Power to the People

POWER TO THE PEOPLE?The Politics and progress of

Decentralisation

Power to the People?The Politics and

Progress ofDecentralisation

K.C. Sivaramakrishnan

Under the auspices oJCENTRE FOR POLICY RESEARCH, NEW DELHI

fl[-qvlwwUNKONARK PT]BLISHERS PIIT LTD

KA-149,

e-mall: [email protected]

@ Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi' 2OOO

ts reserved. No part of this book may beor utllised in any form or by any means'

or mechanical, includind photocopytng,or by any information storage and retrieval

without permission in writing from the

Tlpest by Dlgigraflcs, New Delhi andPrintcd at RashhE Rachnn Printers, Delhi

Dedicatedto mg brother Late K.C. Sankaranarayan€rn

who, more ttwn a senror in the LA.S.was a mentor and a model.

Foreword

As we celebrate 5O years of our Republic it ts worthrecalling that the very flrst line of the Constitution ofIndia begtns wlth the words "We the People of India".In the flve decades since the Constltutlon came intoeffect "We the People of Indla" have been left farbehind, elther by design or circumstance. The size ofthe government has grown enormously both in theCentre and Ar the State often at the cost of the cltlzen.,While we seek to move forward on reforms andeconomlc liberallsatton the relationship between thecitizen and the government has become more vexedand tedlous

The 73rd and the 74th Amendments to theConstltutlon by the Narasimha Rao Governmentstgdry a maJor attempt to redeflne people as the truebasis of state authority, and return to them atleastsome of the powers for determlnlng thetr own desttnyand course of development. It will be wrong tocharacterise these amendments merely as measuresof adminlstrative change or reordering llnances. Inessence, they represent a conscious attempt towardsmultt-level democratic governErnce. Given the vastdlverslty and rlslng aspirailons across the country,the destlnies of the people cannot be orchestratedexclusively by the Central and State governments.The message inherent in these two Amendments lsthat the Parliament and the Assembltes alone cannot

Potuer to the People?

at all levels; we need our Panchayatsas much.

The , debate and eventually the passage ofthese nents have been marked by rapidly

ts tncluding some tragic ones like theof RaJiv Gandhi who had initlated the

process. e debate on the Amendments was markedby much ln the initial stages. Their s0ope

be theand M

changlngassassina

and suof ttre

since itskrishnanits historytaflon. Htsln Indiaand a

Cente JorNew Delht

As one assoclated with the Amendment exercise

were also widened bv Joint Committees

ception in 1989, Prof K.C. Sivar4ma-been in the unique poslUon to chronicle

as well as the progress Of its implernen-experience in urban management

abroad brings to this book an insightnot usually found. The Centre for Policy

Research V.A. PAI PANANDIKERPresldent

Research es to record its deep appreciation ofhiscontrtbu 1.

ntre for Pollcy Research (CPR) hasThe Ca strong tnterest in issues ofgovernance

slnce thethe poltcy

-l980s. The CPR is happy to offer tommunity in the countqr and the publtc

thts t addttion to the growtng subJeot ofgovernan and the urgent policy action that isnecessary.

Preface

India is not the only country to embark on decen-tralisation. Complexities of governance, managingdiversity and coping with rapid econornic change haveprompted many other countries to undertake similarexercises.

Though local Self Government in the rural andurban areas has had a long history in India and isalso reflected in the Directive Principles of State Policyand other provtsions of the Indiem constitution, fiftyyears of our independence have been marked by adecline rather than development of local autonomy.The limited success achieved in some states insteadof helplng its continued progress has itself become acause of resentment and apprehension about localgovernments. The efforts to amend the Constitutloninitiated by the RaJiv Gandhi Government andlmplemented during the Narasimha Rao Governmentwere based on the hope that what was derailed in thepast by political expediency could be secured byprovtding consiltuflonal safeguards. It also markedthe outcome of a rapld learning process that RaJiv

Gandhi underwent in the early years of his PrimeMlnistership.

As one assoclated with the Amendment exerciseslnce its inceptlon, I have had the prlvilege and oftenthe pain of wttnessing in close proximity its progressand problems. I have attempted in this document a

force. Itposluve

too early to present a clear verdict eitheror negatlve. However, I have not refrained

from my own hopes and fears.filends and colleagues Lrave helped me in

this . P. B. Iftishnaswanry, J. B. D'Souza,D.B opadhyaya, George Mathew and Mani

Alyar very kindly spared the tlme to gothrough draft manuscrtpt and made several useful

I also had the benefit of tnteractt4g withs. R. Meenakshisundaram, B. G. Vetghese,Ajit M mdar, AJay Mehra and Raj Mohan Gandhiat stages of writing this book. I am gfiatefulto all of them for thetr advlce and help. If the flnafverslon falls short ofthet expeotations, the reason

my own lnadequacies alrd not the strengthcan onlyof thetr

Dr. A. Pal Panandiker, President, CPR has beenstrongly supportive of this whole effort frorn the

I am grateful to him and to the CPR forbrlnging out this book as a CPR publicatlon.

of this kind can succeed onlv if thereis lnd ce and support at horrle. My wlfe Sunitaprovtded an ample measure of both. She also veryklndlyuseful

through the manuscript and suggested

Iam

what

t}te

Power to the Feople?

and chronological account and a re{rlew ofhappened since the Amendments carjne lnto

es to lts tone and tenor.to Mrs. JasJit Mansingh for editing

wtth diligence and speed. PafamttaDatta p ded very useful research suppott andhelped the various tablesr I am thankful toMr. of the Parliament Library for his help in

the relevant records ofthe Lok Sabha andRaJya ha. Mrs. Sarala Gopinathan cheerfully

PreJace

accomplished the task of typing the whole manuscript.No one has clalmed that the 73rd and the 74th

Amendments are a masterpiece of legal draftlng. Somedemands have already been made for amendtng ttreAmendments. But the spirit and substance of theAmendments are more important to secure theirlmplementation than the letter of the law.

As I have repeatedly emphaslsed ln the book thevery large number of representatlves from the ruraland urban local bodles numbering more than 3 mllllonwlll undoubtedly lnfluence the countr5r's politicalchemistry. The process of decentralisatlon cannot beheld back. An opportunity ls available before thecountry to ensure that the changes are accomplishedwtth deliberation and reason rather than betrg wrestedby discontent and warped by chaos. For this it isnecessarJr to understand the background and theratlonale, the intent and purpose, ttre points ofagreement and discord and how consensus waseventually reached to enable the Amendments to bepassed.

My labours ln writleg this book would be morethan fulfllled lf tt helps thls understanding.

K. C. SMRAI\,IAKRISHNAN

l.2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

Contents

Foreuord uii

PreJace i8

The Prologue I

Decentralisation-Past and Present Efforts 3

The Drafting of the Amendment Bill 23

Parliament Debates the Two Btlls 40

General Elections and After 58

Conformity Legislation 87

Outcome of Panchayat and Municipal lO7

Elections

FuncUonal Domain

Financial Domaln

Some Pending Issues

Authority, AccountabilrtY andProdmity to Citlzens

Prospects for the Future

INDEX

t27

L57

t78

206

227

243

The Prologue

It was late In the night of the l3th of October 1989.The RaJya Sabha was preparlng to vote on the motlonto conslder the Panchayafi\Ral and the Nagarpalikablll-s. f)urlng the precedtng rtronths of the year, RaJivGandhl had spent much tlme and effort in gettlngthese Bills drafted and pushed through the lok Sabha.By the time they reached the Upper House, RaJtvGandhl was nearlng the end of his term. He was amuch-embattled hme Minister, yet he hoped thatthe managers of hls party and his own personalcommltment would somehow see the Bllls throughan unenthused RaJya Sabha. When ttre vote was taken,a llttle past mtdnlght, there were 83 Nos, and 157Ayes-three short of the requlrement of a two-thlrdmaJortty of the total of 24O members present andvotlng. The motion was declared defeated and thehouse adJourned sine die.

As both the Congress and the Opposltton membersleft the House raising slogans, challengtng each otherin the antictpatlon of general elections which wouldfoUow my colleague Vinod Pandey, who was thenSecretar5r, Mlnlstry of Rural Development, and Iremalned in the offlctal's gallery, clutchtng our fllefolders as thoirgh ttrey were chtldren abandoned byqua:relllng parents. After a while we also left in silenceand sadness. The bills had been defeated not because

2

of thelrand the

yearsthe 74

struand theof the

subs unchanged, became law. What seemedand hasty endeavour tn 1989 came to be

regard as a major systemic change in the country'sof governance in 1993. While the Centre

Power to the People?

substance but because both the Congresshad taken a polltical stand; neither

to give any quarter to the other. Fourthe two bills. renumbered as the 73rd andAmendments to the Constitution but

tates continue to be the prlncipal eldmentsederal archltecture. the Panchavat and

Nag amendments have marked a sigrriflcanttowards multi-level governance.

I

Decentralisation-Past andPresent Efforts

The Panchayat and Nagarpalika amendment btlls of1993 should not be regarded as the flrst initiatlvetowards decentralisation. In 1952 the establishmentof Community Development Blocks as part of thenatlon-wide programme was itself a major step tndecentrallsing development admlntstratlon. TheNational Extension Service was eStablished soonthereafter to reinforce the administrafion at differentlocal levels. However, lack of public participatlonemerged as a maJor problem.'The Balwant Rai MehtaStudy Team was appointed in 1957 to consider theinstitutlonal framework and suggest measures formobilising local initlatives. Beginning in 1958, withthe adoption of the Study Team's Report forestablishing a three-tier panchayat system, thecountry witnessed considerable progress in organisingpanchayats at the village, at the block and at thedistrict level. Some States like Karnataka, GuJarat'Maharashtra and Rajasthan established innovatlvestructures for decentralised planning and coordinaUonparticularly at the district level. In some others, likeTamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh, progress was notable

tnttlative the ascendancy of tb,e panchayati raj,as the ka Mehta Committee reported later,

ln'themselves the causes of a slow down.

at the196Os,220.OOO

H

Theand

Nehru,weakenwas of alevel, surather

real conthetheir beh

wtth1977. whandwlth

Fouer to ttre People?

and at the block level. By the mid-60,000 village panchayats coverlngl some

had been set up. In additlon, there7,50O Panchayat Samitis and 330 Zilla

er, the success of the decentralisation

that was emergtng at the village, blockct levels had a strong local identity and a

litical party different to that at the Statedifference was taken as a loss of powera fact of political plurallsm. By the middle

ofdecentralisation had been derailed: theof funds and decision-making reverted to

leadership and the officials actirrg on

change of government at the Centre inMorarJi Desai became hme Mlriister,

setting up of the Asoka Mehta Committee,

better of local problems and it came to beregarded a potential threat by other levels of political

With the passing away of Jawartrarlale commitment to democratic valuesIf the leadership at the decentralised level

of the I , decentralisatlon was almost revdrsed.Notwiths stalwarts ltke S.K. Dey, and thesupporr leaders ltke Kamaraj andJawaharlal NEhru,the

there was a revival ofinterest tn pahchayati raJ. The

panchayarecommended a two-tler structure witrat the dlstrict and block or mandal levels.

Somemade a

-Andhra Pradesh and West Bengal-changes. Maharashtfa, GuJarat and

fucentaltsa{an-Past and, Pre s ent Elforts

Karnataka malntalned the set up at the distrtct level;others continued with the same weakenedarrangements as before. It took nearly another decadefor any maJor change to be considered. The SlnghviCommittee, appointed in 1986, looked into the legalaspects ofpanchayati raj and urged that they shouldbe glven constituUonal recognition, that their powersand functlons should be set. forth in a new chapter,and that free and fair elections to the panchayatsshould be organised through the Election Commissionof India.a The Sarkaria Commisslon, in its report of1988 on Centre-State Relatlons, dld not favouramending the ConsUtutlon. It preferred a model billbased on consensus in the Inter-State Council, whlchwould then be enacted by the St?tes. Alternatlvely,Parliament could legislate after ob{aining the consentof the States. Prima facie, the Sarkaria Commlssion'svlew was that the subject was wlthin the domaln andcompetence of the Sates.s

The RaJiv Gandbi InitiativesThe panchayati raj and the nagarpallka initiatives

started by Rajiv Gandhi were, therefore, not Just aresumption of the decentralisation process but anattempt to force the pace of change. The SinghvtCommlttee's recommendations were accepted lnsubstance and it was recognised that this time theprocess should be underwritten by constitutionalprovislons. The amendment exercise, however, shouldnot be seen as an isolated move; it was part of therapid learnlng process that RaJtv Gandhi was goingthrough. Rethinldng on national planning and thedlscusslons about organising planning on the basisof different agro cllmatlc regions was one of the early

Gandht

DM wi

and th

/Collectors from all over the country andtlle iate seminars and discusslons that the

developof Personnel conducted were signilflcantts.6 The then Minister of Personnel.

was an enthusiastic organiser of theseevents. labelled as a sea-rch for resppnslve

tion, these semlnars did capture theof the offlcials. Some Oppositlon leaders

resented meetlngs as an attempt by Rajiv Gandhito State and District administration bypassing

political leadership. "From the PM to theout the CM" was a frequently heard

the

tndtctmWhether

t which summarised such reactions.

of or anger at what seemed to be a dellberatelntent to bypass some Chief Ministers, RaJiv Gandhiused workshops and serninars as a learning

His belief that decentralisation of powerexperland to the distridts and the levelsbelow as essentlal part of the development processwas . Decentralisatlon was seen not onlv asan to enlarge the funnel,of representation

counter "poVer brokers" but alsb as a

Pouer to tlw People?

The sedes of group consultationS RaJiveld during 1987 and 1988 with Distrlct

critlcism was prompted by consideratlons

more t way of channeling publlc resoufces toflnance development programmes. It wa$ alsonecess to address the shortcomlngs of the

ral experience, which might otherwise beused to or deflect future changes. The concept

Plannirg, whatever its lirnitations, stronglyRaJiv Gandhi.

felt that he could not relv entifelv on

of

t machinery alone or his own party

Decentralisation-Past ottd Present Eforts

leadership. Within hls own government there werepeople with significant experlence ln Stateadministration but either they were not as enthusiastlcabout decentralisailon as he was, or were not as

forthcoming in expressing their reservatlons. He,

therefore, decided to mobilise whatever support hecould get for his ldeas on decentraltsatlon from suchlocal bodies as were alive at that time, whether ruralor urban. The Panchayati RaJ and the NagarpallkaSammelans, rvhich took place during the flrst half of1989, were the platforms he devlsed for the purPose'By any account these sammelans were one of themost extensive series of consultatlons with a wtdevariety of offlctals and eleeted representatlves fromthe local bodies of the country. The hme Minlsterhlmself became a very active partictpant in thesegatherings.

The Panchayati RaJ sammelan serles started lnJanuary and went on ttll April. The Republlc Daycelebrattons of 1989 were an opportunlty to bring alarge number of offlcials and representatlves of villa$epanchayats to Delhl. I was Secretary ln the Minlstryof Urban Development at that tlme and Vtnod Pandeywas Secretaqr, Rural Development. My colleagues andI watched wlttr some amusement and cynlclsm asVlnod and hls offlcers laboured hard in organlstngone sammelan after another. At the best of ttmesinteractlon between our two rnlnistries was mlnlmaland ttris perlod of lntense semtnarlng did not seem

an approprtate time to widen the contacts. We weremlstaken.

A Blll for Panchayatt RaJ

On 15 May 1989, RaJiv Gandht lntroduced ln the

t Bltl 1989, as it was known, sought toestabltsh panchayati ral at the village, lntermedlateand levels composed mainly of representativeselected terrttorial constituencies, A separateSchedule the Constitution was prpposed contatntngt$renty- subjects such as agriculture, minor

animal husbandry, rural electrlflcation,povertyObJects

etc. I quote from the Statement of

of the working of Panchayati RaJhas shown that in many states they

have

L.ok

ofandinadand

Apartblll alsoElectlon

Power ta the P.eople?

a bill to amend the Consrtitution. The 64th

Reasons for the Bill:

e weak and ineffective due to a varietytncluding the failure to hold rqgular

elections, prolonged supersession,representation of the weaker secUons

adequate devolution of power and

a three-tier system ofpanchayats, the

respo ility on them. Having regard to theles in the edstlng system and keeping

the directive principle of state policyln Artlcle 40 of the Constttutibn which

alms endowing Panchayats with such ppwersand as are necessary to enable thpm to

as units of self government, tt is proposeda new section/part to the Constitutionto the panchayats.T

tenure of years for the panchayats, the setilng up

nvlsaged elections to be organised by theCommisslon, reservatlons of seats forI Castes, Scheduled Tribes and women.

of Commlsslons ln the State$ and empowedng

Decenhallsation-Post and' Present Efforts

the CAG to audtt the accounts of the panchayats'While introducing this btll, RaJiv Gandhi alsoannounced that a similar exerclse would be taken upto provtde a consUtutional mandate for urban localbodies.E

Events started movtng very fast thereafter. On 19

May 1989, Mohsina Kidwat, the Urban DevelopmentMinister, met with BhaJan Lal, the then AgflcultureMlnister and two other party stalwarts, Dinesh Stngh'the ttren Commerce Minister, and H. K. L' Bhagat'the then Minister of Parliamentary Affairs' At theofflctal level, in the Urban Development Ministry we

had prepared some notes for this meeting based mainlyon the report of the Nattonal Commission onUrbanlsation, known as the Correa Commission'whtch had submitted its report tn August 1988. Stnce

RaJiv Gandhl had already made known his preferencefor a Constttuttonal Amendment the dlscussionsmoved quickly, ftom the philosophy of decentralisaflonto its pracflcal aspects. It was declded that, as in thecase of ttre panchayats, a seminar to be attended byofflclals wtth direct knowledge and experience of theworlrdng of different types of urban local bodles suchas Corporatlons, Municipal Counclls' TownCommittees, Notifled Area Committees, etc' shouldbe organlsed, to be followed by three or foursammelans of the elected representaUves of suchbodies from the different regions.

The Sammclan SerlcsThe schedule of events to be organlsed was

dauntlng. Withtn one month, June, a semlnar ofofflctals, three regional sammelans at Bangalore,Cuttack and New Delhi, a meeung of all the Chlef

lo P0wer ta tte People?

a meeflng of all State ministers of local)nt and a meetlng of the ParliamehtaryCommittee had to be organised. trhere

would be break of no more than two or three davsbetween . The June events were to be followedbya of all Chlef Ministers in the llrst week ofJuly to such consensus as was possible.e The billto amendthereafter.

ConstltuUon was to be introduced soon

tlon guaranteed to jeopardise both myphyslcal and my offlclal standtng. Anyway,there no alternattve but to plunge lnto theexerclse, I did with some trepldatlon. To beginwlth, cerebral strengths and energies whtch hadlatn ln the corridors of Nirntan Bhawan hadto be mo

By and traditlon, the Mlnistrv of UrbanDevelopmresponslb

nt was an amalgam of miscellaneous

concernDelhl

a

off andRetu(eePlannlng,but later,

Mlnlstry f Industry and Supply, a formidable: The Supply rninistry had shouldered avarlety of responslbllities-.-from delivering

mules to during World War I to thelarge procurement of food and defence itemsthrough e Supply Misslons ln London and

Aft.er Independence, Industry was hlved

Such a schedule, my friends advised, was

es. Prlor to Independence, lts tnainthe allotment of government land in

the construction and maintenance ofbuildlngs through the CPWD. It was notministry but a part of the much larger

remalned became'Supply, Works andrllltatton'. At one stage Health, Familyks and Houslne were clubbed tooethery'orks and Houstng were clubbed together

true to the prlnctples of bureaucfatic

Decentalisation-Past and Present Efforts

physiologl and the division of cells, 'Works andHousing' became a mtnistry on its own and wasensconsed ln Nirman Bhawan. Local self-government,urban development, water supply and santtatlon weresome of the subJects listed for this minlstry but mostof its time was spent in admlnistering the CPWD, theDelhi Development Authority, the Directorate ofEstates, the numerous samadhis along the Yamunaand, by an odd coincidence, a dozen printtng pressesleft behind by the Department of Supply. Afterassumlng offlce, Rajiv Gandhi changed the name ofthe mlnistry to Urban Development, hoping that someday the Ministry would live up to its tlUe. He alsobrought ln D.M. Sukhthankar, former MunicipalCommissioner of Mumbai, as the Secretary of theMtntstry and set up the Correa Commission onUrbanlsation to help formulate an agenda. When Isucceeded Sukhthankar in September 1988, I madea plea to Rajlv Gandhi to remove at least two of themlllstones around the ministry's neck-the CPWDand the Directorate of Estates. Rajiv Gandhi respondedwith a smtle and said tt was not his Job to llft whatwas around my neck but if I could do so myself hewould have no obJectlon.

Tbe Mlnlstry of Urban Devclopment and ItsLlmltatloneThe Mlnlstry's concern with local government has

always been peripheral; since the subJect was regardedvery much as the responsibility of the Stategovernments it was expected to act on issues of localgovernment only through them. However, a CentralCouncil of Local Self Government had been establlshedh f97O, as an lnter-State body under Artlcle 263 of

ll

t2

the

Power to the Feople?

tution. The Council used to meet aboutonce a , chalred by the Wofks and HdusingMtntster.usuallybudget,Councll

The agenda was set by the Ministry andbcused on routlne iternrs like murlictpal

taxation, etc. Later the All IndlaMayors Jotned these meetings wlth ttre

Centralpassed

In a few meetings resolution$ weresupersession of elected local bodies

and en uring autonomy and resourceb formunlcl tles.ro The resolution$ were routlnelv

but the Mlnistry did not see itself as theof local self-government.

the Ministry was engaged in somees, seminars or workshops. Fori most

of this rk, the Ministry relied on two insfltufions.the Indian Institute of Public AdmirristrattonThey

(IIPA) ch set up centres for municipal and urban

research

studlesand theBothandschemes.etc. Th

rather

Delhl, Lucknow, Calcutta and Hvdenabad.Institute of Urban Affairs (NIUA),had a predilection for the extent

cs of urbanisaton, urban developmenturban poverty alleviation, land development,NIUA's general body included State

departments and development authoritiesmunlcipalifies. The IIPA would cofrduct

some co s on municipal budgetary refbrms,training municipal officials, personnel managdmentin es and so on. The Town and CountrvPlanning on, considered as a techntcal armof the , also had a reasonable record brlt that

ed to Just town planrrtng while HXJDCOwas thethe aegls

proflle public sector enterprlse trnderthe Ministry. But all these organisatlons,

as well the Ministry, had kept away from the core

Decentalisation-Past and Present Efforts

lssues of local self-government, such as municlpalelecflons, munlclpal autonomy, urban govern€rnce,etc.

The Nagarpallka Sammelans, therefore, came as adramatic challenge to the Minlstry of UrbanDevelopment to focus attention on the critical lssuesof urban self-governance. The Ministry was fortunatein having some able and dedicated offlcers at theAddittonal, Jolnt, and Deputy Secretaqr levels. Someof them like Thakkar, K K Bhatnagar, DharmaraJan,and Sundaram had also speclaltsed ln urbanmanagement and. municipal admtnlstratlon ln theirprevlous asslgnments. The NIUA, under Om Mathur'sdlrectlon. had functioned as a secretariat for theComea Commission and had comptled much usefulinformation. It was, therefore, possible for the Ministryto quickly formulate an agenda for the sammelansbacked up by informatlon and data on types of urbanlocal bodies in the country, their structure, theirpowers and responsibilities, flnance, problems, etc.

Itwas estimated that there would be a total numberof over 5OOO, including both offlctals and electedrepresentatives, who would participate ln the semlnarand sammelan events. The resources of the Ministryof Urban Development wereJust not enough to managea serles of events on this scale. As in ttre case of thepanchayatt ral events, help from other ministries ofthe Central government was sought. About a dozenJolnt Secretary level officers were spared by thedtfferent mlnlstrles to help durlng the sammelans.Apart from thelr proven adminlstratlve skills, manyof these Jolnt Secretarles had also some backgroundin urban development and munlcipal management inthelr respectlve States. Ttrey were pressed into service

t3

t4 Power to the fuople?

persons to help organise and condupt theevents. their misglvings might have beenabout the substance and outcome of the discussions.these persons worked with dedicatton andenth along with the offlcefs of the Urban

Ministry. The fact that a very largenumber offlcials and representatves from the grass

were participating in these eventsl andtheirviews with surprising force and clarity,

roots I

must impressed even the diehard bureaucrats.That the Minister of the country was preparedto spend lot of time and actively participate in the

was also an enthusing factor. Personally,I found wlth a cross sectiqn of able oflflcersfrom the mlnistries an enriching experllence.

of officials in Delhi had about. 7OOTheThe regional sammelans at Bangalore

and Cu ck drew over l5OO elected representatives.Thethe

the b

with 1600 representatives. Just in terms ofI accommodation. venue fon themeetlngs, etc.-the Nagarpalika Sammelan was amaJor e. For the events in Bangalore andCuttack,

of elected representatives in Delhi forand western States was by far the largest

State governments shouldered much of. For the sammelan of the elected

from the northern and western States.held at alkatora garden, Delhi. the New DelhiMunicip Corporation (NDMC) pressed ltsconsid le resources into service.

