (Rs 2500) under Art. 276 should be revised periodically.

·         Enhance the fines for civic offenses – (Spitting on roads, littering etc.).

·         Incentivize revenue collection by local bodies by linking it with State Government grants.

·         Encourage municipalities to run municipal enterprises such as municipal bus service.

·         Municipalities should be encouraged to access capital markets through instruments like municipal bonds.

To conclude, local self-government is one of the most innovative governance change processes our country has gone through. The noble idea of taking the government of a country into the hands of the grass root level is indeed praiseworthy. However, like any other system, this system is also having some lacunae, like problems of maladministration and misappropriation of funds are recurring. But this shall not stand in the way of efficient governance; and if these ill practices are rooted out, the local governments in our country will be successful in all respects.

RFERENCES:

1.      Anirban Kashyap: Panchaytiraj, Views of founding fathers and recommendation of different committees, New Delhi, Lancer Books, 1989.

2.      Bandyopadhyay, D., Ghosh, S. K., Ghosh, B. (2003, September 20–26). Dependency versus autonomy–identity crisis of India’s panchayats. Economic & Political Weekly.

3.      The Local Government System in India". Commonwealth Local Government Forum.

4.      Mahoj Rai et al. :The state of Panchayats – A participatory perspective, New Delhi, Smscriti, 2001.

5.      Mohinder, S., Mohinder, S., Kumar, V. (2005, April–June). State control over Panchayati Raj institutions. The Indian Journal of  Political Science, 66(2), 221–232.

6.      Ramnath Jha & Sayli Udas-Mankikar, India’s urban challenges: Recommendations for the new government (2019-2024).

7.      Reddy, G. (2013). Status of decentralized bodies: Post-73rd Amendment Scenario. Economic & Political Weekly, 38(12, 13), 1290.

8.      Singh, H. (1994). Constitutional base for Panchayati Raj in India: The 73rd Amendment Act. Asian Survey, 34(9), 818.