A ofSecretaries set up for the pulposehad to flnalise the broad format and substanceof the workshops. With the help of theNational rmatlcs Centre, a questionnaire was

Decentrallsation-Past and Pre s ent Efiorts

prepared seeking the response ofthe partlcipants onvarious specific issues. Out of about 4,4OOparticipants, responses were obtained from 3,4OO. Atthe end of the sammelans at Cuttack, Bangalore andDelhi the responses were analysed and the finaloutcome presented to the Parliamentary ConsultatlveCommlttee as well as to the meetings of ChiefSecretaries, Local Self Government (tSG) ministersand Chtef Minlsters which took place towards theend of June f989. Responses indicated anoverwhelming consensus for providing a Constituttonalguarantee agalnst supersession and for regularlyelected municipal bodies at varlous levels,lrParticipants also favoured broad uniformity in termsof population, occupailon and income for setting upurban local bodies in three categories-NagarPanchayats or Town Committees, Municipalities andCity Corporations. A tenure of flve years in keepingwith the llfe span of the Parllament and StateAssemblies was favoured. About 9O per cent of theparticlpants wanted earmarked tax sources for localbodies. Optnion was divided about direct or indirectelections for the positions of Mayor and MunlcipalChairperson.

The Sptrlt of the SarnmelangThe format of the sammelan workshops provided

for a concluding session where the recommendationsof different groups would be presented to the PrimeMinister by ten to twelve participants. The PrimeMinister actively participated in the discussionfollowlng these presentations. Two incidents meritmentlon. At the Bangalore event, a young lady whowas chai4rerson from one of the smaller munlcipalities

l5

l6 Pouer to the Feople?

adu, belonging to the DMK, made a fofceful

Prime Minister ls whether your own partybellef ln free and fair electlons." RaJiv

complimented the forcefulness of thee other incident was during the Delhione of ttre sessions male chauvinismpant and every woman speakeri was

Then, a lady councillor from qne ofmunicipaliUes mounted the dais and

a severe tongue lashing as "one Hat'yanviThe main galleries were subdued fdr the

session. These two incidet'rts are mentlonedof the atmosphere of free and frank

whtch characterised the workshopF.workshops were followed by a

soon after the Tienanlnan incideht insaid Gorbachov had regarded that event

of the tr2grc breakdown df communidation

speech whlch she remarked: "We are preparedfor at all levels; to the city and Muriictpal

the poslUons of Mayor and ChalrmanCouncllsas well, dlrect elections. We believe ln thesanctit5r strength of adult franchise. The qu0stion

inTamil

to you,sharesGandhispeaker.meeung.becameshoutedthe

to othersrest of thas andlscussi

The

the Sth oMinisters

Beijlng, has a resul

of Chief Secretaries on 27 J:uneitz ameetingof the liamentar5r Consultative Committee on29th;t3 a brence of the LSG Ministers on the 3oth:

of the Government of lndia Secretarlbs onJuly, and, finally, a meeting of the Chief

RaJiv Gr 7 July 1989.14 In many of these erfents,il participated. It was at the Secretariest he made a candid and moving speechthe rationale for the decentralisation

meetingexplinitiative. brring to a conversatiort he had had wtthGorbach

between Communist party, the Feoples'Army and

Decertraltsalion-Past and. Present Efrorts

the students. These three entlties had always beencentral to the Chlnese polity and yet each had misreadthe stgnals of the other. An important lesson from themassacre was that even in regtmented socletles someplurality erdsted. In other societles the plurality, andthe fledbility needed to deal with that, would be muchmore. As for the Soviet Union, RaJiv recalled thatGorbachov had consldered the political and socialaspeets of Perestroika as more important than itseconomic features. The lesson RaJiv carried from theseconversatlons was that ln a multi-ethnic, multl-lingualsoclety ltke India, it would never be possible for theCentral government to meet the rislng aspiraUons ofthe people, or cope wtth the wlde range of problemswlth their varylng intenstty in the different parts ofthe country. These required highly flexible and locallyrelevant solutions. Besides, for a countr5r of Indlasslze, the funnel of representailon, consisting of theMPs and MLAS in the country, together numberednot more than some 6,000. This limited numberregarded themselves as exclusive representatives ofthe people but in fact they had become power brokers.In his vision, the polity of India and lts survlval as asoclety would be threatened if the avenues andnumbers of representation were not enlargedsigntflcantly. This "widening the funnel ofrepresentatlon' became a passion with RaJiv Gandhi.The arithmetic of numbers emerged as one of theorganising principles for the political structure of thePanchayats and the Nagarpalikas as envisaged forthe proposed Constitutional Amendment.

RaJiv Gandhi also acknowledged at these meetingsthat it was not going to be easy to get the polittcalsupport needed to push through the decentrallsation

t7

and d not be acceptable to the existlng poltticaltj ; some leaders would keep saying,'hozamnalti (cannot be digested). Nevertheless, they did

l8

initiativp

notTheany suexerclsedeclaredofthewhich

sendthe N

Andhravoiced

decision

constituonly for

Pouser to tte People?

His own party apprehended that themeasures were far too wide. far tod manv

tt prudent to join issue with RaJiv Gandhi.ition parties, however, were not bound by

inhbition, Right from the beginning of thethe DMK, CPM and the Telugu Desam Partythat RaJiv Gandhi was bypassing the spiritnstitution by seeking to legislate on subjects

clearly wlthin the domain of the State

desh partlctpated in ttre sammelafis butthe conference of the

nal provision was needed at all it can bee purpose of ensuring regular elections to

gover ents. West Bengal pafticipated in thePan RaJ sammelan in Calcr,ttta but refused to

official or elected representative to any ofsammelan events. Tamil Nadu's DMK

gov t and the Telugu Desam government of

eir opposition atState of local self government held on 3O

June I 89. West Bengal stayed away from thatthough initially it promised to serrd itsmeetingtive. t5

The eeting with the Chief Ministers, on 7 July,was s posed to be the culminating event of theconsul tion process. A few days before, Andhra

Chief Minister, Rama Rao, announced histo boycott the conference. West Bengal and

Pradesh

Kerala f llowed suit. In an open letter dated 4 July1989 dhi wrote to Rajiv Gandhi that if any

local on all other matters it should be left tothe Sta to introduce the necessary legislation thus

Decentralisation-Past and. Present Efforts

recognising that local self-government was exclusivelyin their jurisdiction.t6However, if the Centre intendedto proceed further, the Constitutlonal Amendmentsproposed should be brought before a conference ofChief Ministers for specilic discussion. Jyoti Basuwrote a similar letter questioning the need and wisdomof the central government in resortlng to ConstitutionalAmendments.rT Leaving aside questlons ofConstltutional proprtety, Rama Rao openly accusedRajiv Gandhi and his party of trying to woo voters onthe eve of a general election by such manoeuwes ondecentralisatlon.

In the absence of the opposition-ruled states, theconference of Chief Mtnisters did not produce anysurprises. However, the conference was followed byintenslve consultatlon between Mrs Mohsina Kidwatand some Congress Chief Ministers such as N. D.Tiwari, J. B. Patnaik, Pratap Singh Rane, Delhi's ChiefExecutive CouncillorJag Pravesh Chandra and others.Some of these Congress leaders felt that WardCommittees and Tnnal Committees as proposed forcitles would be an overdose of the elective elementand might lead to serious conflict of power and fightfor office within the party. Jag Pravesh, familiar withthe urban scene because of his long assoclation withDelhi, argued the other side with enthuslasm. Theills of democracy, he said 'a-la John Stuart Mill canbe cured only by more democracy. Tiwari, on theother hand, repeatedly advised caution and suggestedthe Centre should llmlt itself to policy guidance, rnrgadarstwt as he called it. and leave it to the States towork out the details. However, these Congress leadersas well as other stalwarts in the Central government,such as Bhajan Lal, Narasimha Rao, Solanki or others

l9

with ethe reseDed

Fower to the Feople?

of worldng at the State level, acceptedof the sltuatlon that Rajiv Gandttl hadlnitlatlve and had turned the proposed

of the Constitution into a maJor plankof the party's political strategr. As such,the party leaders, whatever their mi$givings, kept thelrown not wanting to give the impression of

or any withdrawal ln the face of opposition.The and conferences oven the scene shiftedto the of the Amendments.

Decentralisatian-Past and Pre sent Efforts

NOTES

I. Singh, S.S. et al. ed. Legislattue Stattts oJ Panchayati R4i rnIndia. New Delhi: Indian Institute of Public Administration,1997.

2, Meenakshisundaram. Decentralisation in DevelopingCotnl.lrles. Delhi: Concept Publishing, 1994.

3. Ibtd4. Singh, S.S. et. aL ed. Irgislatiue Status oJ Panchagoti Rq rn

Indin Op. cil.5. Ibrd-6. Report oJ the Workstwp oJ Dtstrtct Maglstrotes / Collectors on

Respottstse Administration, New Delhi: Ministry of Personnel,Government of India, July 1989.

7. IbId8. The Constltution 64th Amendment Bill 1989 (Btll No. 50 of

19891 as introduced in Lok Sabha.9. Speech of Rajiv Gandhi introducing 64th Amendment Blll.

lok Sabha debate, 15 May 1989. RaJiv Gandhi, *lectedSpeecfes and Writings 1989, Vol V. Publication Divlsion,Government of Indla. 1991.

lO. From proceedlngs of the meeting between UrbanDwelopment and other Ministers, 19 May 1989, Ministry ofUrban Development.

I l. Resolution No. I I of the Joint Meeting of the Central Councilof tncd Govemment and All India Council of Mayors. Octoberr986.

12. Nagarpaltka Sammelan, Responses from DelegatesiComparative Analysis, New Delhi: Government of Indta,Mtnistry of Urban Development and Nauonal InformaticsCentre, June 1989.

13. Conference of Chief Secretaries; Agenda Notes, Ministry ofPersonnel, June 1989.

14. "Give Financial Powers to Urban Bodies". News item inPatri,ot New Delhi. of 30 June 1989.

15. 'Bengal Boycott Meet on Urban Bodies'. News item ln Patnot,New Delhi, of l5 July 1989.

16. 'Karunanidhi may not attend the CMs' meet". News item inIndlan Express, Madras, of 4 July 1989.

2r

Pouer to the Feople?

Boycott CMs' meet". News item in Indian .gxpress,2 July 1989 and "Bengal also to Boycott CMs

News item in Hindustan Tirrres, Calcutta. 5 Julv

+a-

The Drafting of the Amendment Bill

Prepartng the Amendment Bill for the Panchayats

had not posed any serious conceptual problem. The

recommendations of the Balwant Rai Mehta Commlttee

were in considerable detail. Several State governments

had also acquired much experience establishing the

legal and administrative base for the panchayats. The

Ministry of Rural Development had monitored for long

the countrywide experience and had made its own

formulations from time to time for strengthening the

panchayat bodies. Drafting a bill to provideconstitutional safeguards for the functioning of thepanchayats was, therefore, a comparativelystraightforward task for the Ministry.

The Nagarpalika Bill as an AfterthoughtIt had been expected that some provisions in the

64th Amendment Bill regarding elections, reservations'

schedule of responsibilities, etc, would be repeatedand more thought given to municipal reponsibilities'The Nagarpaltka Bill, thus, was an after thought-itwas announced for the first time while Rajiv Gandhiwas introducing the 64th Amendment Bill in the [,ok

Sabha. Several ideas emerged from the outcome ofthe sammelan events. One was the need to classiff

size and other criteria. The experiehce ofGuJarat, Nadu and Uttar Pradesh with Nagar

or Town Committees, for smaller ruralwhich were increasingly urbanising had

at the sammelan. The general feelingfor such transitional setflements, Nagar

as a separate category and as a hybrid ofas well as rural panchayats wor,tld be

. As for the schedule of responsibllifles,the

24

munlclp

that ofTheyfunctionsprepared

into

Power to the F,eopb?

ties and corporations accordlng to

of the participants was very similar towho attended the panchayafl raj events.

their lack of experience Ar this regard.Vesting of executlve powers tn the elected

was another strong expectation.The bill for the Nagarpalikas tried to bulld

on these lnses. A drafting group of sorts camewith the Prime Minister's offlce in the

lead. As cipal Secretary to the hime Mirlister,kept a close tab on the progress ofwork,

leavlng Shankar Aiyar, a former schoolmate ofand now a Joint Secretary in the pMO,RaJtv

to the PM's philosophy on the subJect. VlnodPandey, , Rural Development; Krishnaswamy,Secretary,and I, asthe group

Planning; Gopi Arora, Flnance Secnetary, Urban DevelolNnent, comprised

ted an exclusive mandate for municipalwlth adequate resources. They werd also

take on poverty alleviation progrartmes

Dr Rao, then [.aw Secretary, sounded thetime to time when our thoughts crossed

It fell to the lot of Smt. Rama Devt.Secretary, to make sense of the group'sand glve them some legal formulation.

alertlegalttren

The Dro$ing oJtte AmendmentBill

None of these formulations lasted long as thelrrepressible Mani brought to the group some brightidea or other on a daily, and sometimes hourly, basls'

The meeUngs of the drafting group often became

marathon sessions fortifled by jalebis artd

and, of course, .a steady supply of pantPandev.

scunosasfor Vtnod

Two items became more contentious than others'

One related to the setting up of Ward committees and

Zonal commlttees as a measure for enhancingprordmity between cltizens and their representatlves'The other was the provision for District Planning

commlttees. The response from the samrnelanparticlpants to the proposal for Ward and Zonal

committees had been m-lxed.t About 45 per cent

wanted a three-tier set up in large clfles' conslsting ofthe Municipal Council, Zonal Committee and Ward

Committee: about 350/o did not and the rest were

undecided. In the conference of Secretaries, Chief

Secretarles, Minlsters, etc., the preference was forZonal Committees as an administratlve €urangement

and Ward Commtttees at the neighbourhood level as

an informal arrangement rather than as elected

entltles. Nevertheless, as mentloned before' thearlthmetlcs of representation and the need to widen

the funnel of particlpaUon were considered cruclal by

RaJiv Gandhi. Mant Shankar argued vigorously forthls vlewpotnt tn all the drafttng meetlngs. Under the

Panchayat Blll, he pointed out, village panchayats

would cover on an average a population between flve

to ten thousand, with representatives drawn from

territorial constit-uencies each comprising about athouqand people. In urban areas the ratlo ofrepresentatlon should not be very dlfferent desplte

ln a substantive sense. Similarly, Zonalfor groups of wards in large cities could

promote tralisation, bettdr accountabilitv andmore in the provision of services. Whilemany of were sympathetic to these view points, wefelt the and financial implicatiofirs forprovidin

26

theperhapsreally be

re€rsonabl

moniexpectedsuccessorin the pprornln

MLAs and

Fouer to tfu, Feople?

of population. The urban motwllc- (oreighbourhood or the miniaipal ward) shouldregarded as the equivailent of a villaAe

these three tiers wittrin a city withautonomy and funds would be horrendous.

on of development programmes andof ttreir lmplementation. Initially it was

t the Zilla Parishad, regarded as asorts to the Distrtct Development Boards

e-Independence period, would play arole in this task. In Maharashtra, for

ishads, emerged. In tJre process, the Mps,in partlcular, ministers at the State level

Neverth at ttre end of the day tfie PM's views asby Mani Shankar Aiyar prevailed.

Dcdtng Distrlct Planning

in thislevel planning has been a preoccupationuntry for long, with all its romantic.polltical and administrative overtones. Aspanchayail ral setup, different State$ hadpart of th

provided t5pes of arrangements for planning,coordina

example, e Zilla Parishads grew rapidly in strengthand be e powerful bodies in administering

-funded programmes. Ey f962, a newas distinct from the State level and based

on Zllla

began to that their own importance and infltaencewere eroded. It was also argued that the fbcus

fhe Dr6W o;f tteAmendmentBill

of the Zlla Parishad was on rural areas and importantproblems of rural-urban relationships tended to beignored by the Zilla Parishads.2 Event.ually, a newbody called 'District Planning and DevelopmentCouncil' (DPDC) was formed in each distrlct with aState minister, usually drawn from the district itself,as Chairperson. The Zilla Parishad President, MPs,MIAs, representatives of banks, cooperatives and othernon-officlals were included as members. Gradually,all decisions regarding varlous development schemeswere taken by this DPDC. It also became the arbitratoror umpire in inter-departmental issues concerningplan allocations and schemes within the district.Though the Zilla Parishad was established under anAct of the legislature, its role became secondary tothe DPDC which was only the creature of a governrrientorder.

The situatlon in Gujarat was similar. Some otherStates like Andhra, Bihar, Rajasthan and UttarPradesh also provided for such DPDCs under thechalrmanship of mlnisters. In some other States, likeWest Bengal, Tamil Nadu, PunJab, Orissa, Kerala,Himachal Pradesh and Assam, district level plannlngor development coordination was treated as anadministrative and technical matter and was handledby committees usually under the chairmanship of theCollector or the District Magistrate, as the case maybe.3 Karnataka. which started a similar official levelcommittee changed over to a very strong Zilla Parishadsystem. When Ramakrtshna Hegde was Chief Minister,Nasir Sab, the highly dedicated Panchayat Minister,brought about a new State law establishing the ZillaParishad as virtually district level government. Thechairperson was given the status of a minister and its

27

28

was an offlcer considerablvct Collector and was designatedof t]:e Zilla Parishad.a

Potuer to the Feople?

seirior toas Chief

NGOs, etc.. should takeplanning, executi.orr and

by the Gandhi government between December1987 an June 1988, provided an opportunity for

the framework, content and methodolog/ of

chiefthe Dis

planningseries oCollecto

districtwas ona recoZllla

charge

AlnN

well asspeciffc

all aspects of5

all these varied experiments andtill the late 198Os, the position of dtstrict

vague and loosely established. Theworkshops of District Magistrates andon Responsive Administration, organised

. Though the.focus of the workshopadministration, its report contained

tion that, as a generalised model, theshad, "suitably composed" to include

represen of municipalities and cities as alsoMPs, , Cooperatives,

ent conference of Chief Secretaries. held1988, was less enthusiastic about a

powerfulflnd favo

Parishad and considered it migtrt not

Secretariexercise

with existing political groups. The Chief, therefore, suggested that a con$ciousuld be made to seek such a consensus

inclu a possible ConsUtutional Amendment. The, however, was clear in its vlew that the

Distrtct llector should be the focal point and "hisindethis

status should not be compromlsed atin our development".o

While re outcome of the Collectors' workshop asconference of Chlef Secretaries was ilot ashe would have liked, RaJlv Gandhi dccided

that the posed Constttutional Amendment should

fhe Drqfthg oJthe AmendmentBiLt

itself be the occasion for securing a consensus. Hewas also keen to provide for a uniform three-tierpanchayat setup in the country. That became thecentral piece of the Amendment Bill for Panchayatsintroduced in April 1989. District Planning was to betaken up as an item in a subsequent bill, theNagarpalika Blll.

Thc Vlews of the Planning CommissionWhen the drafttng of the Nagarpalka Bill was

taken up, there was some opposition from the PlanningCommisslon as well to the maldng of a Constitutlonalprovision for District Planning. Madhav Singh Solantrd,then Planning Mlnister, feared that providing aConstltutional status for planning at the district levelmight have some unexpected and adverse implicationsfor the Planning Commission itself. Solanld voicedthese apprehensions at an lnformal meeting of theCouncll of Mlnlsters on 7 July 1989. On 28 July,I(rlshnaswamy, Secretary of the Planning Commlssion,wrote to Deshmukh, Vinod Pandey and myself drawingour attention to the followtng vlews andrecommendatlons of the Sarkaria Commlsslon.T

If the Planning Comrnission ls reconstituted bya statute gtvlng it an autonomous status, divorcedfrom the polltical executive of the Union, itsworking wlll be stymied by legalism, rigidiUes andtechnicalities which are inherent in inflexiblestatutes. The tasks of Planning Commission arenow overseen by the National DevelopmentCouncll. ThIs arrangement has well answered ourplanntng needs. The remedy, therefore, lies inreforming these lnstltutlons and thelr worldng,

30 Pouser to tle People?

at the same time llull and effectivewith the States at all stages of the

process so that they feel that thelr rolein it not that of a supplicant, but of an equal

t.

the Sarkaria Commission's Miews.in the n discussions at the offlcial level.district I planning remained a contentious item.

district . It was also argued that providing astatuto basis for district plarlning would notunde State authority or the status of thePlanning Commission at the national level which

the contrar5r, be an impoftant input for thewould,State Eventually, it was decided to provlde for

Manifor a

Districtelectedand

TheThe

interface

reiterated Rajiv Gandhi's preferenceprovision and a formal setup for

Committees composed mainly oftatives drawn from the Zilla Pafishad

local bodies.

and the Urban on a Cohmon Platformmaining issues were the rural-lrrban

and how to provide for participation of thepancha ts and municipalities in the planningprocess. t was noted that out of about 44O dibtricts

untry, 30 were predomilrantly urban andpredominantly rural. In all other di$tricts

in the3O0 pthe pos on varied raising important issues of

hips between urban and rural areas,fringes o urban areas and transitional areas. [t wasalso not that village, block and district levelpancha ts were part of a known hierarchy of twhichmuni ties and corporations wbre not a part. It

The Droftbtg oJ the Amendment Bill 3l

was, therefore, proposed that a Joint PlanningCommittee comprislng representatives of the ZillaParishad as well as municipalities and corporationsshould be set up. The ratio of membershtp from these

two streams would be in proportion to the populationin the panchayats and urban areas. To make theprocess appear even more democratic, Mani Shankarproposed the draft development plan should be placed

before an assembly of all panchayat and municipalpresidents in the district. Vinod Pandey, Krishna-swamy and I feltthat such "Athenian" type conclaveswould only benefit tent houses and shamianacontractors and would serve no purpose. Our viewswere brushed aside. Rama Devi faithfully drafted aclause providing for such gatherings which Maniplaced at one of the meetings of the group ofministers.8 Even Seshan, then Cabinet Secretary, whowas a stickler for details including proper numberingand marklng of Cabinet papers, was a silent spectatorto Mani's missiles which landed on the meeting tablefrom ilme to time, These missiles were unannouncedbut not unexpected since, invariably, RaJiv Gandhiwould suggest to his colleagues with his disarmingsmile, "Why not take a look at what Mani has justproposed?" However, it must be said in all fairnessthat while Mani paid little regard to procedure orprlor consultation with the concerned ministries, some

of his suggestions did add to the substantive meritsof the Bill but the suggestion for district level conclaves

was not one of them. Mercifully, in subsequentdiscussions in the Council of Ministers, Rajiv Gandhiwas persuaded to drop this provision.

In the discussions that I had with Deshmukh,Vinod Pandey and Krishnaswamy' varlous alternatives

also felt the preparatlon of the developmerit planfor the should not be a one-tlme affair but acontinu process. All this required that the pfocessshould entrusted to one body with some assurance

32

for lnwereaspect,signifi

of conwould

intense.Gandhi

pouertottw people?

the rural and urban aspects of plannfirgdered. Apart from the representadonaldistrict planning prooess also required

technical inputs, data and analysls. We

. Once we agreed that the Zilla paftshadthe appropriate body for this purpose, it

that the overall obJectives, priorities set by

of the Bill became frequent and morefrom the very strong interest of Rajiv

was that the chairperson of the panchayatat the level, whether lt is called Zilla paf.ishad

else, should be the Chairperson of theDistrictproposed

Committee as well. We fdrther

the and State government$, the extent andtype ofshould

and other resourc€s available: etc..de the diskict planning propess. It was

also that tn the planning process ve_riousofflcials d ottrer institutlons and organisdtionsshould consulted. Article 243Y sI the AmendmentBill made for all these purposes. The arrticlealso recognised spatial planntng, sharingof water other physical and natural resources.and the tegrated developmeht of infrastructurb and

conservation as matters of corhmoninterest between the panchayats and the

The Btll Shapettre second half of July 1989, discussions

on the

providtng for elected representaflves at

Tle DroSrng oJthe AmendmentBill

multtple levels and establishing a district planningmechanlsm, some other aspects in the amendinglegislatton also came to be frequently discussed. Onewas wlth regard to the cut off flgures of populationfor constitutlng nagar panchayats, munlcipalitles andmunictpal corporations. Given the fact that ln severalparts of the country panchayats consisted of largevillages with a population of around 2O,OOO, therewas a feeling that municipalities should have apopulatton of 5O,OOO. Mrs. Mohsina Kldwai felt thiswould create a lot of prablems for the numeroussmall municipalitles which already edsted in UttarPradesh-her State. Eventually, it was agreed thatthe cut off would remain 2O,O0O for a munlcipalcouncil and be three lakhs for a municipal corporatlon.Ttrere was also the view that the whole question ofcut off sizes should be left to the discretion of Stategovernments, but thts was successfully countered bythe Urban Development ministry which felt somerattonallsatlon was essentlal if muntcipalities andmunictpal corporations were to become viqble.

Plannlng for Metropolitan ArcasAs a corollary to district planning, a proposal to

set up Metropolitan Planning Committees for largeurban agglomerations consisting of multlplemunicipaliUes and urbanising fringes was actlvelyconsldered. The rapid growth of large cities overddlngerdsttng municipal boundarieg has been an lmportantfeature of Indta's urbanlsatlon. According to the l98lcensus, there were a dozen of these urban agglomera-ttons with a populatton of one mtllion or more. By1991, the number doubled and another twenty werelikely to be added by the end of the century.'o

34

the growthbeen a major

. In the Nehru era,

Pouer to the People?

of these multi-muhtctpaland mOstly unan$weredthe Planning Comrrrlssion

was matched onlv bv Xack of investtment.Late in e 195Os it also became the centre of

with cholera claiming a fbw thousand lives.In 1961, the Ford Foundation and WHO organised amajor cal assistance programme in Calcutta toprepare metropolitan-wide programme of rescrtre and

in partiHowever, the Nehru government and,the Finance Minister. T.T. Krlshna-

had

Calcuttawhere

macharyand the

Delhi,

ofn

Thewith

urban lems, whatever the scale, were a muhicipalconcern therefore the responsibility of the State

. This stand did not seem to apply tothe Master Plan exercise and large-scale

land ition and development benefited consi-derably central government investments as r,Vell asthe interest and guidance of Nehru.tl

Inl O, matters came to a head in Calcutth-theind

insurgen , the freedom stn-rggle in east Paltistan,and themetropo

tinued influx of refugees into the Cdlcuttatan area created an unptrecedented crisis.

of the State itself had been chaoticon ministries lasting no more than a few

months a time. Indira Gandhi decided that as partmeasures to arrest further deterioration. a

, quite unsuccessfully, the policy ofmetropolitan growth by limiting investment.

was probably the worst affected metfopolisbsolescence of industrv and decav of

were unimpressed wtth the prescriptionsplea for Central assistance. In thein view,

recesslon beginning in 1966 and the loss2OO,OO0 jobs since then, the Ndxalite

of

fhe Drofring oJthe AmendmentBill

special programme should be mounted for Calcutta.Slvaraman, then Cabinet Secretaqr, and Ashok Mitra,then Planning Secretary in the Central government,made a few visits to Calcutta in the middle of 1970.A quick review of the various infrastructure schemeswhich the Calcutta Metropolitan PlanningOrganlsation had prepared, with the help of FordFoundation experts, was undertaken. A Rs l5O crorepackage to finance se*rerai of these schemes wasauthorised. A combination of loans and grants fromthe Central government and a special entqr tax toservice market borrovings was also approved. To acity which had not seen even 1O per cent of such ascale of investment, this was most welcome. Moreimportantly it marked, for the lirst time in the country,the active involvement of the Centre in a metropolttandevelopment programme. The Calcutta MetropolitanDevelopment Authority (CMDA) was set up as acompact body to coordinate and monitor thisprogramme. Since West Bengal was under President'srule, legislation for this purpose was prepared in afew days and endorsed by the Parliament'sConsultative Committee at the Centre.12

In those days I was in Durgapur runnlng adevelopment authority for that industrial complex. InSeptember f 970, I was summoned to Calcutta by B BGhosh, then Principal Advisor to the Governot andordered to take charge, as Secretary and ChiefExecutive, of the CMDA. Shri Ghosh had beenSecretary of the Food Ministry in the Centralgovernment; he was, by any standards, anexceptionally dedicated person. With his unstintedsupport and inspiring leadership I could set up theCMDA within a short time. mobilise the promised

35

36 .Power to the People?

funds, a shelfofover 100 schemes processed ands€rncuo and also assemble several organisationsof the g nt into a framework of implementingagencies

under Indira Gandhi's directions. Inttiallvthe Uni n Health Ministry and later the Ministry ofWorks Housing funcUoned as the nodal ministry at

Theanothercontextthe C

thethe

review ocoordin

wasthe

this tocollabo

Mumbal

ccess and shortcomings of the CMDA isstory but what is relevant to the present

the special mechanism for monitoring ofprogranrme which was set up by the Central

t of India level. Once every quarter,tary of that ministry, along with Additional

the programmes of the CMDA. Problems oftion would be discussed and special

a very positive exerclse of Centre-Statetion in metropolitan developmerlt and

or Joint level representatives of the Planning,Finance, Transport and other ministries concernedwould Calcutta as a team and conduct a detailed

ln n of the Government of India as neededed at the meetlng. At the end of that meeting,

Bengalwould brief the Chief Minister of Westthe status and then make a report to

the t Secretary and the PM. As many as eightto ten tings of this Review Committee took placebetween 1971 and L972.t3 In addition, the Cabinet

and some Union ministers would themselvesvisit Cal to hold such review meetings. I found

marlage t. Since Calcutta had opened a wlndowfor su collaboration, the model was picked up in

and Chennai as well. It convinced me thatthe of metropolitan management were multi-Jurisdic nal and could not be, regarded as the

The DraJting oJthe Amendment Btll

responsibllity of corporatlonsA strong inter-governmentalCentre, the State and therequired.

and municipalities alone.endeavour involving thelocal authorities was

Almost two decades later the ConstitutionalAmendment exercise gave me an opportunity topropose that a platform should be devised for suchinter-governmental collaboration. Rajiv Gandhi himselfdid not require much persuasion: The CorreaCommission on Urbanisation, which he had set up,had also drawn special attention to the problems oflarge cities and argued that the animosity about largecities should be given up and they should be regardedas "National Cities".'a My initial proposal was thatmetropolitan areas should be regarded as specialdistricts and should have a Metropolitan PlanningCommittee similar to the District Planning Committee.The Committee would consist of elected representativesdrawn from the urban, semi-urban and rural areaswlthin a metropolis, representatives of the State andCentral government organisations, and alsoprofessionals. To begin with, I had suggested thatsuch Metropolitan Planning Committees should beset up for the large cities of Calcutta, Mumbai, Delhi,Chennai, Bangaiore and Hyderabad with a 1991population of two million or more. Rajiv Gandhi,however, decided that it should be extended to allcities of more than one million. Provisions for theMetropolitan Plaanning Committee were madeaccordingly in the Draft Bill.

Electlon of ChalrpersonIn regard to the elections of Mayors and Municipal

Chairpersons, the response at the Nagarpalika

.'t I

38 Pouer ta tte People?

was not very clear. Rajiv Gandhi found thefor direct elections persuasive but some of

his es in the Council of Ministers felt irrdirectelection would be politically more acceptable.

the draft setUed for indirect electiorr. i.e..and from amongst the elected mempers of

a . To ensure strength and stabilfty theelectlon

draftofawouldelected

tenure

This

2439'7) also stipulated that the removaln from a municipality or corporationa maJority of the total number of the

as also a majority of twolthirdspresent voting. Such a provision would have

made the tenure of a Mayor or a Municipalon stronger than even a Chief Minister" Some

States pick up this idea and provided for stablewe shall see later.Is

AsJ neared its end, relief was in sight forRama who had waited for long for the discussions

for final drafting of the Bill to comtnence.came to me on 3l July 1989; lt was

to end

by Mrs Kidwai, sent up to the PMO aTrd wasintrod in the Lok Sabha by the Prime MinisteronSA gust. As mentioned before, the 64th

alreadyBill in regard to the Panchayats hadtntroduced on the 12th of M4y, the

N Bill now became a companion piece. Weshall in the next chapter how the two bill$ fared

T he Drqftlng oJthe AmendmentBill

NOTES

l. Nogarpallkrr Sammelan, Responses Jrom Delegates:Comparative Analysis. New Delhi: Gwernment of India,Ministry of Urban Dwelopment and National InformaticsCentre, June 1989.

2. Report oJ the Workshop oJ Distict Ma,gistro,tes / Collectors onResponsiue Admtristration. New Delhi: Ministry of Personnel,Government of India, Julv 1989.

3. rbid,.

4. Meenakshisundaram. Decentraliso.tion ln DeoelopingCotntrles. New Delhl: Concept Publishing, 1994.

5. Report o;f the Workshop oJ District Mogtstrates / Collectors onRespnsiue Admini.stration, New Delhi: Ministry of Personnel,Government of India, Julv 1989.

6. rbid7. Sarkaria Commission on Centre-State Relations, 1988.8. Draft of the Amendment Bill, July 1989, unrevised.9. Article 243Y ln the Constitution 65th Amendment Bill 1989;

Bill No. 6OC of 1989, as introduced in the Lok Sabha.lO. State oJ Indla's Urbanisation. New Delhi: National Institute

of Urban Affairs. 1988.11. Sivaramakrishnan, K. C. The Indinn Urban Scene, Shimla:

Indian Institute of Advanced Study, 1978.12. Sivaramakrishnan, K.C. with Leslie Green, Metrowlitan

Management. Washington D.C: Oxford University Press,World Bank, 1986.

13. tbid.14. Report oJ *Le Na,tiono,l Commlssion on Urbanisation Vol. I,

Recommendations. New Delhi: Ministry of UrbanDevelopment, August 1989.

15. The relevant Acts are the following:

- Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act 1998

- Madhya kadesh Municipaltties Act (as amended in 1994)

- Haryana Municipal Corporations Act 1994

- Uttar Pradesh Urban Local Self-Government Laws(Amendment) Act 1994.

39

-a-

Parli ent Debates the TWo Billls

Whlle in ucing the Panchayat Bill, RaJiv Gandhihad the opportunity to unfold his vtsion fordecen tion. He had said then that "though theessenceRaJ Instt

democracy was elections, for Panchayations fhey had been hopelessly irregular

and un . The sine qua non of respolrslve

went onon is responsiblity to the electorate". Heelaborate: "A wide chasm separated theof the electorate from a small number oflargest

Its elected tatives. This gap has been occupiedby the brokers. the middlernen and vestedinterests.have had

or the minutest municipal function, peopleto run around finding persons with the

right co on. We have come to this House after along co sideration and a national detlate.

ted in history in which over lO,OOO electedand offl representatives of Panchayat bodies, State

tate Ministers, Chief Minlsters and othersOfflcials,had partipanchaya

ted. With the passage of this Bill thewould emerge as a firm building block of

a tion and development. The Bill would thentake its penactmenthe conso

alongside another great event, i.e. theof the Constitution, as an instrument indation of democracy at the grass roets."r

Parliament Debates tle ?luo Btlls

The Panchayat Bill faced much opposition, even

at ttre stage of introduction itself, whtch focused onthree major points. Since panchayats and local self-government were in the State list, the flrst obJection

was about the legislative competence of Parliament toconsider such a bill. The second was that by addinga new part and providing a constitutional status topanchayats and municipalities, the Amendment Billwas altering the basic features of the Constitution.The third objection was that the RaJiv Gandhigovernment, neadng the end of its term, was seeldngto make political capital out of an illtlsory legtslationwhich was in fact no more than a set of guidelines.Madhu Dandavate, Dinesh Goswamy, Jaipal Reddyand Somnath ChatterJee led the attack in the LokSabha.2 Dandavate said that there was unanirnity inthe country on the need for decentralisation anddevolution of powers to panchayats. However, themodus operandi was with the State government andParliament had no competence to legislate on thesubJect. Dandavate also questioned the wisdom ofthe Election Commission conducting panchayatelections and the CAG auditing its accounts; thesewould only increase centralisation. Dinesh Goswamyreferred to the views of the Sarkaria Commission,which had gone into the question of strengtheningpanchayati raj institutions, and identified threealternatives.The lirst was for the Central governmentto prepare a model bill. get it endorsed ln the Inter-State Council and then urge the States to enact thesame: the second was for Parliamer.rt to pass a lawwith prior consent of the States; and the thirdalternative, which the Sarkaria Commission did notfavour. was to amend the Constitution. Dinesh

4l

Bill was an erosion of the domairl andauthority the State governments, and there 0ouldbenod tion to panchayats if the rigtlts ofthe Sa are not respected. Somnath Chatterjeerecalled who had said that the "legislativeand tlve authority is partitiohed betweerr theCentre the State. The Centre cannot bv its willalter thepointed

daries of that partition".3 Chatte{ee alsot that the proposed bill was only a set ofand asked what the Centre could do if anot act. Jaipal Reddy accused the Rajiv

Gandhi vernment of surreptitiously trying tointroduce third tier.

to these points, Shankaranand, RaJiv

42

Goswamy

directionsState did

Gandhi'sParliamen

session,the 65th

Pouer to the People?

argued that in style and substance, the

colleague tn the Cabinet, argued thathad an inherent competence to enact a

Nagarpalika Amendment Bill, labelled as

Amendment. Whethef the Bill alteredthe basicmatter of

cture of the Constitutlon or not was a

therretatlon. He also arglred that fulflllingset forth in the Amendment Bill would

bea responsibility and failure on thataccount amount to a faih-lre to discharge

obligations.Both ruling party and the Opposition had

IIred openlng salvos. It was time for the L,okSabha to Its summer break.

The N Bill is put through lts PacesWhen t reconvened for the monsoon

in therrendment, was ready and was introdlr.rcedSabha on 7 August 1989. Introducing the

Blll, Rajiv emphasised some of the points on

Parliament Debates the Tuso Bills

decentralisation which he had made earlier whileintroducing the Panchayat Bill. The debate in the I-okSabha at that time had helped to draw the battleItnes between the Congress and the Opposition parties.

Some research was done about past proposals madeby some of the Opposition parties, which were similarln substance to those contained in the AmendmentBills. RaJiv Gandhi chose to be less strident andconfrontational in introducing the Nagarpalika Bill.aHe said no party in India could claim an unblemishedrecord in local self-government. Both the Congressand non-Congress governments have accomplish-ments as well as fallures to their account. Conferringa constitutional status on municipalities, he pointedout, was a demand not unknown to the Oppositionpartles. He recalled that in February 1989' a jointmeeting of the Central Council of Local Self-Government and the All India Council of Mayors'where the representatives of the Telugu Desam party'the left front in Kerala and the CPM in West Bengalwere present, had demanded a ConstitutionalAmendment.s He also quoted from the CalcuttaCorporation's testimony before the Charles Correa

Commission whlch had stated "the country weddedto grass root democracy must bless its localinstitutions with a constitutional status; it would be

much more meaningful if the rules, functions andresponsibilities are constitutionally defined."6

By introducing items like district level planning'State flnance commlssions and metropolitan planningwhich had not been included in the Panchayat Bill,RaJiv Gandhi proJected the Nagarpalika Bill as acompanion piece of the Panchayat Bill and claimedthat together the two would provide a more complete

43

44 Pouser to ttle People?

prescrip for decentralisation. As speech writer forRajiv G Mani Shankar helped to elaborate hismasterls eas with much fluency, occasionally theeloquen

decen n."

Lok Approves the Two BillsMuch this eloquence was lost rather rapidly in

the L,ok because within the short space of afewmonup and

between May and August 1989, the make-of the House changed. Since general

elections ere expected early in the following yeAr theparties were determined not to let theOppositio

Congress gain any political advantage frorn thesation initiative. The Bofors controversyin the meantime and about hundred

decen

Oppositiowere notstayed y from the House and only a few Oppositionmembers like Syed Shahabuddin and Banatwalaactually the lok Sabha. Their own oppo$itionto the Bill was muted and focused more on individual

. On 8 August 1989, both the 64th andprovisio65th Am ndment Bills .were taken togethen for

when"threadmegapo

escalat

considin thewas mosbenches,eulogisOppositiconstituti

far exceeding the substance-for instanceiv Gandhi said the Amendments woulde farthest rural hamlet to the largestin a rudrakshamala of democracv and

MPs resigned. Though the resignationsrmally accepted by the Speakea these Mps

About eighty members participated, butof the Opposition stalwarts, the d€bate

one sided. Speakers from the Congressth few exceptions. followed the routine of

RaJiv Gandhi and heaping blame on then. On legislative cornpetence and

ty, Shahabuddin pointed out that the

Partinment Debates the Ttro Bills

very llrst Artlcle of the Constitution described Indiaas 'a union of states" and not a "union of states,municlpalities and panchayats". Therefore theAmendments would alter this basic feature. He alsoargued that while there was no controversy in thecountry about making the local institutions effectiveand responsive, the Constitutional Amendment Billshad been conceived and delivered in a hurry. Hecharacterised RaJiv Gandhi as a later day Columbusdiscovering the panchayats when they had been inexistence for decades. "I am not here to match and Icannot match the eloquence of the Prime Minister",he said. "I have no ghost writers. I have introduced anumber ofAmendments and I hope the Prime Ministerwould consider them as a statesman rather than as apolitlclan."T

Some of the Amendments that Shahabuddin anda few others had suggested sought the substitution oftJle word "governor" by the words 'state government',the vesting of various responsibilities under theproposed Amendment more clearly on Statelegislatures, and provision for representation of theMPs only in the district panchayat. Sultan Owaisirecalled the bitter experience of Hyderabad whereelections were held after twenty-two years. HaroobhaiMehta wanted the Bill to be more specific inrecognising the elected mayor as the executiveauthortty bylproviding for a Mayor-in-Council ratherthan vesting the executive powers in an appointedCommissioner. Bhajanlal and Mohsina Kidwairesponded to the debate. Sitting late in the evening ofLO August 1989, the Lok Sabha negatived theamendments proposed by the non-Congress mernbers

45

46 Potuer to tte People?

and the Bills, which were then referred to theRaJya ha,E

The Fate of the Bills in Rajya SabhaNext , the scene shifted to the RaJya $abha

when the Amendment Bills as passed by the Lok

Guru , Balanandan and Upendra wereready.s the attack Gurupadaswamy askedwhere th government was all these forty years whenlocal self- t had become a stronA realitv inStates Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Kerala.

Sabhaon 14

These Sdemons

but politiwonderedsince thethe Stadate to IgovernmmembersCongress

Panchayaassent,

laid on the table. The debate commencedand the Opposition heavyrveights like

tes run by the Opposition parties hadted that what was needed for

n was not a Constitutlonal Amendmentwill and political leadership. Upendra

why the government was in such a hurr5rrocess of passing the Bills, ratillcation byand presidential assent would take theI or beyond by which time the Rajiv Gandhint would have ceased to exist. Somealso assailed the ambivalence of the

government pointing out that when thegovernment sent a comptrehensive law onRaj in 1983 for obtainiqg the President'sCentral government had kept it pending

till 1985. Sab, the Kainataka Panchayat Mirnisterhad then threatened to go on a hrirnger strike anda-fter mu polittcal pressure the Ptesident's a$sent

Upen contlnued his attack when the RaJyaSabha on 16 August, emphasising thepoint that devolution to local bodies could not be in

Partiament Debates tte Ttlto Bills

isolation but should be preceded or accompanied by

devolution from the Centre to the States. He also

pointed out that the Prime Minister himself was on

iecord that Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu'

and West Bengal had done much ln regard topanchayatl raj institutions. If so, he could notunderstand the distrust of the State governments

which seemed to have prompted the Centre to bringup the Bills. Upendra added for good measure thatthe Nagarpalika Bill contained some rather "funny"provislons-such as Ward Committee and ZonalCommittee-and that he assumed "some bureaucratswho did not know anything about municipaladmtnistration" must have drafted the Bill.to

L K Advani was another prominent Opposition

leader who partictpated in the Rajya Sabha debate'

He observed that those who supported the Bill hailed

it as historic, while those who were opposed regarded

it as diabolical device to usurp the powers of theState. He attributed this controversy to lnept handlingby the government in preparing the Bill and bringingit to Parliament without mobilising consensus on

essentlal points. Advani felt that unanimity on some

of the essentlal features of the Bill could have been

achieved if the government had so desired' His own

party had been urging a Constitutional status forpanchayat bodies for a long time' In fact, as on date'

out of about 72 corporations in the country' 37, whichwere mostly in Congress ruled States, were

superseded. He felt that the Amendment Bill was an

exerclse to correct the declining image of the Prime

Mlnister and was nothing more than an electiongimmick. In conclusion, he offered three suggestions'

Ott. *^t"" to replace the word 'State government'with

47

Power to the people?

; the second was to follow the Sarkariaon's recommendation on decentralisation.

If these o suggestions were not acceptable to thet, the third course open would be to refer

the BillPrakash

as the HWhen itmade aintroduNRYJawaharsome

trainingfeatureshad mad

for d

ConstiunimpwhichNehru'.

The ebate in the Rajya Sabha did not continue

a Select Committee as proposed by Satyall

use was adjourned sine die on lg August.reconvened on I I October, Rajiv Gandhistatement in the House announcinq theon of the Nehrr. Rozgar Yojana (NRy).12 Thepresented as a parallel programme to the

Yojana (JRY) which had operated forin rural areas. Rajiv Gandhi had hoped

:d for such a programme strongly apparentwith the alleviation of urban poverty, there

nal Amendment. The Rajya Sabha was. So were the newspapers the next day

the effort as 'Rural Jawahar'- .I_trrban

that the two programmes launched in the vear ofJ Nehru's centenary would help to reihforcethe -urban links and become eventually a

e common for both town and country. Urbanwage loyment, housing, shelter upgradaUon forlow-in families, urban micro enterprise$ and

self-employment were to be the principalthe NRY. Earlier in the day, Rajiv Gandhi

a similar announcemernt ln the l,ok Sabha.While the elements of the prografirne were $oundand the

isnod the fact that the programme wasconceived in a hurry as part of a strategy to ..sell" the

, the timing went awry. The Rajya Sabhawitnessed dally scenes of acrimony as the Oppo$ition

Parliament Debates the Ttuo BiIIs

demanded the immediate resignation of thegovernment on account of the Bofors controversy'Neverthless, some parliamentary business continuedand the debate on the Panchayat and NagarpalikaBills was carried on. Murasoli Maran, who wouldbecome the Urban Development Minister in thesuccessor government, considered the two Bills to be

a'virtual war' on the States.t3The Bills were only thetip of an tceberg concealing a lot of hidden rnischiefhe felt and the States were expected to toe the line ofthe Centre in needless uniformity' Ram Jethmalani,who would occupy Nirman Bhawan nine years later,thundered that the whole attitude and the philosophybehind the measures was undesirable, the timingand motivation highly objectionable, and the mannerin which the measure was being projected andpresented to the people of India almost obscene. Inhis view, the Rajiv Gandhi government was a l€une

duck and had no moral authority to tinker with theConstitutlon. He also mocked the idea of JRY andNRY as if they were gifts from the Nehru family.Chitta Basu, the veteran Forward Slock leader opposed

the Bills in principle because they passed on allresponsibility to the States but curtailed their rights.He accused the government of ignoring the AsokaMehta and Sarkaria Committee recommendations.Chaturanand Mishra conceded that regular electionsand reservations for SC/ST were good provisions butsetting up State Finance Commissions without a

provision of devolution from the consolidated fund ofIndia was meaningless.'a

The debate in the Rajya Sabha had all thecharacteristics of a Greek tragedy. Since the twomeasures were Constitutional Bills' at every stage'

49

50

startingrequired

Pouer to tte Feople?

from the motion to consider the Bills. ita two-third majority of those present and

voting. iv Gandhi felt that he could somehow scraDethrough the process. The Opposition on the otherhand determined to block the Bills at every stage.

knew that the term of the ninth Lok Sabhawouldthe Op

to a close by the end of the year. Whileaccused the goverrlment of resorting

to on the eve of the elections its ownbehavio also reflected a keen eye on the forthcoming

As the debate moved on to October l3th.a general expectation that this woUld be

elections

the last tem of business and thereafter the Housewould bably be adjourned sine die.

N Rajiv Gandhi decided to give all that

of the ev RaJiv Gandhi's chance to reply camearound I p.m . Unlike the Lok Sabha where the

party had a comfortable majority and any ofhis s would have been lost in acclaim, Raiiv

there

he haddecided

GandhiHe hadbalance

of constithat the

proceecljurisdictipropriety.

support of the Btlls. As the Rajya Sabhacarqr on with the debate till the late hours

to be less combative in the RaJya Sabha.o marshal his arguments carefully and

with restraint. He started by referring

nal history of the country". Recognisingbate had revealed general acceptance ofdemocracy and maximu[n devolution, heto deal with the so-called controversies onn, competence, substance and politicalHe asserted that the Bills did not imqringethe jurisdiction of the States in anv wav

to the jya Sabha debate as "sometimes stormv,incisive, sometimes reflective but at all

times ; a debate which will adorn the text books

or abridg

Parltament Debates the Two Bilb

and the State List was not being altered. He Justilleda uniform structure for panchayats and nagarpaltkason the ground that the pattern and degree ofdemocracy should not differ from one part of thecountry to another. He reiterated that "while wecelebrate the intellectual, spiritual and culturaldiversity of the country, social tyranny andsuppresslon had to be ended uniformly and that lspossible only if the structure is broadly uniform."rs

On the quesflon of propriety, in particular thecomplaint that the Prlme Minister had dared to tu:teractdlrectly wlth the DMs, Rajlv Gandhi asked "what rtghthas the Pdme Minister to remain as Prime Minister, ifhe cannot feel at home and talk to anyone in any partof the country?" He declared that there was nothlngclandestine about his consultations. When he metthe DMs in Madhya Pradesh, Chief Minlster Moti LalVora had Joined him. At a similar event in AndhraPradesh, N.T. Rama Rao refused. A sammelan of thepanchayati raj representatives was held at Calcuttawith Jyoti Basu's cooperation. The consultatlons wereopen, frank and free with everyone concerned.

Assailing the view that these inltiatives were tooclose to the polls, Rajiv Gandhi reminded hlsopponents that "we were elected for five years and tJreprogramme for decentralisation had been a majorplank of the government ever since it assunred ofllcein 1985". ln his January 1985 broadcast as well asthe Congress Centenary meeting in Mumbai inDecember 1985, the programme for decentralisationhad been made known. Responsive administratlonwas also included in the 2o-Point Programme inAugust 1986. The search for managerial andmeaningful solutions to the problems of unresponslve

5l

l

governanThesubribery, tion and other multiple malfeasafices."

that the proposed Amendments grouldvastly in

52

adminisfor the

consultathe most

and thvoter

in thehad

talkedmake it

wouldflrst d

Fower to ttue kople?

rtion had all along been a strong copcernovernment. "The Panohayati Raj anda Bills, brought forward after extensiveons. should be considered as measures for;ubstantive, systemic transformatlon ln the

rase the number of electqd representFtives)y reduce the gap that now separatQs thehis representatives, Rajiv Gandhl dedlared

for long but the Amendments would. Social justice would be an in[egral

ome cmcial and India wquld be one pf theoping countries in the world to provide a

r an end the kalkaesque nlghtmare thloughpeople at the grassroots live. Their problems

that the ills are the warrant for ending the rEgimeof the er brokers and intermedlaries".

g attention to the provisions for plapningBllls, Rajiv Gandhi said "surprisingly littlesald in the house about these provisions

Dra

which re the heart of the Arnendments; Thenal Amendments envisag€d an entirely new

era ln p . Decentralised planning has been

element. trict Planning and Metropolitan Plafining

platform interaction between states and c€ntralauth ". Concluding his speech in a bufst of

and emotion, Rajiv Gandhi said, "v4e areeloquenbrlngingwhichcan nowwtll benailed t

PatliamentDebates the Tbo Bills

nagarpalika. I invite all sections of the house to adoptthi motion for considering the Bill and therea-fterendorse it as it has been passed by the l-ok Sabhaalready."6

As the House prepared to vote on the motion forconsidering the Bills a new controversy arose.Referring to some ministers who were present in theHouse though they were not members of the RajyaSabha, Advani said that it would be desirable if theywithdrew when votlng took place. The Treasurybenches took this as an affront. Shouting and discordagain threatened to disrupt the House. Finally, themotion to conslder the 64th and 65th Co^,stitutionAmendment Bills was put to vote. There were 83 Nosand 157 Ayeg, three short of the requirement of thetwo-thlrd maJority of the total of 24O members presentand voting. The motion was declared defeated at 3lmlnutes past midnight of 13 October 1989. The Housethen adJourned sine die.t7

Drafting laws is often regarded as a mundane anduntnsptring exercise, of concern only to lawyers andbureaucrats. The preparation of the 64th and the 65thAmendment Bills was an exception. Few Bills hadrecelved so much detailed attention on substancefrom the highest levels of political and bureaucraticleadership. Mani Shankar had not been merely amouthpiece of RaJiv Gandhi but a conscious andtireless participant in the exercise. Both Pandey andI as well as our colleagues in our two ministries hadworked very hard during the previous few months,now it seemed all our cfforts had come to nought.

But this was not true. Between May and October1989 as the debates proceeded in the Lok Sabha andRaJya Sabha, there was also a public debate in

53

54 Pouer to the Feople?

the Blll to be enlarged sb that panchayatsr function as the village Judiciary with powers

Congress as well as the Opposition, talkedte in extenso, praising or deridiftg thetional Amendments but none questioded the

ukarJl, L.C. Jain, Geofge Mathevf, B.K.

to bonded labourers and take actlon 4galnsttlon where Dalits and women were vlctims.

He also e a powerful plea for functions and flnancether: "Negative denunciration of thd RaJiv

in the nthisa politiscope ocould

to go

model

vari ou s'Consti

leaders,and wrConstiessence

S.R. BoNirmal

rm RaJ is not enough. Positive alternatives,the Gandhian paradigm and accepting the

essence the Ambedkar critique fnust be prebentedfor pu examination." Similar articles appeared in

newspapers in different Ianguages.tional status for urban bodies [s not

co us with reforms of urban governmentr wroteB.G. V ese.rs'"The reforms are doomed to failure ifthey are merely intended to gathel votes, thotlgh the

ring general election may be the right time togalvaniNirmal

opinion around revolutionary change."ukarji, one of the most distinguished former

civil strongly argued for decentralisatlon butfrom th Centre to the States and then down to thelocal . Within and outside Parliament, political

As ident of the Janata Dal, V P Sin$h hada Committee under the chairmanbhip ofal. former Chief Ministet of Karnataka with

V R Krlshna lyer, the eminent Jurist wrote

^/spapers with his usual eloquence: "What ls

tttutional Amendment Billr which has fgnitedI pandemonium?"r8 Krishna Iyer wanted the

c and K.S. Krishnaswamv as metmbers.

Parlianent Debates the Ttuo Bills

The Committee in its unanimous report of July 1989

had stated that a "Constitutlonal Amendment to makepanchayats and local bodies effective units of selfgovernment is not 'per se' unwelcome."2o But theReport identilied several 'grave infirmities'in the 64thAmendment Bill and proposed speciflc amendmentsto rectiff them. The charges proposed were reasonableand could have been accommodated. The Report hadeven endorsed the provisions for entrusting local bodyelectlons to the Election Commission and audit ofaccounts to the CAG. However the reasonableness ofthe Report was not reflected in the r,'iews expressedby Janata Dal members in Parliament. The essence ofthe Bommai Report was picked up some months later,when the V.P. Singh government presented its ownverslon of a Constitutional Amendment for decentra-lisatton.

Obviously; the most desirable effect of the Amend-ment initiative was that it had elevated decen-trallsation from a mere administratlve exercise to animportant element of any political agenda.

DD

56 Power totte ftople?

NOTES

of Rajiv Gandhi introducing 64th Amendmetrrt BiI.ha Debate, l5 May 1989. See (aiiv candhi, Sbtected

and Writings, 1989 Vol V. Fublications Dilr'ision,t of India, 1991.

I,oK ha Proceedings, May 1989.s statement in the Constituent Assemblv; Cited

by ath Chatterjee, MP during debate on theintrodMay I

of the 64th Constitutiortal Amendmerlt Bill.L.ok Sabha Debates.

of Rajiv Gandhi introducing qsth Amendment Billon7 1989. op.cit.Cen Councll of Local Government dnd All India Council

rs meet, February 1989.oft of Calcutta Corporation Mayor during the vlsit of

the Commlssion. Cited by Rajiv Gandhi in his $peechintrod the 65th Constitutional Amendment Bill. 7

of S. Shahabuddin, MP in Lok Sabha. Debhte on, and 65th Constitutional Amendment Bill, S dugust

L,ok Debate on the 64th and 65th Constitutionalt Bills, l0 Ausust 1989.

hk

the 641989.

Rajya

RajyaRajya

LokRajyaIbin-

8.

a

lo.I I.72.

13.14.15.

16.17.18.

Debates on the 64th andBills, 14 August 1989.Debates, 16 August 1989.Debates, l7 August 1989.

65th Constitrltional

t by Rajiv candhi in the l-ok Sabha and RajyaSabha about the Nehru Rozgar Yojan4. Proceedings of the

ll October 1989.Debates, 13 October 1989.

replying to theRajyaIbid.Votlng

October 13,

Rajya Sabha. Proceedings, l3Iyer, V. R. -lllusion and Realitf",

debate, by Rajiv Gandhi in ther989.

October 1989.Hrndustan fimes,

New September 28 & 29 1989.

I9.

Parlionvent Debates the Tluo Bills

20.

Verghese, ts.G. "With Due Care and Caution", lndian Express'New Delhi, 6 June I987.*The Basics of Democratic Decentralisation", Report on

Panchayats and Self Government of the Committee appointedby V. P. Singh, President, Janata Dal. A Janata DalPublication, Delhi, July 1989.

-a-

eral Elections and After

The gen elections held in late 1989 led to theformation of the non-Congress National Front (NF)governm t with V P Singh as Prime Minlster.Notwl ling the opposition that some qf its

had shoum to the RaJiv Gandhi Bills, theconsUtuFront not now abandon decentralisation d.s an

the contrary, to strengthen the federalagenda.structure ral became an important elementof the N F'ront manifesto. Apart from someessential items like regularity of electlons and

on which a political ' consensus wasalready the NF government wanted to showthat aconfer

more concise legislation, which Wouldstatus on local bodies but at the

e provide enough flexlbility to $tateto have their own anangements, was

possible. For such an enabling legislation thethought ttrat it was not necessary to have

two te Bills. The Bommai Corhmittee had alsofavoured the 64th Amertdment Bill and

ln lts place "an integrated and well thoughtof constitutional legislation sparlning, local governments and cooperatives". r

out piece

as such was percelved, and rt$htty

Generol0lections and'\fter 59

so, as a single obJectlve, relevant to both urban and

rural bodies. Accordingly' the Law Ministry was asked

to prepare a common Bill instead of separate versions

from the mlnlstrles of Rural and Urban Development.

A group of ministers, headed by Shri Devl t'al'determtned the broad features of the legislatton. Ameetlng of the Chief Ministers endorsed the proposals'

' The N F Government's Composite BillOn 4 September 199O, Dinesh Goswami, the L,aw

Minister, introduced in the L,ok Sabha a Composite

Bill covering both the Panchayats and the Munlci-palities (Bill No.156 of l99O). The Statement of Ob-

Jects and Reasons appended to the Blll was not sub-

stantially dtfferent to what had accornpanied the Rajiv

Gandhi drafts. The absence of regular elections, pro.-

longed supersession, inadequate representation of theweaker sections, insufffcient devolution of powers and

lack of flnancial resources were recognised as majordeflciencies. As before, inspiratlon was taken fromArticle 4O of the Constltution. It was noted that whilethis Directive Prtnctple applied to village panchayats'

urban local bodies should also be organtsed to enable

them to functlon as unlts of self-government.The earller obJectlons about the competence of

Parliament to legislate on the subJect were quietlyput aside. As ln the case of the previous versions, theAmendment Bill added a new part, tltled "localauthorltles", covering both the panchayats andmuntcipaltties. Ttre Btll envisaged a gram sabha atthe grassroots level in each settlement or habitatlonand the constltution of avillage panchayat for a group

of such settlements at the village level. The provision

for the gram sabha comprising all the voters in a

60 Power to tte Feople?

setUement as some kind of general assembly.ps the most important contribution of the

l government to the Amerldment exerbise: itd the need for proximity between the peoplerepresentauves since the Average poprllauonsabha would be about lO0O to 2OOO people.,

non-Congress posiilon while the Balwantprescription for three-tiCr panchayr prescription for three-tiCr panchay4ti raj,

exclusion of the other, cad:le to be iderntifiedlgress maxim. It is an irony of history that'ess governments, as in Kafnataka, and West

rre than the Congress led governt'nentsMaharashtra, GuJarat of Rajasthan;,'ision ln the Goswami B[ll for urbarl localabout the same as in Rajiv Gandhi's

'ee t54pes of bodies-a Ndgarpanchayfat fornsiilon from rural to urban, a Munricipalsmaller urban areas hnd a Munhcipal

TWo or such gram sabhas wol.rld be constitutedformally a panchayat at the villaEe level comprtslng

lves elected from territoy'lal consfltuencies.It was I to the State governm4nts to conFtitute

ts at other levels and have either a two-tierora tier setup as they desired. The choide wasnot on any philosophy ofparichayafl raJ; it hadmore to with its political overtones. The Balwant

Committee had preferred a thred- tierent wtth panchayats at the village, blocktrtct levels whereas tAsoka Mdhta'sndatlon was for a two-tier arrangement

Since theof the District and Mandal panchayats.3soka Mehta Committee had been appbintea'arl'i Desal's tlme, it somehow came to be

wasV.P.

andofa

Rai Meh

and direcomm

duringseen asRai Mehby simpas thenon

perhapssuch as

The pbodlesversion.areas inCouncil

Bengal, p ued three-tier panchayhts as much as or

GeneratElectlons and.Afier 61

Corporatlon for larger urban areas-were envisaged

but populatton cut-off sizes fot these three categories

were omitted. The attempt to rationalise slze classes

presented in the previous Bill was thus $iven up. The

reservation of seats for Scheduled Castes andScheduled Trlbes, as also one-third of the seats to be

reserved for women, were maintained as before. Ward

Commlttees and 7.onal Committees, which Upendrahas regarded as "funny" in the Rajiv Gandhi Bill'became serious enough now but were left to be

establtshed at the discretion of the State goverments.

The provision for a State Finance Commisslon was

maintalned but separate provisions for conductingelectlons by the Election Commission and audit by

the CAG were omitted. As for bringing rural and urbanlssues to a common distrtct planning platform and

establishing metropolitan planning committees at least

for a few large cities, I urged Murasoli Maran' thenMinlster for Urban Development, to seize theopportunity and make provision for them in the Bill.Maran shared to some extent my belief in these

matters but felt the mandate was limited by such

consensus as was already avallable. In his view, the

Btll could address only these essentials. We were

back to ttre marga darshan approach of N.D. Tiwari'Since the V.P. Singh Bill was based on consensus

in the National Front there was a flicker of hope thatit could be carried through Parliament but externalevents extingulshed that flicker' Even before theintroduction of the Bill, the stir agalnst the Mandalformula of reservations had begun. V.P. Singh stillhoped that the agitation would subslde and thebusiness of the government could be resumed. On 12

October, Deshmukh, who had contlnued as Prlncipal

62 Power to the P,eople?

to the PM, wrote to $ome Secretariesthe PM's "strong desire" to hdve a

e programme of decentrallsation and callingBut a new set of problems emerged withilrl commencing his Rattr Yatra. The NF,s

a Mandal versus Mandir issue. On199O Advani was arrested in Sama$tipur

Bihar. The BJP decided to withdrAw itsthe government and on 7 NovembEr thegovernment was defeated by 346 votes to

L42. J as the Bofors controversy had killed RaJivGandhi's it was now the turn of the EabriMasJidSingh

cast its consuming shadow on thq V.p.

Rao Government and tbe two Billl as a

Secreconvesufor ideas.&JP'ssurvival23aftersupportV.P.

The Cthat of VIn his

asktng ifral with

determln

reintrodu

Gandhi's

mdrashekhar government which followedSingh was in power for only a few months.

as Special Assistant to the ConlgressRajiv Gandhi

could pick up the thredds ofpanchayatiChandrashekhar government. He was

Mani Shankar sent a note to

strictly cted not to do so.a It was expected thatthe , for whom decentralisatlon was animportan part of its manifesto, would malke a

I bid to come back. Rajiv Gandhi'son 2l May l99l was a major set back

though ections were held. The Narasimha Raot was sworn in on 2l June: it pledgpd toe the Panchayati Raj and Nagarphlikawithin 1OO days as redemption of Rajivromise. However, Narasirqha Rao was ]waryls in the process ahead. During the dfbateof the

Generol Electians and AJter

in Parliament in 1989 certain items had stood out as

patently controversial. Entrusting the conduct of the

Fanchayat and Nagarpalika elections to the Election

Comrhission, making the CAG responslble for auditof the accounts; and entrustlng some of the funcUons

to the State Governor as distinct from the State

Government were some examples. Apart from these'

there was also not much enthusiasm among the MPs

for the District Planning Committee or the Metropolitan

Committee as constitutionally mandated bodies'

Narasimha Rao wanted the Amendment Bills to be

dtfferent from what the V.P. Singh government had

proposed but he did not favour a comprehensive or

"rnUition" effort like that of Rajiv Gandhi: In fact

Rao's perception of what was feasible was not very

different from that of V.P. Singh.Yet, at the same time, the Narasimha Rao

government could not go back to the tmncated version

of tgSO where V'P' Singh's goveinment had limited

itself only to a few enabling provisions leaving most of

the actions to the State governments' The Congress

government had to show that the decentralisation

charter was not a mere legislative shell but a serious

endeavour for empowerment of the people and the

local bodies. A common bill would have prompted a

more careful scrutiny and perhaps achieved more

consistency and complementarity in regard to some

aspects like proximity between people and theirrepresentatives, functions of urban and rural bodies'

rural-urban relationships, etc., but neither the Rural

Development nor the Urban Development ministries

were keen on a Joint exercise. S'R' Sankaran was

then the Secretary, Rural Development' Given his

dedlcatlon and commitment to rural development

63

hls cru purpose of strengthening panchaya,ti raj.He

64

and povoccu

issues of

to urbanwould oMadhav

he no lo

and a co

Someundeslrablrevealed,

Power to the F,eople?

rty alleviation, Sankaran regarded tneof Nirman Bhawan as n$t very relevgnt to

gram sabhas, villaget panchayatE andLl development at the iBlock or Mandal

He, therefore, felt that aJoint exercisedelay matters and dilute attention.s

le, his counterpaft in the Urban

set up to guide the process had

yar had become a Congfess Mp by now,ger functioned as liaison man or a

n was an objective oommon to lbothlaw for that purpose would have been

consequences as subsequent experience

level as to the Panchayat Bill &nd not applfcable

Develo t ministry, was also reported not veryenthus c about a joint effort with the RuralDevelop ent ministry. The redrafting of theAmen t Bills thus conilnued as two separateexercises,group of

pursued by two separate ministriest The

A{un S and Sitaram Kesri as common mernbersbut wtth Sheila Kaul, Minister. UrbanDevelop t, and Venkataswamy, Minister, RuralDevelop t, were held separately; Although fvlaniShankar

troubles oter between the pMO and the twoministries concerned. Whatever the characterilsticsand diff ces between the rural and the urrban.decen

more d rle. However there was rro indication orto that purpose from the pMO. Thesuggestl

preparatio and pursuit of two sepatrate bills duringRaJiv Gan 's time, more as a result of circumstarrces

thus became sanctified,as a prece{ent.itles between the two bills persisted iwith

and

General Elections attd' Ajter

T\ro Bills IntroducedOn 16 September 1991, the 72nd and 73rd'

Amendment Bills were separately introduced in the

L,ok Sabha by Shri Venkataswamy and Smt. Sheila

Kaul.6 Whlle the two bills broadly resembled the 1989

verslons they differed in some important respects' Inthe case of ttre Panchayat Bill, differences were ltmitedbut slgniflcant. The provislon for a gram sabha as aconclave of all voters, introduced by the V.P. Singhgovernment, was included. As for reservation ofchairperson's positions for SC/STs, the draft contained

an affirmative provision rather than merely anenabling clause. Dr. B.D' Sharma, the notedanthropologist and civil servant, had drawn repeated

attention to the fact that during the flrst generailonpanchayatt ral in the country there were hardly any

SC/ST Sarpanches and mere membership in thepanchayat would not be suffictent for empowerment'Pdor to the Amendment, Andhra Pradesh and Madhya

Pradesh had provided for reservation of SC/STs forthe posts of chairpersons in the panchayats' Thisexperience had prompted a similar provision ln the

Constltutlonal Amendment Bill. The 1989 Bill had

only stated that nothing would prevent a Statelegislature from providing for reservation for SC/STsor women in the Chairperson's position but the l99ldraft made it more Positive by stipulating that suchresewation should be made and it was left to theState legislatures only to determine the manner'

In the case of the Bill for the Munlcipallties, the

dlfferences were more significant. Firstly' in the RajivGandhl verslon, size classes were indicated for nagarpanchayats, municipal councils and municipalcorporatlons. The revised version was content with

65

mentsger urban area' but left It to State govern-determine those wlth regard to some broad

66

menUoand a

criteria.ity, theshouldontobeddeviati

Pouer to the People?

a'transitional area', a'$maller urbdn area'

regard to the chairpersbn of a muriicipal-989 Amendment Btll had proposed that this'e indirect but stipulated some restr[ctions

l. The 1991 Amendment:Bill left the [nattered by the States. Thirdly, in another maJorthe Bill did not make any provision for

cipallties stuck to thd provisions of the; while the 72nd Amendment Bill in fegardayats speclfically chose to leave actounts

of panchayats to the State governfnents,Bill repeated the provisions of the l9g9

t muntcipal accounts should be kept asthe CAG and the CAC shall caube the

rc audited.T It is difficult to understahd ther this difference between two bills formu-

.e same government. It could not be thataccounts were considered more onerous

chayat accounts and, therefore, shoilld bery the CAG. It can only be concluded that

oversight. It is also appa_rent that [n the

Ward or Zonal Commlttees leaving the same to bed ed by the State governments. Curior:tsly, in

rtant respect, accounts, the Amendment Billfor the1989 Bto pancand authe 73verbion,advisedsame toreasonlated by

thanhandledthis wasprocess f formulating and approving t\,!'o bill$ on asimilar s bJect, the two ministries,of Rural Develoo-ment an Urban Development proceeded on thelr own

interaction. In contrast, Vinod panddy andith some other officials concerned. ubed to

with littlI, alongmeet t daily during the variorirs stages of draft-ing thePanc

agarpalika Bill and relating it tb theBill. The Joint Parliament Committeb also

General Elections ond' AJter

overlooked the difference between the two Bills. Even-

tually the matter was reconciled and the two Bills as

passed contalned the same provision.The Naraslmha Rao Amendment Bills were also

consplcuous in completely omitting any provision for

district planning or metropolitan planning both ofwhich had been regarded as substantial innovatlonsto which RaJiv Gandhi had brought strong personal

support and conviction. It, was of course known thatconsiderable technical and administrative support was

needed to make these entities functional; NarasimhaRao could have pushed it but decided not to do so

possibly fearing delays and a lack of support for these'innovations'.

Bills Referred to JPCBoth the Bills were lntroduced in the Lok Sabha

on 16 September 199 I towards the end of themonsoon session. When Parliament reconvened, inwinter, a motion to refer the two bills to JointCommlttees of both houses of Parliament was made

in the L,ok Sabha by Venkataswamy and Sheila Kaul'The RaJya Sabha concurred in the motion on 2lDecember. In keeping with the pattern of two separate

Bills, there were two separate Joint Comrnlttees.s The

Joint Parliamentary Commtttee (JPC) for th'e 72ndAmendment was chaired by Nathuram Mirdha andincluded Mani Shankar Aiyar, Deve Gowda' SudhtrRoy, P M Sayeed, Deepak Ghosh, SubramanlamSwamy and others. The one for the 73rd Amendmentwas chaired by K P Singh Deo, and included ChlttaBasu, Malini Bhattacharya' Sumitra MahaJan' N EBalram, Gulam Rasul, Pawan Bansal and others'

direct ons from territorial constituencies. As forthe cho ce between a two-tier and a three-tierpan setup in the rural areas, the draft Bill,

rg viUage panchayats mandatory left it to

68

Thecontaln

consens

while

Oneof theverslonshould

felt thateven ifpmerepresen

Power to tte PeopLe?

nd Amendment Bill on panchayats did notcontroversial issue on which the Joint

e was expected to spend much Ume. Besides,s was already available on reservations and

issup was about the represerltationand ML,As. Even in the Rajtv Gandhi

had been agreed that the Mps and MLAsout of village panchayats. As for the

level and the district panchayats, opinioned. The Rural Development ministry itself

ch representation was not required anded, MPs and MLAs should be non-voting

The State govermnents, as also sometives of the public who had submitted

the

the Sta to decide on intermediate or district levelpan or both. The JPC preferred uniformity, as

in the Rajiv Gandhi draft, and recomrnendeduer set up as mandatory. As for election ofns, the draft proposed that at the village

level and lntermediate level it should be direct but atthe level the method could be decided bv theState. JPCs'recommendation was that it shouldbe dtrect at all levels.s

The of MPs and MI"As

to the Joint Cornmittee, also exprresseddifferent . Obviously, the MPs and MLAs werevery mu in favour of their inclusion as they clearly

of power otherwise. Eventually, a co{npro-feared I

Cenerol Elections ard AJter

mise was worked out as described in detail in thenext chapter.

As for the 73rd Amendment. the Joint Committeeappears to have been much more proactive. As iscustomary, the JPC sent out a questionnaire to varlousindividuals and institutions and also invited a few togive oral evldence. I was one ofthe ten persons called.On 8 Aprll 1992 I submitted a number of points tothe committee; I strongly urged the setting up ofDistrict Plannlng and Metropolitan PlanningCommittees and other provisions for promotingdecentralisation within large cities and proximity topeople. Though I was still in government service atthat time, the JPC was kind enough to hear my viewsin my personal capacity and as Vice President of theNational Institute of Urban Affairs. The JPC receivedresponses to its questionnalre from forty individualsand organisations and memoranda from anotherthlrty. It also undertook several field visits. Afterthirteen sittings, the Committee finalised itsrecommendation ln July 1992.to

JPC on Ward.CommitteesThe Report proposed that the provislon for Ward

Committees should be made mandatory in the case ofcities with more than three lakhs of population buttheir size and composition was left to be determinedby the State legislatures. No speclfic mentlon wasmade about Zonal Committees but it was open to theStates to form these or other committees. Theimplications of this vagueness are discussed inChapter 5. The Joint Committee also felt that theDistrict Planning Committee and the MetropolitanPlanning Committee were Recessary; it revived them

.Pouer to tte People?

inserted addittonal provislons to the

JPC'S on I.inancc Commls$lonA addition by the Joint Committee'was in

regard o the Finance Comml$sion. While the

settingendorsed the provlsion in the bills for

of ffnance commissions at the State level.itwas of view that the Central Finance Comrilissionshould enter lnto the area of locat bodv

andBill.u

ffnancestund oflocaltheSlngh,JointcruclalclauseaddedCo

localThtsthe Cen

d advise how to augment the consollidatedState to supplement the resources of the

es in the State. This change was resisted byMtnistry and the Minister, Dr Mantrohanalso opposed to the idea. However, the

was lnsistent; it felt the change waslocal body flnances. Accordingly, a new

amend Artlcle 28O of the Constitutlon wasspecifically required t$e Central Fbranceto address the financial needs of State

ts ln the context of the requirements ofand reports of State Finance Commlsslons.

a far-reachlng change because traditlonallyFinance Commlssion had limitled itsto the needs ofthe States. The dhange

made it

andown

for the States and the State Flnancens to take note of the needs of thd rurallocal bodies and reflectt the same lfr their

and reports to the Central FlnanceIn effect, the Amendment considerably

widened the mandate of both the Central arrd theState ce Commissions.r2The.effect of thls new

tn the assessment of local bodies' Ilnancialneeds the impact on the worlting of the Oentral

General Electtons ottd Afier

and State Flnance Commissions are discussed in asubsequent chaPter.

Thc JPC RePorts and AfterBoth the Joint Committees sent their

recommendatlons on the Bills to Parliament in July1992. Soon after the government and Parliamentbecame preoccupled with various other mattersincluding theAyodhya issue' However, the recommen-

datlons of the JPC were discussed in detail by the

Cabtnet for two days. The range and durailon of the

discussions were greater than any held at the drafttng

stage. Eventually the recommendations of the JPC

were accepted, barring a few, Four months later, on 1

December 1992, Venkataswamy and Sheila Kaul, the

two ministers concerned, moved the motions toconsider the 72nd and 73rd Constituttonal Amend-

ment Bills as reported upon by the JPCs.r3While the

government agreed witlt most of the recommendatlons

of the Joint Committees some offlcial amendments

were proposed as well. One was to limit direct elections

at the village and intermedlate levels and not all the

three levels as suggested by the Joint Committee'Regarding elections, the Joint Committee hadproposed that conducting them should be theresponsibility of the Chief Electoral Offlcers (CEOs) ofthe State. Seshan, then Chief Electlon Commlssioner'felt that entrusting local body elections to the State

CEOs would affect their work on Assembly and

Parliament elections. He is reported to have informed

the government that neither the CEOs of the States

nor their election boxes would be available forconducting local body elections. The government'

therefore, decided on separate State Election

7l

72 Power to tte pbople?

(SECs). Subsequent experience hasshown this decision to set up such sepa_rateSECs, th prompted by odd circumstances wasactually wise step.

As happened three years earlier, the Z2ndand the Amendment Bills were taken up together

tlon, on I Decernber l992.raThe debatecontln for two days. Since the Joint Committees

y reported on the Bills, there were hhrdlv

f where the executive authority of a

Bansal of

any maj polnts of dissent during the debate. KashiRam a former Mayor of Surat, lamented thatthe 73rdquestion

dment Bill had not addressed the

should be placed-with the elected Heador wlth appointed Municipal Comrnissioner. p&wan

handigarh, who had been an active member

for consl

had alrea

the Joint

Bill shoul

Ag thc Y

of the J t Commtttee, elaborated on the need forDlstrict

the draft and thus rectified maJor omlssions, Theproposal twiden the

amend Article 280 of the Constitutioh-toof the Central Findnce Commi$sion

to consl er the reports of the State Finance

was-was generally welcomed. Sharad Dighea lone voice in questioning the wisdom

of provi for MPs and Ml,As to be represented incity rents. He also felt that the Amendrnent

have provided some guidelines for size

corporaof nagar panchayats, mtrniclpalities andl5

and Metropolitan Planning and howttee had added these measures to

ends both thc Governmcnt and thc Bills

the debate was mild cofnpared to WhatOverall

Generol Electlons and AJter

had taken place in both the Rajya Sabha and LokSabha three years earlier, in 1989. Shahabuddin'who had opposed the Bills earlier on grounds of both

Jurisdictton and substance and who had continuedas a focal point of opposition after several of hiscolleagues had resigned from the l,ok Sabha ln 1989'now generally supported the Bllls "with all the lacunae'all the faults and all the omissions because thebills as they have come out of the Joint Committeesrepresent the natlonal consensus". Mani ShankarAiyar, who had drafted many an eloquent speech forRaJiv Gandhi and was now an MP from Myladuthurai,Tamil Nadu, was also unspectacular; perhaps therewas no combat to lnspire him. All that Mani could dowas to lament that "when we are at the brink of thesingle most important systemic change in ourconstitution, we should have such a thin atten-dance".16

As the Lok Sabha moved to other matters, furtherdebate on the two Bills was delayed. Several thousandkar seuaks had assembled in Ayodhya with theintention of building a temple for Ram in place of theBabri Masjid. Parliament hovered once again on thebrink of chaos. The MasJid itself was demolished on 6December 1992. On 2l December, a vote of no-confidence against the Narasimha Rao governmentwas defeated, with 106 Ayes and 334 Nos. The LokSabha resumed its legislative business immediatelythereafter and moved on to a class by class discussionof the two Bills, which were passed the next day. 17 On23 December, the Rajya Sabha approved them withoutmuch debate.rsThe passing of the Bills came withinless than 2OO days after the Narasimha Raogovernment had assumed office. Despite the short-

73

74

comlngs

Power to the People?

the polnts of departure from the RajivGandhi n, getting the Bills through Parli4mentwas an mplishment, deftly achieved. NarasimhaRao had a better understanding of the limits ofParliam nt's perception and eommitment topan ral and urban local governance; he pnshedfor and a consensus on What was feasible.He was not visible as the chief protagorlist ofthe d tralisation plank but made sure his aidesand performed. The party could claim tohave won battle launched by Rajiv Gandhi thoughthe combat with ground realities was still to

rights inAfter

Kennedy's passion and rhetorlc for civillaw.

passing of the Bills, ratification by halfthe Sates requlred since the Amendment impingedon the of the executive power of the Unionand theof the

as laid down in Artidles 73rd and 162nstitution. After the ratificationi the

Amendm Acts, renumbered as the 73rd and the74t}], the assent of the Fresident in April1993. Th State governments then had time till April1994 to their existing laws on panchayats andmunl ties into conformity with the Amdnded

follow. Inln much

Constltuof the

presen

some respects, Narasimha Rao performedsame wav as Lvndon Johnson had in

on. A comparision of the principal fealturesfferent versions of the Constitrltiont Bills and the Act as

byfinally passled isa chronologr of

events.ln Table 4. I followed

Generat Electiorts ottd Afier

ag ,_,gH

iHeE.F

'X(J^

o9.' C)

a o-

.sx^bEEL\Qtr

qo

:EgEi,H IEig't€;tEF€

=?5EEli#EE5€ssEs;.9

q

a

Lq)

q)

q)

$l

xv

,4

m

a:\.,

z

*$lEa ; fi !'qu,s,85*fi { giIE;i€: Ei sB'gs s5

A).EU)

{$;!fi,i * i*,gE iiE;=FE:E{ :s!..rsis;!g:gE msE;E::tgs

:q H EjE:,:te;ut

3 s E E E * e E ; ; : g t €

g E

g s

vlEcl

. |)0E€ihr?;.-5

Esi

o

qat

l-

tJav

q)F

q)

a)

+.,

o'thpI

.F

-iq)

F

76

t,l-'rrtt iil< aIERI'\tc<

oL

g!J

lJr

-.

C.o

Fotuer to the People?

.$ si

^'.r tr'=*EE'xx5 \.,'

kq)bo('!

o0).'9.z&

a

.o

v)

a)

L

€

q)

xivl

'-lv)lml

(J

t)

z

t,c!?i. !l

&.a

aL

gC)

i?

v)

oEi

Q. .o

L

OJ

'r.t

3

.iri,! i.a-g*g=E

.,,.+o.gF$$ii E FszAE;>dS

U)L

*.r t.H; i I,.\^€€'-H,-i-:5 rr --V-^*rOC!gtr

:s!:iEi''r+Jli+rl{;iv>E3i:5';

:ilsis,E sslEgE

I tr!IEEI C+.lf-Opli.s,

$ | EsS

General Electtons and Afier 77

t4

*J :i

-9U\oERF-r

qJ t-,1

!.t >

{Edq)

^EtE|.'.Utr

8u

EHeEIi* EEEEir3*€.ts'F go -tsi;ss;;t E;!rQ-,rltr*';*9 tri:i3.; F€s'Ed:sS E *

Ol,

o .14

oe (!u Bi

.Ltr?,oH 4_Et';t o

3 Ei;

nq)

F

B

al

Fi

xiJ

lr)

ultw

zO

v)

.e-H A

o !_- >.cuobo

oF-.;qSqb.5 b6 E

tr

+- s E 3 E H . ? E i . ? c

*: E's i H F s 3: E E 3€pbb !-6*':P,''1 ':E

EEEE.!+i!;E:!;g

v)

a)

78

lvtI]J Y

Ir H

IERtF.tr-

Patuer to the Ppople?

I | -1..irr I WVX I O '-r

'=i l:-.:jxtHxx E li!;- '4 li^-dst<3

darb"+E^,e E '!!.etr

8o

!ooL)-Pv,:

ilo,^+J

.4e^1.

:9(dTE'i:

^r^.v X

(n

'6TJ>:

.g d€ "

.ii i1dfi{!rixzSia:i. J o qJ

d:>E€

v)

AJ

l-o

.P.i

O

x

)'-

q;v

z

(g

'; ".r

ir aTl | | .r E(

;3; *; F

E-9€tsef,',8 Ei ai u

"-'fi*.c.<f,t9g.E€E

U)

r.'|

'i ?'i>:

€!tgEfEFb{€ 3.ff;'; ri r i sm!E5i!;E€:i;[tgEs;:t;;

in3a'1o\ka 'a

is:s fi iE*e :.e '- 6 ) 3 A*'60€ 6

E€EFH;Hg;i;U ;:9 !d o *A 6*FF::€b-.9nor4tevg:g;#:EE

a)r,l

b IEtrF la>n l€sg lbF

EMIE$

Geruerat Elections ortd Afier 79

ul

+r llalvdth\U)

88.FF

9.? :(r) oAa

a r'6+8.9cbn E

.g $r

b*rE'{EEqo

Gtbp

da'!

O

z

Ul

E3s)q)

xi(

.r,lx

tt

UI:v

z

^ill*|

,- v t! r*< :Y

Q.-vv(/)9q >!t q)

6. HEIO OE:LLO-

'1 ^Ex ht- Fr. +, H e

q

! boo

'i >,

;!.9-9io6!

s; a$ i:;$ FE f,S:^9f; E.E frEEE E H!n;?9:!;&E*li-6;!.:X=.'!.J"'rEEot.EtH>.:i!€!

dji ooQvl5r'l E

-t ", Ex^:oX

aa)

o

+rooEto€EEtoit .gon

ttl5'*(J \J{3PR

c.r

-tFrE'{9E'xx5 \'/

80 Power to the Per

OO

o>()(Jo

ad?(zEa

ooo>q){JO

(dP(!zn|r'l

,ple?

OCJ

ox

ooo

69c{>ta

oc)

o>

oQo

d9(>t6

aq)

t-q)

AJ

xldl9lnlxl

v)l

UI

iv

z

oc)

ox

ooo(d!?(>ta

OOJ

o>

oooc! !? (>t6

F'U)

oc)

o>

ooocd!?(>ta

q)()

o>a

ooo

d9dE€6

lJH 5 F.E E i;Ei+'otsv c) (- tro!-(!{?ar:bo'tr=tsr .. e E 3 " F;tr :(J!r.=-E:FFT3:

e;:-s frgf ;P'F;PEE?-EsiEErEf;eS;€E;.gE [E0

tr

?E>oE$o.6ila

li;!rE5li$$!$

Gerleral Elections and Afier 81

ta

.rJ x:U\(4^.:FL{'-r

F:=+rEh,E<!

r0J

t) >i

{.)

< trt

.i rlb*rli^etr'=*AJtr

,qo

oi .EL

Cqo c=u)|Ja> xo)9EE0i > '-'

+= Fi

Itd.:A<9-;;b*'-ti0Jo^.i:.1

^n \J

{ (!N o d

vlc0)

t-a)

a.)

d

xv

q

v,v

z

aJJO.-9:b0Eo'!9t:AqJdz>E

a

'6'd's9

v)

oJO.d

9r:h08o.EPh!Aocdz>E

t1

d

6ri'sP

q

*f i-EF- *?5e!BE aii, -

" F E 3.oE,€F*_,P;."deq P ! E X rq +- & a y, ! ;AFs[SitsEEEEE

(g

'6n>:

th

!l

Ecl:E9F.:EEo6EE

O ET^oio g Bblx o 6

5Et r

a2

ItaI r.r :?

Ir H

lE8.lF.tcr

Potuer to tIue People?

.$ $ib*rti^,., E '='*pF,go

8Et€gfi!s:-,E3;rifiEi;i;,;EE 5 E H E 1# 5

na)

La)

S)a

'tr-.{

rda)

xts

Ct

a

d

t4

v

z

v)

tI

Q

General Electlans ard AJter

Table 4.2: Ctvonologg oJ Euents

83

1958

1977

1986

r988

August, 1988

December 1987-June 1988

November 1988

May 15, 1989

June 5-8,1989June 12-14, 1989

June l8-2O, 1989

June 24-26, 1989

Balwant Rai Mehta report adopted,recommending a three-tier panchayatsystem.Asoka Mehta report recommends atwo-tier set-up with panchayats atdistrict/block levels.Singhvi Committee urges thatpanchayati raj be given constitutlonalrecognition.Sarkaria Commission on Centre-Staterelations did not favour amending theConstitution. Instead it preferred amodel bill based on consensus.National Commission on Urbanisatlgn(Correa Commission) submlts ltsreport. Recommends a two-tler set-up for larger cities and regularelections for all city and municipalcouncils,Series of workshops wlth the DMs:PM as an actlve partlcipant: Focuson Responsive Administration,Panchayati Raj and District Planning.Conference of Chief Secretaries :

Stress on the focal role of DistrictCollector.RaJiv Gandhi introduces the 64thAmendment Bill in the Lok Sabha toamend the Constitutlon.Seminar of Municipal Officers.Sammelan of elected representaUvesof the southern. region in Bangalore.Sammelan of elected representativesof the eastern region in Cuttack.Sammelan of elected representativesof the northern region in Delhi.

84

August 8,

August lO

1989

1989

, 1989October I

October I 1989

Late 1989

4, 1990

Pou:er to the People?

65th Amendment Bill forNagarpalikas introduced tn the LokSabha.The lnk Sabha passes the bill whichthen goes to the RaJya Sabha.Nehru Rozgar YoJana (NRY) sqhemeintroduced in urban areas par4llel toJawahar Rozgar Yojana (JRY)operating in rural areas.Announcement irl Parliament.The Panchayat and Nagarpalika Billsdefeated in the Rajya Sabha.Formation of the National FrontGovernment with V P Singh aF PM.Dlnesh Goswami, the NF GovernmentLaw Minister, introduces in the l-okSabha the Constitutlon AmendmentBill Number 156 of lggO as acomposite Bill.Fall of V P Singh Government andsubsequent formation of theChandrashekhar Government.Assassination of RaJlv Gandhi.Narasimha Rao Government swornin.'Ihe 72nd and 73rd ConstiturtionalAmendment bills separatelylntroduced in the Lok Sabha byVenkataswamy and Shetla Kaul.Motion for referring two Bills to theJolnt Parllament Committee adOpted.Jolnt Parliament Commlttee flnalisedIts recommendations on the twoAmendment Bills.Venkataswamy and Shetla Kaulmoved the motions to consider the72nd and 73rd Constitut[onal

September 16, 1991

November

May 21, IJune 2l,

December

July 1992

December

1990

I, l99r

1992

General Elections and AJLer

December 21, I9Sz

December 22. 1992December 23, 1992April 1993

Amendment Bills together as reportedupon by the JPC.Vote of no confldence againstNarasimha Rao Government defeated.Bllls passed in the l-ok Sabha.Bills passed in the RaJya Sabha.Amendment Acts. renumbered as73rd and 74th, received the assentof ttre President.

86 Power to the People?

NOTES

Committee Repert: Janata Dal, July [989.Raj at a Glance, Ministry of Rural Develppment,

S. S. ed. Izgislatiue Stotus oyf Panchagotl Raj inOp. cit.

4. Mani Shankar Aiyar's uritten comments on the drallt of thisman

5. ln with S. R. Sankaran, Former Secretarv, RuralGovernment of India, Hyderabad on l8th

F 1999.6. The 72nd Amendment Eill l99l tBill No. 158

ofl l) introduced in the tnk Sabha lry Shri Venkat4swamy,for Rural Development and the Constitutipn 73rd

Bill (Bill No.l59 of l99l) introduced in the Lokby Smt. Sheila Kaul, Minister for Urban DevellopmentSeptember 1991.243H in the 64th .dmendment Bill 1989. Article

of the 72nd Amendment Bill and Article 243U of the

of the Lok Sabha, 16 September and Rajyaon 2l December l99l .

oJ hc Joint Parliament Committee on the Con$titution72nd AmendnTent Bill. Lok Sabha Secretariat. Julv 1992.

oJ the Joint ParltanPnt Committee on the Con$titution74th Bill. I,ok Sabha Secretariat. Julv lgg2.

243 ZD and Arttcle 2432E inserted by the JPC.of Reference for the I Oth Finance Comrhission.

1992y of Finance, Department of Economic Affaiis, Juneand Terms of Reference for the llth Finance

, Ministry o[ Finance, Department of EconomlcNotification dated Delhi: 3 Jr.'rlv 1998.

Debates. I December 1992.

3.

Bill.

9.

lo.

I l.t2.

13.t4.15.16.t7.la.

I,KIbid.tbid,tbid.I,ok Debates. 2l December 1992.

Sabha Debates, 22 December 1992.

Conformity Legislation

Article 243 ZF of the 74th Amendment stipulates that'any provision of any law relating to municipalities inforce in any state, immediately before thecommencement of the Constitutional Amendmentwhich is inconsistent with its provisions should beamended or repealed before the expiratton of one yearfrom such commencement'. A similar provision iscontained in Article 243 N of the 73rd Amendmentrelating to panchayats. The provision ofone year as acommon factor in both cases was simplistic. In thecase of the panchayats several States had already inplace comprehensive laws and regulations since the196Os and the 197Os. To a large measure the 73rdAmendment was built on the substance of these laws.In the case of municipalities many of the States wereusing laws derived from British India such as thePresidency Acts of the nineteenth century as in Bengal,Bombay or Madras. While there were many commonfeatures among these laws, particularly in regard tobudgetary and administrative matters, their spirit andsubstance were not geared to public participation ormunicipal autonomy.

Some of the States felt. therefore, that more tlme

Power to tte Feople?

should glven for revlewing the existing municipalI and amending them as necessary. lVithinthe of Urban Development itself therne was

for this plea. Besides, there was alsothat an opportunity would be available toa comprehensive municipal lawwhich could

bea

some.syrthe hope

views,within

Delhilaws.

and any extension of time would have requlredthe Amendment itself, which was not

consld appropriate. The Mlnistry of Ruralorganised a conference of State Mi4isters

in July 993, adopted a l5-point programme forconformity legislatiorr and set up aof Minlsters to pursue the followup acflon.I

The of Urban Development organised stmilarengaged some institutions like theTimesmeetlngs

Research Foundation and the NIUA to help the Statesin amending legislation.2

LaWSThe rmity legislation brought out by the

States from a mere repetitiorl of the provlsionsof the 7 Amendment to fairly elaborate amendments

State laws. All the flfteen major States andofsome of smaller States like Goa, Manipur, Tf:ipuraand as well as the union territofies of

Andaman and Nicobar enacted conformitydoes not however mean that the conformitywas the product of serious analysis and

thrddng. In as many as twenty states the conformitylaws

for many States. Notwithstandlng all theseimplementation of the, Amendmerrt Actyear was a Constitutional requlrement

put in place only at the last mlnute, in, when the time limit of on€ yearwas nearlngApril 1

Co4for mity Legts lati,on

Its end. A revlew of the laws reflects much ambivalenceand lack of enthusiasm on the part of many States;very few have been willing to seize the opportunitywhich the Amendment provided for long pendlngreforms ln municiPal law.

Slze ClaselficationIn regard to the setting up of munlcipal bodies'

the 74th Amendment provided three types-a nagarpanchayat for transitional areas,. a municipal councilfor a smaller urban area and a municipal corporaflonfor a larger urban area. Some broad criteria such as

populatton and its density, revenue generated,employment in non-agricultural activitles' etc., werementioned in Article 243 I of the Constitutlon butthe details of these and other criterla were left to be

deffned by the States. The amended Municlpal Acts ofAndhra Fradesh, Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra have

glven some attentlon to this subject in theiramendments. For example, Andhra Pradesh, inproviding for all the three types of muntcipal bodiesusing such criteria, also specifled that all distrtctheadquarters should be classifled as not lower thanfirst grade municipalities.3 The Maharashtra Actprovldes for population cut-off sizes such as 3 lakhsfor a corporation, 25,O00 for a municipality and IO'OOO

for a nagar panchayat whtch should also be wlthln25 krn from the territorial limits of a munlclpalcorporation.4With regard to the size of the munlclpalcouncils most of the amended municipal laws providefor a minimum and maximum of munlclpal wards,ranging from ten to fifty-five, depending on thepopulatlon. The numbers for corporations are more.

Fanoer to the fuople?

Com of MunlcipalitlesAs compositlon, Article 243 R(ii) 0f the

Amendm t provides that persons with specialand er<perience in municipal administfatton

may be as members of a municipal cquncilbut wtth votlng rtghts. In Uttar Pradesh, TamtlNadu,HimacprovislonAs

Rolc ofThe

were ofagalnstestablish

elections, while many States have followedthe p:

few Sin the Representation of People Act, a

have introduced additiotlal features suchas a twoHaryana

child norm as in Delhi, Andhra Pradesh.Kerala. Anti-defectiort laws werd also

enacted Kerala and West Bengal. These are bmallbut t pointers to the fact that eledtoralreforms be a parallel effort at the local body levelwhlch not have to depend on some nationally

design.

and MLAsof MPs and M[,As in municipal

councils corporations has been dealt with veryln different States. It was a vexatious lssue1989 and the subsequeilt drafts of l99lnot avoid controversy. Wtrile some people

rtghtalso

asthan, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh,Pradesh and Assam laws have tnade

such nominatlon wlthln certain litnits.squaliflcation of candidates to contest

view that such membershtp would gospirit of the Amendment-whtch was toe panchayats and municipalities as a

distlnct iler of governance, some others felt thatexcluslo of MPs and MLAs would create anappre about loss of power in their mind$ andeven lead to conflicts of turf. The manner in

ConJormitg lzgislorflrln 9l

which this was handled in the Panchayat andNagarpalika Bills also differed and was quite confusing'In the 1989 Rajiv Gandhi version village levelpanchayats were excluded and it was left to the State

governments to provide for representation of MPs and

MLAs tn panchayats at the intermediate and distdctlevels but without vottng rights.6 In regard tomunicipalities, the 1989 draft contained no specific

provision for representation of MPs and MLAs butthere was a general provision enabling Stateleglslatures to determlne their composition.T The V.P'

Singh government's version left the entire compositionto the Sates in the case of both panchayats andmunicipalitles and did not make any speclfic reference

to MPs or MLAs. In the Bill introduced in 1991 by theNaraslmha Rao government the provisions of the 1989

version were repeated. However' the Joint ParliamentCommittee dealirtg with the Panchayat Bill was of theview that representation of MPs and MLAs withoutvoting rlghts would be inappropriate. Eventually acompromise was worked out whereby voting rightwas allowed except in the election of the chairpersonof the panchayat. Section 5(b) of Article 243 C

accordingly stipulates that the chairperson of a

panchayat at the intermediate level or district level

shall be elected "by and from amongst the elected

members thereof". The participation of MPs and MLAs

in such elections was thus precluded.In the case of the Nagarpalika Bill' the Joint

Parliament Committee similarly added a provision toArtlcle 243 R for representation of MPs, MLAs andMLCs with voting powers. However' unlike thePanchayat Bill, the JPC did not stipulate anyrestrictlon on the vottrg powers relating to the election

92 Power to the people?

or any other matter. This patenthas led to some contrdversies and courtwell. In 1995, in the case of a few

es in Rajasthan including Alwar thens were removed by votes of no conftrdence.

moved the RaJasthan High Courton the ground that Mps and Ml,.ds had

in the motion. A single Judge of theHigh Court held that sirtce Mps and MI_As

'whole house' for the purpose. Stnce theycipate, the Division Bench held that the

f conlldence in the instant cases would fall.accordingly that the Petitioners should

be reins ed as chairpersons. s

from Haryana, a decislon of the punjaband High Court went even furthel.- TheHaryan

of theancase smunici

ThesefornotRaJ

were not elected members of the municipalities, theircipation did not vitiate ithe motion of no

. The Petittoners went on appeal. A DlvisionBenchthough

the Rajasthan High Court has held thatand MtAs are not'elected members' of

the cipalities in so far as votes of confldencehave to carried by a two-third maJority of the'wholepart of

use', the MPs and M[,As should be tanren as

did notmotionsIt was

represen

Muniandgivesi.e, eith

that they shall neither have the right to contebt northe rightor Vice-

vote in the election or retrnoval of pre$ident

Municipal Act while providing fortion of MPs and Ml,As speciflcally states

resident of a Municipal Committee orCouncil as the case may be. The punjab

High Court has held that Article 243Rlimited delegation to the State governrhents,to provide for representation of MpS andot, but it does not give the State any rightMl,As or

ConJormity Legrslafton 93

to restrict the vottng powers of the MPs and MLAs so

represented. The High Court has also held that since

MPs and ML{s who are nominated to municipal bodies"being elected members from a much largerconstituency of which the Municipality ltself forms apart would have the right to vote while considering

no confidence motion in the Municipal Committee"'

This decision almost confers an inalienable right on

MPs to vote in any Panchayat or Nagarpalika even

though they are not elected members of these bodies'e

The intention of the 73rd ConstitutionalAmendment however is very clear and the patent

contradiction between Articles 243C in the 73rdAmendment and243B tn the 74th Amendment cannot

contlnue. The situation is further compounded by thelack of uniformity in the provisions made by the

different State governments in regard to therepresentation of MPs and ML,As in municlpalities' InMadhya Pradesh, Haryana and Tamtl Nadu, MPs and

MLAs are represented in municipalities but have either

no voUng rights or restricted voting rights. In AndhraPradesh, Assam, Karnataka, Rajasthan and UttarPradesh, representation with votlng rights has been

provided. Gujarat, Kerala, Maharashtra, Orissa and

West Bengal have not provided for such representationat all. In the case of Punjab, representation wlthvotlng rights is limited only to MLAs. It is also

interesUng to recall that in the case of Tamil Nadu

the initiat amendment of the Munictpalities Act carried

out in 1994, when Ms Jayalalitha was the ChiefMinister of Tamil Nadu, provided for membership ofthe MPs and Mt^A.s with voting powers.'0Subsequently,

there was some rethinking by the Karunanidhigovernment and a second amendment was brought

Power to tle Feople?

out in I which limited the membership of Mpsand only to corporations, municipalitids anddistrict- panchayats but wtthout the porlver tovote.rr conformity laws thus indicate the conttnued

and confusion in the thinking of different

Local Electionswith to the organisation of elections. the

legislation from the different States has

States.autono

more orElection

more, asElectionfollow the

rolestyle-insch

implications for decentralisation and localare dlscussed in a subsequent chapter.

been uniform in the provision for Statemmission. The establishment of such

nstitutionally recognised bodies the Statehave chosen by and laqge to

and practices of Central Election.Seshan, the former CEC, has boen a

for many SECs in substance if not inatters such as the determination of electiondemarcation of constituepcies, conduct of

Co as an independent authority has helpedelections the local bodies to be regarded as an

acuvit5r which was previously dismissed asa misce us responsibility of District and Sub-Divisio administration. Because of the very largenumber representatives being elected, as also thehigher that local elections Usually enJoy, theState have allowed the State Eldction

a fair measure of autonomv. Further-

elections, , they have been, by and large, assertive.The a of the State Election Commissioner inKerala in 1998 in disqualilring more than IS,OOOelectedto submit

tatives to panchayatF for their fallurerts of election expenses and the O[.issa

ConJormtfu Legislalion 95

SEC's obJectlon to the State seeking in the High Courtpostponement of the local body electlon 1997 are two

illustratlons of the Point''2

Dtetrtct Planntng Scdcd DownWhen the Panchayat Bill was moved in Parliament

and the drafting of parallel legislation for Nagarpalikas

commenced, RaJiv Gandhi felt emboldened tointroduce his proposals for district planning' The

confabulations at the offlcial level, the eventualcompromise and the provisions made in the first set

of Amendment Bills have already been recounted insome detail. It has also been stressed that there were

Just no takers for the District Planning idea in the

V.P. Singh or the Narasimha Rao governments and

the item was brought back to the table by the JointParliament Committee.

Though the JPC revived the provision for a DistrictPlanning Committee (DPC) it departed from the Rajiv

Gandhi version of the Bill in two important respects'

One was about composition. The 1989 draft envisaged

a compact total of twenty-one members to be elected

from among the elected members of the Zilla Parishad

and the municipaliUes in proportion to the ratio ofrural and urban populations' All the members of the

DPC were to be elected and there was no provision fornomination. If in a particular district 30 per cent was

the urban populaUon, 30 per cent of the DPC members

v/ould be elected from among the elected members ofthe urban local bodies in that district and the rest

would be elected from the Zilla Parishad members'r3

The Joint Parltament Committee did not speciff anynumber but recommended that "in order to impart ademocratic character to the DPC not less than

4/Sthselected

size of thfunctionsthe Con

schemesassignedBengal

Power to the Feople?

the total number of mernbers should be sothe panchayats at the district levdl and

of the ities."ta The secondritem of departureto the chairperson of the DpC. Whilewas wlth

the Rajivof theas well, setflng at rest future questions Aboutthe locati of the DPC, the parliamentar5r comrtritteeleft this e to be decided by State legislatut'es. Itcan be that in the Parliamentary commlttees,discussi , apprehensions about the Zilla parishadand its becoming a centre of power andfears abo t the eroslon of influence of Mps and Stateministers volced. The Parliamentary committeeperhapsopen. It243 ZD

it prudent to leave these queStionsore remained content by insertingArticle

the Bill for setting up the DpC.The eness in the constitutional provisiotns is

reflectedMadhya

the Conformity laws as wbll. In tlre cdse of

and.hi version provided for the chairpersonParishad to be the chairperson of thd DpC

lesh, a State minister d,esignated blz theis the Chairperson of the DpC, whilb the

ChatheDPC

of the Zilla Parishad is a member andCollector, the Secretary, The size of the

has flxed at L5, 2A or 25 depending on thedistrict and other characteristics. The

ed to the DPC are as stipulatdd in

monischemes the district including Central and $tatesponsored

itutlonal Amendment. Additionallv.evaluation and review of the develop-.rrt

as well as Local Afea Developlnentby MPs and MI-As have also been

the DPC.'5 The provisions in the Westtrict Planning Committee Act lgg4 aresame but the Chairperson of the Zillaabout the

Conlormitg t egistrttion 97

Parishad has been designated as the Chairperson ofthe DPC and the District Magistrate and Collector as

the Secretary of the Committee.r6 The West Bengal

Act also provides for the State government to establish

urban development sub-committees in the DPC'

In the case of the other States enabling provisions

for DPCs have been made in the Panchayat Act'Municipal Act or the Town and Country Planning Actas the case may be. The chairperson of the ZillaParishad is designated to chair the DPC in Bihar'Kerala and Karnataka. Maharashtra has tried tocontinue with its earlier model of the DPC with aState minlster as chairperson. In April 1999 it passed

a law for creating DPCs but kept the ministerdesignated for the district as the chairperson' The

President and CEO of th;e Zilla Parishad are ex officio

members and the District Collector, is MemberSecretary.rz In Tamll Nadu, the District Collector has

been made the chairperson of the DPC' while the

chalrperson of the Zilla Parishad is regarded only as

a member. From time to time this provision has been

objected to by various political parties in the State as

grossly inconsistent with the spirit and substance ofthe Constituttonal Amendment. Early in 1999 a highlevel committee with representatives of differentpolittcal parttes and members of legislature, chaired

by the local self government minister, considered thisissue along with various other matters ondecentralisation. While three members of thecomrnlttee objected to the existing arrangement, othermembers suggested that the chairperson of the districtlevel panchayat can be designated as Vice Chairpersonof the DPC retaintng the Collector as the Chairperson'r8

Thls vlew, whlch is in very sharp contrast to the rest

98

of theof the

cannot

to setAssam,have

more as a coordination committee with a techntcalrather

Power to tte ,people?

try, is, however, in keeping with the standNadu government that the dlstriOt level

ts ttself superfluous and that thb DpCregarded as a panchayati ral body but

an a political mandate.some States have made ha,lf hearted attempts' DPCs, some others like Andhra prhdesh.

GuJarat, Punjab and Uttar pt'adeshcontent to pass enabling lawd only.

However, Uttar Pradesh made a stat't in March lggg.removed to bring the Zilla parishads closer

to the by placing District PlanninA Cblls inthe hads, wlth the Zilla Parishad as the

>n of the DPC and the parishad's CEO asry.2o Generally, the DpC continues to be a

slowits

The MshrlftThe

though

beendrafts

MPC; itrevlved

The

action.

which prompted the Ministry of Ruralto write to several States in April 1999

Planning Comnlittee givcn short

has been virtual non-starter. The backgfoundand rati in providing for such. committees have

etropolitan Planning Committee (MpC),ded for in the Constitutional Amendgnent,

in detail in an earlier chapten Theby the V.P. Singh and Narasimha Rao

ts did not make a reference at all to thethe Joint Parliament Committee which

provision.levant recommendation of the qJointComrnittee, Article 243- Zt,, for a Comrfrittee

Cor{ormity Legtslotion 99

for Metropolltan Planning merits mention and tsquoted below.

'"There are twenty-three metropolitan cities irtthe country where the metropolitan area wouldencompass not only the maln Clty Corporatlonbut also a number of other local bodies, bothurban and rural, surrounding the matn CltyCorporation. By the end of the century, thisnumber may rise to about forty-flve. To ensurethat there is an orderly development of the vastarea, proper plans need to be drawn up inassociation with the plan of the maln city.Constderable lnvestments ln these cities are alsoundertaken by Central and State governmentagencies. It is necessary to coordinate theseinvestment plans wlth the development plans andrequirements of the metropolitan city.

There ls, therefore, need for a suitable plan-ning mechanism which would take care of theinteraction between the various local bodies, bothrural and urban in such metropolitan areas. Atpresent, the system that is adopted in many me-tropollses is the creation of a metropolltan devel-opment authorlty. The functions assigned to themetropolltan development authority differ fromcase to case. In some cases, they are only plan-ning bodies while in some cases they take onexecutive function, particularly of major schemes.Further, at present, these bodies are not demo-cratic instituUons. They are nominated by theGovernment.

The Conrmlttee therefore feel that there shouldbe a provision for constitution of a Metropolitan

Power to the F.eople?

Committee to prepare a draft developmentthe Metropolitan area a$ a whole. Inr order

by,

planto irCom

from amongst, the elected members of the

a democratic character to the saidttees not less than two-thirds of the

such Committees should be electedof

and Chairpersons of tJ-e Panchayatsin the metropolitan area in proportion to thO ratio

the population of the municipalities andof the Panchayats in that area. The other details

to composition of the rsaid Comrnlttees,the er of filling the seats therein, the

oftatlon in such Committees of Governmentand the Government of the State and

other and institutions. the functionsrela to planning and co-ofdinatlon for theMetr politan area to be as,signed to suchCo ttees and the manner in whictr thec of such Committees shall be chosenmay

The

243 ZE.'an area

census.ln the

left to the State lrgislatures." 2r

int Parliament Committee, accordinglyed the insertion of a new provision-Article

243P defined a metropolitan alea asa population of ten lakhs or more,

in one or more districts and consisling oftwo or municipalities'. The multi-municipal

metropotherefore, an essential requiremerlt of aarea. Prima facie thefe are twenty-flvengglomeratlons according to the 1991a population of ten lakhs or more locatedof Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, I{erala,

sueh

GuJarat,PunJab,

tra, RaJasthan, Madhya Pradesh,

ls,

Pradesh, Bihar and West Bengal. In the

C onJormitg Le g islafion lol

case of Bhopal and Ludhiana, the metropolitan areaas presently dellned conslsts principally of a singlemunicipality. It is, therefore, open to the MadhyaPradesh and PunJab governments to consider whetherMPCs are required to be set up for these places. Sofar as the other States are concerned, the MPC is aconstitutlonal requirernent. However, as in the caseof the DPC, while conformity legislation or enablinglaws have been passed by,more or less reproducingthe language of the Constitutional Amendment, not asingle State has set up an MPC so far.

Developmcnt Authorltles Sidetract thc ProcessThe reasons for this sorryr state of affalrs are a

mixture of bureaucratic confusion about the purposeand role of the MPC, lack of political motivaUon and,most importantly, the fear of the DevelopmentAuthorltles which exist ln most of these twenty-threecltles that their domain will be undermined. Whllethe Calcutta Mekopolltan Development Authority itselfwas brought about in special circumstances-morefor mobillsing funds and coordinattng implemen-tation-most of the development authorttles ln theother cities were inspired by the Delhl DevelopmentAuthority model of large scale land acquisition, realestate development and housing construction.Eventually these bodies became consplcuous emplresof public works and patronage as in Bangalore,Hyderabad or Jaipur. The creation of these authoritleswas no doubt facilitated by the fact that most of theclty corporations concerned were under supersesslonas was the case in Chennai and Calcutta. In the caseof greater Bombay consistent opposition from theCorporation limited the BMRDA mandate to some

ro2 Power to the .Feople?

broad of planning contiol and coordinattpn andselected estate actvities. The Calcutta authoritvalso tually became a huge amalgam of publtc

State governments have been ratherworks.appreh lve about the large staff which thesedevelotlme,

authoritles acquired over a period of

separaThls ls a totally mi$tdken perceptlon.

The M Planning Committee is expected tobea level, democratlcally set up body whlch willbring a mandate to the whole exerciseof litan development planning. The develop-ment a orlties could serve these Metropolitan

Commlttees as their technical secretarlat.er mlsconception is about the pOssible

Jurisdiction between MPCs and DPCs. Sinceareas are predominantly urban, the rural

ch would become surplus in the eventMetropolitan Planning Commlttees are

component in the MPCs would be

Alternatively, a functional delineation isle. The Tamil Nadu government attempted

rHons of tl.e revenue dlstricts whlch arein the metropolitan area.2s Under the

it is up to the State governments to

Anoconllict

or therather Where the urban areas are co-teriminuswtth e districts, such as Bangalore, Chennalor the cutta urban district, the problem does notarise at . In such cases a DPC is not necessarv.Where part of a revenue district is included in a

redeflneMPC wo

area, State governrrlents can suitablyboundaries for the purpose of DFC and

alsoto do by providing that the MPC for the Chennai

area wlll be deemed to be a DFC forthoselnclud

theJurisdlction of the DPC and the MPC to

Conlormi$ Legislation 103

avoid conflicts, if any. Both functtonal and geogra-

phical delineation of responsibilities are feasible andit ts up to the States to choose either or both'

Statc Flnance ComnrissionsThe next important provision in the Constltutional

Amendment relates to the setting up of the StateFinance Commtssions (SFCs). States have followedup the provision through conformit5r laws and also byestablishing the SFCs. There has not been anyreluctance in this regard presumably because Stateshoped thls would facilitate increased Centralassistance. The amended Article 28O of theConstltutlon stlpulates that the Central FinanceCommlssion should make recommendations foraugmenttng the consolidated funds of the States, lnthe context of the requlrements of rural and urbanlocal bodies and take into consideration therecommendation of the SFCs. The first State FinanceCommissions were established in twenty-flve States;of them fifteen have submitted reports. The SFC

recommendations are required to be placed beforethe State legislature along with 'actlon taken reports'.This, however, happened only in nlne cases.2a Insubstance, the value ofthe SFC reports appears to bevaried. In some cases they have been Just an exerclseln compiling revenue delicits of the local bodles andforwarding them to the State governments in the hopethat the Central Finance Commission would pick upthe tab. In some other cases, the SFCs have tried towork out a divistble pool of taxes whlch could beshared between the State and the local bodies. A fewSFCs have also attempted to work out unlt cost ofservices and norms for capital and revenueexpenditure.

l04 Power to tte kople?

The tional requirement is that SFQs areto be set p once every five years. By the year 20OOthe seco generation of SFCs will be due in most

then the recommendation of the l lthStates.Central Commission will be known. It *ill beseen to hat extent the reports of the State

ns have been used by the CFC and whatitsthe Saccompas much

tions are in regard to the future work ofWhether future SFCs will be able tomore through these initiatlves dependstheir mandate and terms of refererlce as

on theirup theCentral

. The mismatch in the timing of setilngte Finance Commissidns vls-a-viS the

Commission is discussed in detail inthe cha on functional domain.

ConJormitg lcgislation r05

NOTES

Anntnl Report, Ministry of Rural Development, Governmentof India, 1994.AnrunI Report, Ministry of Urban Development, Governmentof lndia, 1994.

3. Andhra Pradesh Municipalities [Gradation of MunicipalCouncils) Rules. 1994.The Maharashtra Provincial Municipalities Act; MunicipalCouncils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act,1965, modifled up to April 1995.Refer to Article 243 R of the Constitution of India and therelwant State Acts regarding inclusion of experts.Section 3 of Article 2438 of the 64th Amendment Bill,r989.

7. Refer to Article 243O of the 65th Amendment Bill. Also referto Article 243Q, sub-section 5 for enabllng provlsionsregarding indtvidual experts.Nevt/s item in the Panchagati Raj Update October 1998.Delhi: Institute of Soclal Sciences, regardlng Rajasthan HighCourt statementl see also Rajasthan High Court, YogeshChandra Saini and others Vs State of RaJasthar and 22others, D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) Numbers 794 ,779,8OO and 8Ol of 1998, Judgement dated l5 July 1999.RaJpal Chabra vs State of Haryana and others: Civil WritPetition Number lOt6 of 1995: PLUlio,b lnur Reporter Vol )O(1998-99.Tamil Nadu Municipalities Amendment Bill No I duringJayalalitha's timei Select Committee on Tamll Nadu UrbanLocal Bodies Bill 1997, Report of Select Committeepresentation to the Assembly on 24 / 7 f / f 998, IA BillNumber 42 of 1997.

2.

4.

J.

6.

8.

9.

10.

I l.

t2.

Tamil Nadu MunclpalitiesKarunanldhi's ttme.News item in Statesman, I Ithapuram.

13. Report in Panehayati Raj Updote,Institute of Soclal Sciences.

Amendment Bill No.2 during

November 1998, Thiruvanan-

l9 November 1998. Delhi:

r06

t4,15.

16.

t7.

18.19.

20,

2t.

22.23,

futuer to tle People?

See 2 of Article 243 Y of the 65th Amendmont.ReWrt the Jotnt Parlianvnt Convnittee. Addltlon of Article

Section 2.to get top Priority". News ltem ln Htndustan

Bhopal, 2 December 1998.in West Bengal District Planning Committees Act,

1994.Ordinance of April 1999,

Report of the inter-party group under the chairman$hip ofrni, Government of Tamil Nadu, December 1998,

t to decentralise planning". News item inKosl"U.P.Hindu Lucknow, 5 March 1999.NewsJune

of the JPC.ReportTamll adu Metropolitan Planning Committee Act, Townand try Planning Act 1974: Proposed Amendments for

Metropolitan Dwelopment Authority, October 1996.Ra, Update. October 1998.,

-o-

regarding Rajasthan DPCs, Hindu" Jaipur, 3

Outcome of Panchavat andMunicipal Elections

Regularity of elections was one of the few items onwhich there was political consensus even during thevarious controversies preceding the ConstltutionalAmendment. Opposition leaders like Karunanidhi,Ramarao and Jyoti Basu had all agreed that electionsshould be held regularly for urban and rural localbodies and supersession should be resorted to onlyin exceptlonal circumstances and only for shortperiods. At one stage, in one of the discussions ondrafting, it was also suggested that supersession oflocal bodies, which varlous governments irrespectiveof their party identification have indulged in, shouldbe totally eliminated. The Bombay MunicipalCorporatlon Act of 1888 whlch contained no provlsionfor supersession was cited as an example. However,the legacy of Article 356 of the Constitution, wherebythe elected governments of States could be set asideby the Centre, lingered. It was argued that if theCentral government could supersede a Stategovernment in special circumstances, similarcircumstances could not be ruled out in the case oflocal bodies. The power to supersede and dissolve an

108 Pouer to the People?

elected was therefore retained as an expf€ssionof In one of the drafts it was sug[estedthat as the case of the State gwernments, whereaction Article 356 would need ratiflcation bv

within two months, there should be asimilar n about the dissolution ofa local bodvbeing by the State's legislative assembly. Later,this n was removed but a ceiling of sixmonttrs the total period of dissolution was retained.This on in the Rajiv Gandhl version survlvedthroughand was

e V P Stngh and Narasimha Rao versionsincorporated in the 73d and 746

Am ts of the Constitution.243 E states that "every panchayat lrnless

sooner lved under any law, fof the time being inforce, s

stipulates that an election to constitute ashall be completed before the expiration of

a period six months from the date of its dissolution.The goes on to state that if a panchayat isdisso before the expiry of its duration and ifanotheronly for

chayat is constituted, it shall continuee remalnder of the perlod for whidh the

panchayat would have eonfinued. .Article243 U

appoinArticle

muni

bodieswouldlns

continue for live years from the date oft for its Ikst meeting and no longer". The

down identical provislons in regard toes. It was thus expected that for the first

uld have the "right to live", that such lifenormally for five years arld that disscilutioncircumstances would be only a tempomry

time in dependent India, rural and urban local

measure.

Outcome oJ Potrchayaf and' Mtnicipal Electia ns r09

Road to Electlons, neither Smooth nor Speedy:Blhar DclaysThe conformity legislation passed by the various

States in the wake of the Amendments havel'eproduced more or less these constitutionalstipulations. Many of the States constituted State

Electton Commissions but very few States heldelections quickly. While the amended Constitutionstipulated fresh elections wlthin six months aftersupersession and specified a normal tenure of fiveyears it did not set a time limit for establishtng thenew genre of panchayat and municipalities ororganising elections for this purpose, after theAmendment came into force. They were repeatedlypostponed in Assam, Karnataka, Orissa, parts of Goa

and J&K. If they were held for panchayats, municipalelections were delayed. Tamil Nadu held local bodyelecUons only in f 997. By end of 1997 elections hadbeen completed in most of the States except Biharand Pondicherry, parts of some States like Orissaand Uttar Pradesh, and some other smaller States.

Subsequent events, however' have shown that whatappeared to be a firm course for local democracy

could sttll be delayed and deflected' The Bihar case

amply lllustrates the situation. In August 1993' justtwo months after the Constitutional Amendment wasbrought into effect, the Bihar Panchayati Raj Act was

amended. Its provisions are almost identical to thosein the Constituttonal Amendment. However, noelecUons have taken place in Bihar till the end of1999 despite the fact that in Octo6er 1995 the PatnaHigh Court directed in a public interest litigation'that the State of Bihar should hold elections to thepanchayats by January 1996 at the latest-' In a

llo

conterenderedHighthe dateelectlonselectlonstake plabefore th

other

deftly usmatters.

Power to the Feople?

case llled tf,ereafter, the State of Biharr Apr{l 19964n unqualifled apologr to the

the n of seats to the positlons of panchayat. The Patna High Court quashed the State

orders wherein the quantum of reservationexceeded 50 per cent of the posts.3 The Bihar

went on appeal to the Supreme Courtbut has little to obtain a decision.

In public interest litigatton in February1997, the Supreme Court separately passed an ordersetung e the action of the State governmcnt in

the tenure of the panchayats last elected in1978.4 appeal regarding reservafions of seats isstill pen

. before the Supreme Court. Though thesame Co had ordered that continuatidn ofpan without elections was not legal, the Biharg t's stand ts that it cannot hold electionstlll thereNothing

a decision on the issue of reservations.course prevents the Bihdr government in

de a fresh arrangement of reservarilonsthe Constitutional stipulation as so fntrnyhave done. Thus, since the Amendment

limiting it

of the Co tiorr local body elections have not beenheld in

and undertook that within slx weeks fromdeclaration of the results of parliamentary

scheduled for May 1996, the local bodyvould be held.2 However, thts also dld notInstead, matters were deflected by agitatingPatna High Court another issue regarding

r citing one reason or another and alsoCourt cases by various parties to delayof December 1999, the Bhagalpur

holds the dubious national record fornot ha held elections since September 1979: It is

Atbome oJ Panctwgat and Municipal El-ections I I I

also curlous that Darbhanga is the only town in Bihar

where elections have been held on the strength ofseparate court orders each time.

Karnataka DcflcctsThe Karnataka story is another glaring example of

how the regularity of elections can be undermlned' In

December 1993, Karnataka successiully organised

elections for 5,300 village panchayats involving about

75,000 representatives. But even this did not happen

without controversy. Karnataka had set the example

for the rest of the country by enactin$ a panchayat

law based on the 1989 draft of the ConstitutionalAmendment even before it had been passed' Gorphade'

then Panchayat Minister of the State, was the moving

spirit. Elections were scheduled soon after but were

postponed. Gorphade resigned in protest's Finally the

.t""Uo.t" were held ln December 1993' The term of

ofllce commenced in March 1994 and after flve years'

by'March 1999, newly elected members should have

come lnto positlon. In December 1998' it was

announced ttrat electlons would be helC as scheduled.G

The State Electton Comrnlssion was prepared for the

task and notlflcation for the elections was to be issued

by the end ofJanuarY 1999.

However, as the new year began, some doubts

were aired in the State government' The manner of

rotaflon of seats for women and SC/ST candidates as

also so called anomalies in the de-limitation ofpanchayat constltuencies were cited as possible

OitflcutUes whlch flrst needed to be resolved' There

was no explanatton as to why these difflculties could

not have been sorted out ln the previous flve years' In

January 1999 the State government decided to

tt2

postpothe StaPancharesignatiit. Newssuchabout Ithe g proposed to reorganise the nrumberof 5,300 village panchayats into 3,OOO. A publicinterestCourtSupreme granted an interim stay in the mhtter.eIt is unfortunate that Karnataka which in

Pouer to the Feople?

elections to gram panchayats.z In pfotest,e Minister for Rural Development andat, Shri M p prakash, submittdd hisrn but the Chief Minister refused to acceptreports indicated that the real reasbn for

rement was the fear of the rulin{ partythe elections.s It was also reported that

rtion followed and the Karnataka Hightly ordered holding of elections but the

to other States has had more expefienceg in democratic decentralisation has used

scale. Accordirlg to the Ministryevelopment, there are 2,26,1a9 villagein the country with Bl,9E,5b4 members.'o

andthat for rather than strengthening suchdecen tion. Fortunately in many other $tatessuch have not taken place and electionsto the and rural local bodies were held soonafter the dment. At the time of writing, a new

t has taken oflice in Karnataka and haselections would be held soon.

Dlections Yield a Vaet and Varled CropElecti have always been a large-scale evdnt in

by these standards the panchayat andelections following the TSrd and Z4thofthe Constitution have been an exCrcise

India.

on an unof Rural

That out to an average of about fifteen menlbersper pan At the intermediate level, which insome is referred to as the Taluk, Mandal or

Outame oJ Ponchngat and Municipal Elections f 13

Block panchayat, there are 5,736 such panchayats

with 1,51,412 members. Additionally, there are 467

dtstrlct panchayats with 17,935 members. Compared

to this the number of urban local bodies and theirelected representafives is rather limited. As of now,

there are 95 Municipal Corporations, 1,436 MunicipalCouncils and 2,O55 Nagar Panchayats.ItAs mentionedbefore, except Bihar and Pondicherry, and a few urbanareas of Andhra and Goa elections have been held inall the States where the 74th Amendment is applicable'

This leaves out Arunachal Pradesh, J&K, Mizoram'

Nagaland, Sikldm, Dadra and Nagar Haveli and

Lakshadweep. The number of elected representativesfrom the three levels of urban local bodies is aboirt

60,000. The number will be much more if the Ward

Committees are composed of persons elected fromterritorial constituencies similar to the case of thePanchayats.

The most prominent exception to the Constitutionalrequirement of municipal elections is New Delhi. an

area of 43 sq km, an enclave surrounded by the DelhiMunictpal Corporatlon, where the Head of the State

and the highest echelons of the Legislature, Judiciar;rand the Parltament a.re ensconed. The New DelhiMunicipal Council Act 1994, enacted by Parliamentr2

after the 74th Amendment came into force provldes

for a council composed of an official nomlnated by

the government as the chairperson, three members ofthe Iegislative Assembly of Delhi representing theirconstituencies which comprise wholly or partly the

New Delhi area, five other government officials to be

nominated, and two other persons again to be

nominated from the public from amongst lawyers'

intellectuals, traders, social workers, etc. No definition

ll4

of thewhawill bemoot

LeavlngDelhl isand

andhave

has vasbetweenit alsot-lee

6000,Since suthe localthe

work atmeans cl

rest of(McD),

i.e., the Municipal Corporation of Dethinot i:r the NDMC.

t-he numbers wtll change w.ith the spfead of, and formation of mofe and more Nagarand Municipal Councils, there is no

denying fact that local bodies have now re-erfrergedin the as elected platforms for self-goverfrance.Together the number of elected representatives inthe and rural bodies constitute the largestrepresen base of any democracy in the world. It

Power to ttu People?

rd 'intellectual' is provided in the Act butthe specification, it can be presumed there

o short supply in the natlon's capital, It is aoint whether the word ,.territorial

cies" in Article 243R can apply to either aassembly constituency or a municipal ward.

legalities aside, lt can be argued that Newsmall a place to accomrnodate botft MtAs

Councillors in one body. But thatcan apply to several other State capitalsIt is also straining the limits of logic to

Munlcipal Councillors and MLAs in the

increased the funnel of represerltatione people and government. Arithmetic apart,rblishes that Members of parliament andLegislatures, who number no more thannot the only representatives of the people.

a large number of representatives fromies have been released in to the stream,chemistry of representative politics will

e Central, State and local levels ls bv no

undou be affected. The mandate and sphere of

at thts stage but clarity will be demAnded

Outcome oJParchagat and Mtuticipal Electtons l15

by these new representatives and wtll eventuallyemerge.

Rcgcrsatlon of Scatg and thclr Flrst lEPactThe reservation of seats for women, scheduled

castes and scheduled tribes is a maJor feature of the73rd and 74th Amendments. For the SC & ST. thereservation ls ln proportion to their populatton. Thtsprovlslon, whlch was drafted in the very flrst verslonof the RaJiv Gandhi Blll , endured at all subsequentstages. As far as women are concerned, provislon forone-thtrd reservatlon. was introduced in the llrst draftttself. It dtd not become an issue at any stage of ttredebate ln Parltament or outside, though most of themembers who participated in the debates in the [okSabha and RaJya Sabha during 1989 were vociferousabout other issues. The Jotnt Parllament Commltteealso did not make any changes in this regard. All thismay seem very surprlstng in the context of the llercecontroversy now surrounding the issue of reservationof women in the Parliament for which a bill wasintroduced in December 1998 and again tn December1999. Perhaps the MPs felt that panchayats andnagarpalikas were comparatively unlmportant andone-third reservaflon for women in these bodles posedno political threat. It should also be mentloned ttratsuch reservation was made in Andhra Pradesh.Karnataka and West Bengal even before theConstitutlonal Amendment.

The elections and the experience gained since then,even during this limited period, has signiflcantlybrought out the positive aspects of this reservatlonfor women. There was no shortage of candidates. Onan average, there were at least three to four candidates

ll6

perslx ln

concern

oSa

prlnctple to the positions of chairpersons has beeneven signncant. So far as the panchayalts are

, the conscientious participation andof women mernbers and Sarpanches

are becoming a legend. Sqme examplEs arelisted.13

Pouer to the F.eople?

seat ln the rural panchayats and five toareas. The extenslon of the reservafion

abhama Lawand of Blthargaon, near

more all-women panchayats.farflung villages of the Kutch reglon ofmost of the village panchayats are headed

ung and middle aged women, maklngrmined efforts to overcome caste and

division in the viilages and seeking

, Maharashtra widowed at the age of 18,in the fields, dressed as a man, brought

up children, learnt the basics of cultivationtrade, earned the respect of her village and

as an actlve Sarpanch for flve years.Stddhi, another village in Mahar4shtra

known for its watershed management, hasa slmtlar panchayat.Shetkari Shangatana, a peasant movEment

in has been instrumental in setting

hadThe

upInGuJ

bydet

and cleaner administratlon. ta

F Bee, a conservative Muslim womair whokn r nothing about the world outside her home

was "terrilied" initially by her inductiton asanch, did exemplary work in Kalva in

district and was honoured with the bestch award of the government and later on

and

UNDP.I5

Orrtame oJ Patrchagat ottd Mtuticipal Elections Lt7

On the other hand there are also horror stories ofwomen Sarpanches being assaulted for thelrasserHveness, or for crossing the boundaries ofcaste.However, such incidents do not escape attention as

they used to before. When Gundiabhai, the Sarpanchof Pipra in Madhya Pradesh, hoisted the nattonal flag

at the local school on the occasion of the Golden

Jubilee of Independence, she was beaten up for hertemerity. The press highlighted the story and therewas a public outcry.to A few months later the ChiefMinlster invited Gundiabhai to hoist the national flagat Tikamgarh, the district headquarters, on RepublicDay.tt I-eelavatl, a woman Councillor in Madural wasbrutally murdered tn 1997 when she organised slumdwellers and insisted that water supply contractorsbe made accountable to the slum people for delivery.In December 1998, Meena More, a Counclllor of NavtMumbai Municipal Corporation was doused withkerosene and set on llre over a petty issue of watersupply connection in a slum colony.Is Mercifully, suchextreme horror stories are still limited in numberthough caste polittcs and male chauvinlsm continueln less vlolent ways. For example, Adtamma, a villageSarpanch of Karnataka, was voted out before herterm was over on some trumped up charges. The realreason was that she defied some influenttal panchayatmembers who asked her to give up cleaning tolletsafter becoming Sarpanch. Adiamma refused because

cleantng toilets was her profession which earned herfamlly its daily bread.'s

Given the higher literacy and education levels inurban areas, lt was generally expected that therewould be no dearth of qualified candidates to llll thereserved seats and positions of chairpersons in urban

Sharada Koll ln Guntur are Just a few examples of

lr8

localManyhavebeenanin

suchcould

Mumbalbecametotwo ofheaded

and U

'Power to the People?

. The expectations have not been belied.uates and professionally qualifted personsed urban local bodies; for several, thts hasIlrst entry lnto politics. Vandana Ch4uhan,te ln Pune; Premajam, a college prqfessor; Rita Joshi, a Doctor tn Nlahabad: and Dr

tlme entrants who became mayors andtheir ofllce and work a new status andNirmala Prabhavalkar was elected to head

Shakuntala Arya and later Anita Arvaof the Delhi Corporation. Acc0rdlng

available up to Januilry 1999, twenty--Ilve corporations in the countf;v are

women.2oThere is little doubt that the one-

aclesh, Maharashtra, punJab, RaJaSthanPradesh. On the other hand. Himachal

thlrd tlon for women of the position ofhas helped. Some women mavorfs llke

PremaJ and Anita Arya also found their civicuseful tn moving on to become Mernbers

of In some States, thi$ is sought to bedone by oaung mayors every year as ln Delhi or

. In Tamil Nadu, Andhra Fradesh and UttarPradesh. ls determined by the State Eldction

on the basis of cities. However. WestBengal, progressive State in many aspects of

has not provided for such reseryation

reservation for backward classes. theAmendment leaves it to the discretion

of the tes. Such reservailon has been made inAndhraMadhya

esh, GuJarat, Haryana, Karnataka,

As

Pradesh, West Bengal and Tamil Nadu have

Outrome oJ Panchagal and Mttrticipal Electans ll9

not provided for such reservatlon. Tamll Naduattempted to, but slnce the total of reserved seats forSC/STs, women and backward classes exceeded 50per cent, the High Court struck down the provlslon'2rGiven the large percentage of backward classes in thepopulatton, the Tamil Nadu government reconslderedits positlon and dectded that even without reservationthe backward class candidates would have adequaterepresentatlon.

Proflle of the New RepresentativegA detalled proflle of the elected representatlves ls

not avatlable as only a few cases have been researched.

A study of the 1995 municipal elections in West Bengalindicated that a total of 2,061 women contested 555seats in 14 districts, that is roughly four womencandidates for each seat. The CPI (M) candidates won237 seats followed by the Congress (I) with 233' Theremaining seats were won by other constltuents of LFand independents.22 Another study of Calcutta andfour other municipallties indicated that of thesuccessful candidates, in the relatively younger age

group of 36 to 45, a maJority were graduates andpostgraduates and two-thirds of them employed as

well. Similar studies are in progress in severalpanchayats and for urban areas too.

Manner of Regervatlon, a Compler ProceggWhtle the reservation of seats and chalrperson's

positlon has generally been welcome, the manner ofdetermining the reservation has not been free fromcontroversy. In States where the SC/ST population islimited, or promlnent only in a few districts' theproblem has not been pronounced. No established

rotauon.

120 -" Pouser to the Feople?

formula emerged yet as far as reseryation of seatsfor is concerned. In almost all the Statds, the

laws merely repeat the ConstitutionalSome of the State laws. as tn Andhra

Pradesh. Assam, GuJarat, Mahatashtra, eto, alsothat such reservation will be made by

However, very few State Acts indicalte thestipulat

generalshall be

or criteria by whlch such rotationand the necessary rules and regulriations

to followsome S

specllied West Bengal, for instance, has made theState Commission responslble. In Kerala, thePan Act lays down a procedure for dellntting

the publication of the draft of suchdellmlta lncludtng the resefvatlon of Seats,

of obJectlons and suggesfions frotn thepublicsimllar

flnallsatlon after considiering the same. Als prescribed in the electionl rules

formula by the West Bengal government, Inalso, reservation of constituencids has

been en to the State Election Commissiion. Inother , dtfferent authorities are responsible for

the manner of reservation. such As the

ofrotation

seats the situatlon does not $eem dlfferent forand urban local bodies.

States where the conceritration of $C/ST

up have not been made in most cages. Inates the authoritles responsible fornq the manner of reservation have been

Someis not high, as for instance in Hafyana,:r each in the Village Panchayat Samiti

Outcome oJ Parchogat attd Mtttricipal Electiors l2l

and Dtstrlct Panchayat has to be from the SC/ST as

a rninimum and the seat is assigned to that territorial

constituency which has a maximum SC/ST popula-

tton. In the case of reservation for women, it has been

argued that reserving speciflc constituencies for

women on a permanent basis would prevent all oth-

ers from representing that constituency' The opposite

view ls that rotation from one constituency to an-

other prevents any elected representative from build-

ing a relattonshlp with his or her electorate'

The reservatlon of the position of chairpersons ln

both rural and urban local bodies has emerged as a

more important and controversial issue' A Madhya

Pradesh study reveals that most women entering the

panchayat and becoming chairpersons are flrst tlme

entrants in politics and most are illiterate' In many

cases the decision to participate in the elect{on was

not of their own volition. In some cases the outcome

has resulted ln a new class ofsurrogate leaders called

'sarpancha-patt', or Pramukh-swami (husband of

Sarpanch oi Pramukh respectively)' On the other

trani, a study of panchayati raj in Haryana' which

has reviewed the progress of hundred elected women

in four districts of the State over two years' indicates

the beginning of a discernible revolution' The women

leadeis are demanding to know more aboutgovernment schemes, especially schemes for women

LO "nitdt"n,

the role of the panchayat and skllls

needed for running a PanchaYat'The rotation of chairperson positions in urban

local bodies has also been a vexed problem' Different

States have followed different arrangements' In Tamll

Nadu, the corporations and municipalities have been

treated as separate categories and in one-third of

t22

t}em thefor

oPen.theIn

monthseveryMuniclpalthtrty

for the

of offlce,contlnuit5r

Ttrere wastenure. Inextending

Thels alsoOctober I

Fower to tlu: people?

,sitlon of chairperson has been reservedThe Thirunelveli and the Tlruchirapallithus have women cha\rersons, whereasColmbatore and Chennal the seats are

the tenure of the Zllla parishad

State governments have tried to approachby limitlng the tenure of the chairpersons.

Mayor's ls limited to one year., It is reserved fora woman the flrst year and a person from SC/ST

year. Where reservailons are made forbackward as well, such rotation becomesmore The main objection to thls arrangementts that it reduces the occupant to a rnere

poslflon. Distributtng the ffshes and lqavesthus, becomes more important than

was reduced from five years to tWentythe argument that rotation can be donemonths within the same local bodrr. For:sldents and Vice-presidents the term iss.23 In the case of the Delhi Municipalfor example, within a five year span the

much resentment about such a shortApril 1999, an ordinance was pa$sed

tenure to two-and-a-half-years.to which reeervations can be pursuedted by the MaharasLrtra case. ffheDistrlct Planning Committee Act

offlce which is essential for the efflcientrunnfng the munlcipaltty. In Maharashtra priqr tothe tlonal Amendment, Munlclpal presidentshad a offlve years. It was reduced to one Vearafter the malnly to faqilitate rotaflon.

provtdesthe case of

such reservatlon formula will apply in:ctlon of the DPC members as well.pa It

Aicome oJ ParchaAat and. Mturictpal Electtons 123

may be recalled that four-Iifths of the members of theDPC are to be elected from amongst the already electedmembers of theZllla Parishad and the munictpalitles,in proportlon to the urban and rural population. Forinstance, if the total size of the DPC is thirty, twenty-four among these are to be elected. In a given districtlf the rural-urban population is 6O per cent to 4O percent, fourteen members will be,drawn from the ZillaPartshad and ten members from the municipalities.All tlrese persons wlll have already been elected bythe public and in that process the reservation systemwill have been followed. What is the merit, onewonders, by applying the reservation formula to electa eommlttee when the members are already elected?

While family connections, rigidity of caste andwtlltngness of the exisflng political ellte to permitempowerment of women contlnue to be importantissues, the resewation of seats for different categoriesof people ln local bodles is already caught up in theoverall politics of reservatlon in the country.2s Theprovlslon for resqrved constltuencies in Parliament,€rs well as the State legislatures for scheduled castesand scheduled tribes exists in Article 330 and 332 ofthe Constltutton. The lnitial time llmit of twenty yearshas been extended from time to time. Outside oflegtslatures, reseryatlon and quotas for government

Jobs and seats ln educational institutions have beenpractised in Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Karnatakaand some other States for several years sincbIndependence. The adoption of the Mandal formulaby the V.P. Singh government-Mandalisation-is,therefore, only a geographical extension of thesepractices to several other States in India. The casteand communal factors are also not new in the politics

124

of local

caste.

the N

roundfar. It

Power to tfui People?

. In the years preceding Independence,politics itself was organlsed and promoted

along and caste lines by different politicalparties. Reserved constituencies for Muslitns, for

were provided in various local bodiesr Wherelegal did not exist, practices were devisedand the sancttity of conventlon. For exarnple, inTamil rdu, where the Justice Party was verf active

three decades before Independence, theln theof Madras followed the practice of electing

aMa each year on the basis of commun[t5r ande annual election of the Mavors tended to be

unanlmous because the selection of thewas left to the Councillors belonging to a

parti community for a given year.the polittcs of reservation was subdued inera, in subsequent year$ it became d vtslble

factor Parliament and in the State electlons. TheMandal brought it to the forefront and satrrctifledit as organising principle of afllrmatlve action forsocial J ce. The 73rd and 74th Amendments could

Its influence. While reservation for womennotand SC ST was made uniform. rdservation for other

was left to be decided bv the Statbs. Thevarylng in the different States harte been

already. In most of the country ot'rly oneelections for local bodies has been held sotoo early, therefore. to assess the spread.

ln , and outcome of the polittcs of reservationin local The indications are that its impact isItkely be more divtsive and contentious in tnatters

leadership rather than tn the compositionof municipalities.

of

Cltc;come oJ ParrchaAaf ard Mtuticipal Elections r25

NOTES

l. "Postponement after Postponement-Brief History of delaying

Panchayat elections in all six states". Panctagati RqJ Update'

November 1988.2. tbid.3. Ibid.4. Ibid.5. Aiyar, Mani Shankar' 'A Constitutional Outrage". Swtdog'

3l January 1999.6. "Gram Panchayat Polls"' News item in Hrdu, Bangalore, 16

December 1998.7. News item regarding postponement in the Deccon Herald'

Bangalore, lO October 1998.

8. Newspaper report on M. P. Prakash's reslgnation: Htndu,

Bangalore, 23 January 1999'9, Karnataka High Court's order for holding elections on

Supreme Court StaY'lO. Rural Development Annual Report.

ll. 'Elections to Urban Local Bodies". Nagarpaliko NetlDork,

New Delhi: All India Institute of l,ocal Self Government'

August 1998.12. The New Delhi Municipal Council Act, 1994: Act of 44 of

1994.13. Datta, Bisakha. ed. "And Who will make the Chapathis?": A

studg oJ All-roomen Panctagats oJ Malnrasfura' Calcutta:Stree, 1998.

14. "Women enter into male bastion". News item in Neustime'BhuJ (GuJarat), 25 March 1999.

15, "What Women in Burqa can do". News item in Pioneer,

Delhi, 4 October 1998.16. The Hindu, Chennai: 2l June 1998'17. 'Gundiabhai to unfurl National Flagi. PanchogattRQ Update'

June 199E.18. "Blazing Crime". News story in India Todag. 28 December

1998.19. "Panchayat Ousts Woman Chief'. Special Report, Inilian

Express, 6 June 1999.

t26

20.

2t.

22.

Mayors in UrbanOctober 1998, New

Power to the Feople?

Local Bodies". Na,gqrpo,liko-Delhi: All Indta Institute of

24.25.

Local Self-Government.Rqj Update. November 1998. New Delhi: Ihs tute

Sciences.Archana.'Municipal Governance in West Bengal-

Pd'ncho'yt{rti RdJPeopl 's perception and participafion-., February 1996.Level leaders and panchayati Raj in Karnataka.

Paper Prof. B K Chandrasekhar presented at the Seminaron ,atsi Rajiv Gandhi Foundation, December 1997.

Panchayat Act, 1993 (as amendedl., Pai. ed. ?'lle Politics oJ Eackwardness. Delhi:

Publishers, 1997.

Functional Domain

In the pre-Independence period, the functlons assignedto the municipalltles were broadly similar in differentStates. Most of the Municipal Acts classlfled thesefunctions as obligatory or dlscretlonar5r. They werealso grouped into four or five categories like PubltcHealth, Medical Relief, Public Works, Education,Development, etc. Laws in almost all States envisagedfunctlons such as water supply, dralnage, refusecollectlon and disposal or registration of births anddeaths as obligatory public health functions. Theestabllshment of hospitals and dispensaries wereexamples of obligatory medlcal relief functions.Simllarly, construction and maintenance of roads,street lighting and municipal markets were examplesof public works. In several States, the provision ofschools and libraries was also listed as obligatory.Dlscretlonary functions usually covered townplanning, area development, etc. While differencesedsted in the State laws, there was a broad acceptanceof the functional domain of urban local bodies,partlcularly in regard to a muni0ipality's minimumfunctions. There was also a general recognitton that amunicipallty or a corporation was 'irr charge' of thetown or the city.t

t2a Pouser ta the Feople?

Clty GovernmentsCity

initlatlveof towns

rovement Trusts were the flrst majorthe Britlsh period to identlS the extdnsion

and neighbourhoods, and the developmentof new within a town, as a separate set ofactivities These functions were then diverted fromthe cipalities and entrusted to ImprovementTrusts,bodies

markeda muni

made e to them as a contribution for thegeneralsetting

of city development. The rationale foran improvement trust was not so much

the s tion required by the task, rather it wasdlstrust f the munlcipality as being 'over politlctsed'and th bre unable to perform the task of cityimprove ent consistently and obJectively.2 The

t Trust in Bombay in 1E98, the first such,tn taking up rnany reclarnation

schemes and shaping the numerous sma-ll i$landsinto a ci . In Calcutta, the Trust was set up in 19 I I ,

the same year when the decision was takento shift e capital of Imperial IndiA from Calcqtta toDelht. e the Calcutta Trust, like Bombay, shouldbe cre ted with the successful planning andimplem tation of varlous projeets for the city'simp t and extension. the two bodie$ also

trusts were envisaged as self-finAncinga share of the municipal revenue was

e diversion of city building functions fromand transferring them to a parallel

organisa on. Separate taxation powers were alsd givento the rovement Trusts. The development chargeslevied in lmprovement area were to be colledted aspart of n taxes and passefl on to the Trusts.

up by the provincial governrhents,a couple of representatives from the

The Tru , setusually cluded

ntnctionatDr,main 129

Corporation. In return, the Chief Executive of theTrust was taken as a member of the Corporatlon.

The Improvement Trust approach was copied invarlous other cities like Madras, Mysore, Lucknow'Kanpur, I-ahore, etc. The motive was partly Fabtanismwhich prompted some attention to the poor. Houslngfor the worlrtng classes and some minimum sanitationin the slums of the ciUes, which provided cheap labourfor lndustry, was combined with practical politicswhich aimed to keep elected city governments withina limtted domain. It is, therefore, not surprising thatthe Calcutta Improvement Trust Act of l91l wasbased largely on the Housing of the Worldng Classes

Act l89O of U.K.3 Improvement Trusts were also theprecursors of Development Authorities in the post-Independence period. These were sought to beJustiliedon the ground that the acquisition and developmentof land for urban expansion or renewal were of anentrepreneurial nature and quite different from theroutine functions of a municipality. Unfortunately,these arguments for bypassing the municipal bodies

in some specific types of city improvement acilviileswere further extended to obligatory functions, suchas water supply. The scale of the need, technicalexpertise required, magnitude of investment, need fordistinct cost recovery measures, etc., were clted as

additional reasons. The autonomous water supplydistrtcts and functional boards set up in the US orsome European countrles were regarded as a model.

Speclal Purposc AuthPritiesDuring the 196Os and 1970s, when WHO, the

World Bank, and other organisations becameinterested in supporting water supply and sanitation

was as the preferred organtsaflonal model.In the of Calcutta, for e*ample, the Basic

Plan, prepared tn 1966 with the help ofwHo Ford Foundailon experts, prop0sed a

tan-wlde water and santtafion authority tothe funcilons from the Calcutta Corpbraflonmunlcipallties in the a_rea. Though the law

for the was enacted and an organisatllon setup, it became functional due to opposiflon fromthe and municipallties. Eventuailly theCMWSA as it was called, became d proJect executngagency munictpalittes and ttrel State goverinmentona basis.aElsewhere ln the country-in

r30

projects

takeand

TamtlState

newthe

hap

manner,regarde

Power to the People?

the establishment of such autonomou$ bodles

Kerala, Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh-water supply and draindge boards were set

supply and dratnage proJects on behalfofand municipalities. Funds for this

up as bodies. [n the case of Uttar pfadeshthe Jal was established to plan and execute all

purpose were usually made available by the Statet, much coming from the World Bank and

some countrles. The loan liabilitv itself waspassedthough

to the Corporation and municipalities

orbodtes did not have arry say in preparlngthe schemes.s [,ater, the operation and

from thce of water supply was also taken awayCorporation and the tnunicipalitles asln Uttar Pradesh where a separaite Jalfor the purpose was created. In this

the basic function of Water supply, longas an obligatory responsibillty of

removed from the murltcipalstaff in State $overnmentb, ltke

munici , wasmandate Technical

F\utctionol Domain l3l

public health engineers, and the State bureaucracywere quite enthusiastic about the process on groundsof technical competence and efflciency. The Centralgovernment, whtch had a key role in declding the size

and shape of all externally assisted proJects,acquiesced in this divestment of munlcipal functlonsunmindful of its consequences for local self-government and local accouptability. By the end ofthe 197Os, State level water and sanitatlon boards,as in Uttar Pradesh. Tamll Nadu, Maharashtra,GuJarat, and PunJab, etc., had come into edstence.City level development or special purpose authorltleswere also established in most large cities of thecountry.6

However, in course of ttme, these parastatal bodiesbecame afflicted wlth the same maladies, such ascormption, unresponsiveness, political interference,lack of accountability, flnanclal mismanagement andso on, wtrlch had been viewed in the past as problemsexcluslve to municipalittes. The municipalltles andcorporations also became increasingly resentful ofhaving to shoulder the loan liability for schemes lnwhich they had not been involved, whether in plannlngor execution. Entrusting land development andcommercial schemes to developnent authoritles whlchhad some prospects of revenue and leaving themuntcipalitles wlth basically non-remuneratlveresponsibilities like sanitation and garbage removaladded to this resentment. In the various sammelanswhich preceded the drafting of the ConstituUonalAmendment, both elected and appointed officials ofthe municipalitles had overwhelmingly assalled therole of these special bodies outside the municlpalframework and expressed themselves in favour of a

could facilitate more pauticipation by thetargeung of beneflciafies and entrlanced

Llst tn the ConstltutlonWhe the drafting of the Constitutional

t began there was much, discussion at theofflcial about the functions of municipalttles. Inthe of panchayats, the Parrchayat Btltl hadldentlflW thescheduleslmllar

ofas. The question was whether such a lists should be made mandatory. l,egal opirrionthe Union List, the State List and thet List of functions and powers as containedSchedule of the Constltution comprtsed

was tha

basic features. Since the Union List a{rd the. were nrutually exclusive and most pf theproposed to be entrusted to the panchayats

t32

clear liresoonlyCorporayears th

includepoverLy,weaker

people,accoun

tn theone ofState

Pouser to the people?

ting of functlons, responsibllitiep and7 The AII Indla Council of Mayors, hs thetive body representing the Mayors Of City

ons in the country, hadlurged for severalneed for such a list. The discusslons ln the

had also indicated that such a list shouldew responsibilitie$ like the alleviatlon of

and child development, welfare of the, etc. The issue heFe was not one of

experuse and preparedness slnce no other lqvel ofgovernm could claim any particular advantage inthis . On the contrary, it was argued that

t of these functions to urban and rurallocal

l-urrctional Do,matr 133

and municipalittes would be derived from the State

List, it was felt that separate lists for this purpose

would alter a basic feature of the Constltution' The

Supreme Court Judgement in the Keshavananda

Bharatt case that the basic features of the Constitutlon

could not be altered by an Amendment was repeatedly

mentioned.s It was, therefore, decided that the list of

functions to be assigned to the panchayats and

municipalities would be illustrative rather thanmandatory.

In the case of the munlcipalities' however, the

initial thinldng was that the illustrative list wouldinclude some items contained in the Uni'on and

Concurrent lists in addition to the State List' It was

therefore proposed that both Parliament and the State

legislature could devolve functions to the*r-r.ti"ip"tiUes. An initial formulation was prepared

accordingly. However, in view of the opposition thatthe Amendment exerclse was seeking to blpass State

governrnents, ,.lt was decided that the asslgnment of

functlons would be a State government responslblltty

rather than that of the Centre. Since the Amendmentscame lnto effect there has been some debate ln the

country about the value of an illustrative llst'Suggestlons have been made that the schedule offunctions for the panchayats and the nagarpalikasshould be made mandatory. It ls worth emphaslslng

that the progresslve dimunition of a municlpaltty'sfurtctlonal dornain has not been because'of any

absence of law on what'those functions are' More

often, these laws have been bypassed or circumvented'The Constitutlonal Amendment went as far as it could

ln sanctiffing a,n illustrative list through a schedule'

whtch came to be labelle.d as tl:e l lthSched e. The l2th Schedule incorporated theobligato as well as several of, the discrettonarJz

assigned to municlpalities tn the riariousSeveral new ltems like welfare of the Weaker

fun

sectlo

sevendraftSched

State

welfare,urbanetc.,

Bothwtth thewere rej

powers|

so that

thew€lsl

Pouer to the Pmple?

;ly, a llst of functions containing thirty-was put together as a schedule to the

arpalika Bill, later identilied as the l2ths The Panchayat Bill had a stmilar list of

women and child development, famtlyran electriflcation, non-convenilonal energr,uir.Ir Erccrrulcauon, non_cqnvenuonal gner€5r,erty alleviailon, public dlstribution sb/stem,also tncluded.

Amendment Bill intro{uced by the V prrment, there was no Schedule of fu4ctionsthe government was of the vtew that the

I authority of all local bodies should flow

complStnghat all

leglslatioonly fro the State governments. As an enabling

the draft only reiterated that the Statelegisla may entrust to the panchayats and

r such functions and powers as necessarymay function as units 0f self Aoverrlment.

Even an Itst of functions, th wasunnecessary and inappioprtate.Rao government revived the

the Co tlonal Amendment. theseparat

was taken up once agBin. In the qase of

thefor

the earlier draft of the I lth Scheduleand adopted wittlout any change,

retalnlng all the twenty-nine items as before.

FttncttonalDomrrin

In the case of the municipaltties, however, the12ttr Schedule of functlons was prepared aftesh' Whilethe descrlptton of some items was simplilled, some

others were removed in a rather casual manner as

not pertahtrg to municipallties. The revlsed Schedulethus contalned only slxteen items as compared to ttrethtrty-seven items listed in the RaJiv Gandhi version.There is really no explanatton avallable as to whysome ltems like urban houslng, heritage conservation,city passenger transport, etc., were omitted altogether.It ls even more baffllng why some items listed in thellth Schedule such as non-conventional energr'technical traintng and vocatlonal education' adulteducatlon, family welfare, women and childdevelopment, malntenance of community assets, etc.'whtch were considered legitlmate actlvitles forpanchayats were excluded in the case of munlci-palltles.'o The Jolnt Parliament Committee also dtdnot spend much time on the list, apart from addingstreet lighttng, parklng lots, bus stops and publicconveniences as one item and regulaUon of slaughterhouses and tanneries as another. These dlfferencesbetween the 1989 and 1991 versions of the Bill, so

far as the Schedule is concerned, have been menUoned

in some detail only to show the casualness whichmarked the 1991 revival of the Nagarpalika Blll. Table7. I provldes an overvlew.

r35

136

l. Urban

2. Regulaand

and

4, Roads

5. Water s

6. Publtc

7.1: Twelfih Schedule-A Comparison

Items listedin the 1989 BiIl

Power to the FeopleT

Town planning, includingheritage Conserva on, urbanarts and aesthetics

. Regulation and prorfiotionof land.use and buildings

. Works, Iands and bufldingsvested !n or in the pqssess-ion of the Munlclpalities

o Investment, promotion anddeveloprnent of industrialand commercial estates

Item not mentloned

Communlcauon incluroads, bridges, ferries;municipal tramways, fope-ways anQ inland watepways

Water supply for drinlidng,industrial and commetcialpurposes

r Publtc Health. Sanitation, includin$

consen/ancy services,public conveniences, solidwaste collection and dis-posal and recycling ofwaste water

o Preventlon of adultefationof foodstuffs and othergoods

137F\nctfonal Domatrr

Items listed inthe 74U1

Amendmerrt Act

7. Flre services

8. Urban forestry, Protectionof the envlronment andpromotlon of ecological

9. Safeguarding theof the weaker sectlons of

' the societY, including the

handicaPPed and thementallY retarded

12. Provision of urbanameniues and facilitiessuch as Parks, gardens 'playgrounds

13. Promotion of cultural'educational andaesthetics aspects

Items listedin the 1989 Bitt

. Drainage, sewerage and

sewage disPosal

Fire services

Urban forestry

. Welfare of the weakersections, in Particular ofthe scheduled castes and

scheduled tribeso Social welfare, including

the welfare of the handi-capped and mentallYretarded

. Cultural activitles

. Education, includtngprimary and secondaryschools

. Technical training andvocational education

lO. Slum improvement and

uPgradation

Slum improvement

I l. Urban Poverty alleviation Urban povertY alleviationprogrammes

Parks, plaYgrounds andrecreational facilities

138 Power to the peopte?

'ms lbted urthe 4ttr

endment Act

Iterns listedin the 1989 Biil

. Adult and non formaleducation

. Libraries, museums andother sirnilar ins tutlons

. Llcensing of theatres anddramatic performancis

. Plilgrimages

14. Burialsgroundrcremauelectrlc

15. Cattle p

tlon of r

animals

16. Mtal stereglstraland dea

17. Public ading strrparlidngand oub

t8.houses

and burial; cremations,n grounds and)rematoriums

Burials and burial groqnds;cremation$ and crema ongrounds

runds; preven-ruelt5r to

Pounds arid prevention ofcattle trespass; preventibn ofcruelty to animals%Vital stat[stics includingregistration of births anddeaths

Specific mention were rnadeof the following instead of anambiguous term like pr.tbltcamenities. Urban electrification,

including distribution ofelectricity

. Urban housing

-

Item not men oned

-tstics includingon of btrthshs

nenitles inclu-et lighttng,ots, bus stopslc convenlences

n of slaughterrd tanneries

F\trtctional Domain

Additional ltems Mentioned in the TwelfihSchedule (1989)

r39

. W'omen and child development

. Familv welfare

. Hospitals, primary health centres and dispensaries

. Veterinary seMces

. Publlc Distribution System

. Maintenance of communitv assets

. City passenger transport and other vehicles, whetherpropelled mechanically or otherwise

Gonformlty I,awB on Municipal Functions ',

The expectation was that the l2th Schedule,though limlted and lllustrative, would provide anopportunlty to various State governments to reviewthe functions entrusted to municipalities andcorporations and to formulate a new set of municipalfunctions which could then be incorporated in theConformlty leglslation. Only West Bengal and Keralatook the trouble to do so. The West Bengal MunlctpalAct, 1993, consolidated and amended the laws relatlngto urban municlpal affalrs previously contalned invarlous separate acts. Chapter VI of this Act containsan elaborate ltstlng of obligatory functions grouped infour categorles, namely, publtc works, publtc healthand sanitation, town planning and development andadmtntstratlon. Additionally, the Act also listed variousfuncttons which the municipality may provlde at ttsdiscretion. EducaUon was one of the items listedamong these discrettonary functlons. Another sectiontn the chapter provtded for the transfer of various

Pou:er to the'people?

and duties to be devolved to municipalities,albngsocial

filnds and personnel required. Iterhs ltkeprlmary education, public distribution,

sports d youth services, environtnental safety, etc.,flgured this list. Taking the various provisions intoaccount, it can be satd that the West Bengal Municipal

twenty- groups of items. Social welfare cdntains

Act, ISched

Thefar theUnderiden

itemsdisabl

sectionslist. Ininclhighcoentrementthe Schthe

matters

, covered all the items listed in thb l2thof the Constitution and also added Some.rr

Municipalities Act, 11994, contains byt elaborate list of municipal funcUons.

tion 30 of the Act, a separate Schedule,as the 'First Schedule' to the Act. lists

e child welfare, anganWadis, homes forchildren and physically handicapped,s, adult education. legal aid for weaker

etc., which are a signilicant feature of theIdition, cultural and educational actlivlties.

1 the control and superyisfon of primagy andools, libraries, non-formal educatiorl, .etc..ols, libraries, non-IormAl eclucatio4, .etc.,

another important group. Developr4ent of:urship, training programmes for epploy-publtc distribution system also figiure in

ule. Apart from the corrlprehensiverpess ofule, the real significance of the Kerala Act

lies in e fact that under Section 3o(iii) and 3o(iv)the ent is required to transfer all institrlrtions,scheme , buildings, other properties, assets and

, as also Central and State plan allocationsand ual budget allocations connected with the

mentioned in the 'First Schedule'. to thees concerned. While under both the Kerala

and the West Bengal Acts, the State governmentshave t rlght to prescribe $ome condfitions

F'ttrlctlonal Domoin 14l

accompanying such transfer, the Kerala Act is more

forthright in declaring the intent of the transfer.'2Thls was followed up by government orders fromvarious departments carrying out the transfer. In thecase of West Bengal, the broad distinction betweenobligatory and discretionary functions and transfer ofaddittonal tasks through a' aarefUl .step-by-stepapproach has been maintained. Notwithstanding thesedistlnctlons, the West Bengal and Kerala Acts go wellbeyond mere conformity to the ConstitutionalAmendment and have indeed utilised the opportunityfor clarity and ampliflcation in the functional domainof municipalittes.

Tamil Nadu ls another State where an urban localbodies act has been prepared consolidattng differentacts for different munlcipalities and corporatlons intoone. The Bill was extensively reviewed by the SelectCommittee of the legislature. Since passed' the Actcontains an elaborate listing of the powers andfunctlons of a municipatity with a broad categorisationof obltgatory, discretionary and delegated functlons.'3PunJab has prepared a similar comprehensiveleglslatlon. In Maharashtra and GuJarat previousmunicipal laws had listed the obllgatory functlons.After the Consiltutional Amendment, some additionswere made such as soclo-economic planntng,protectlon of the envlronment, etc. The main provisionregarding municipal functions and responsibilltlesremalned as before.

Unfortunately, in many other States the functionaldomain of the municipaltties appears to be confused'Thts is mainly because in these States, the Conformitylegislatton was limtted to some essentlal items suchas electlon, reservations, etc., as required by the

r42 potuer to tte Feople?

The functions and powers have beenI and are to be found scatteied inand sections of the munictpal laws

before as well as in government drdersrevised from tlme to time. As in otherDelht Munictpal Corporation Act, [9b2,

an extreme of non-conformitv wtth theConstitution.ra Section 42 of the Act

the most scanty li$ting of obltgfatoryItems llke water supply, sewerage, town

planntng,theAuthorlty

Functions, under Section 43 of the Act.is more elaborate. A comparative picture ofthe domain of the municipalities in different

tc., are carefully omitted matnly to pfotectquo in regard to the Delhi Developmented Water Supply & Sewerage Undertaking.

largelyvariouswhlchissuedmatters.

sptrit ofcontains

States lschapter.

Many

throughopen to thseveral or

sought to

while1992,

somethan plnstance. that powers and fuhrctions of diFtrictlevel

in Table 7.2 at the end of this

avoid when Venkataswamy, thenavold when Venkataswamy, then Ruralnt Mintster, proclaimed irr the Lok Shbha19 the 73rd Amendment Blll in Decetnber"we intend to inscribe in the Consiltution'e elements of grassroots democraoy to

Mintster, proclaimed irr the Lokthe 73rd Amendment Bill in De

rayats may be entrusted to local bodiesdes made in this behatf.ls It is, ther4fore,executive to delegate to the municipalities

only a few functions and also alter theirscope as pleases, at any time. Thib is precise$r theldnd of that the Constitutional Amendtnent

-such as Andhra Pfadesh. Orissa ore chosen to leave tl,re assignmelnt offunctions as a task of delegated rather

cipal legislaflon. The Andhra Actl, for

certaln

niJr.ction/rlDomo,in

take them beyond the pale of changing poltticalexpedlency". Matters came to a head in Andhra ttselfearly in 1999 when the Sarpanches of panchayats inAndhra threatened to go on a masslve agitaUon if thegovernment did not transfer functions in the llthSchedule to the panchayat bodies. Even thoughAndhra had a better record in holding regular electlonsand showing progress in decentralisation, parallelgovernment programmes ltke Janmabhooml anddlverslon of funds to them appeared to go agatnst theessence ofpanchayatl raj. The threat ofagitation borefruit and the Chlef Minister announced on 3 March1999 that sixteen of the twenty-nlne subjectscontained tn the l lth Schedule of the Constitutionwould be transferred to the panchayats.t6 Similarly,in 1998, the mayors of Nagar Nigam in Uttar Pradeshmounted a campaign for empowerment and achievedsome success. Placing the Jal Sansthan units, whichwere prevlously looking after maintenance of watersupply, under the control of the Nagar Nigam is anactlon which followed, restoring to city governmentsthetr role in providing baslc services.

An Unresolvcd lgeucAnother opportuntty was avallable for many States

to address the functtonal domaie of the munlctpalttleswhen the State Finance Commlssions were set up.Aft.er all, funds and functions go together. But hereagaln the opportunlty was not siezed. In some cases,

the SFCs chose not to enter tnto the subJect, whlle lnsome others the terms of reference specificallyexcluded consideratlon of such items, more as a matterof propriety rather than substance.

The essence of the 73rd and the T4thAmendments

r43

the le to the 73rd and the 74th Amendrtrrents.The I tth and the l2th Schedules are both suggestiveand illu . They may not be prescriptive [n thelegal

t44

is thatas unltsDirective

wele so,elaborat

of inhibiresulted

Fotuer to the Feople?

and municipalities should fuhcttonof self-government. That is stated ln thePrinciples of the Constitution as well as in

but they are not merely decorative. [f thate country need not have gone through an

exercise of amending the Constitution, its

on and bureaucratic reluctance: it hasreducing the value of ttre reports df the

ratiflcati by States and getting them to change theirexlstlng to conform to thatAmendment. No Statehas chall any of the items in these two Schedulesas not to local government. In fact, manyofthe cipalities and panchayat lnstitution$ werealreadythe Sch

several of the functions listed inules. The extent of work might vary, but it

was that sooner or later most of these funbflonswould become local responsibilities. The SFCscould h ve very well made a forward-looking

SomeJudgement about the funcUons andilitles of local bodies would have made thet of financial requiremertts more redlistic.

The t could also have been made forr eachservice tely, irrespective of whether on a givendate that was being provided by a municilpalityor not. e States would have benellted bv such anobJective assessment by the SFCs.tTThe failure toaddress functional domain appears to be a rhatter

flrst tlon SFCs.The ctional domain contlnues to be an

unreso issue irr many States. However, dlebateln the local authoritv ctrcles abotlt thehas

F\trlctlornl Domain 145

need to make the list of functions mandatory ratherthan illustrative, and apply it uniformly to the States'It has also been suggested that since there is muchcommona-llt5r of items between rural and urban localbodies, a composite schedule may be more usefulthan two separate schedules as at present.rsAmandatory schedule on par with the Union and StateLlsts may be interpreted as altering the basic featuresof the Constitution, nor would it be an easy task'However, there is no reason why the example set byKerala, West Bengal orTamil Nadu cannot be followedtowards a more rational rede{lnition of functlons andresponstbllities in'keeping with the spirlt andsubstance of the Constitution. Table 7.2 provides anoverview of the allocation of functions as contained inthe laws of some States.

146 Power ta tte Feople?

tl\l I

t4 lr-l

sl!,/ J

<. 1

-l

tlIal

l<lritc?F. t*!l tozl.-l\l

I

.-l I

xlHlBIol

*)lol'.1 I

-l:-. I!'! |

f... I

lrl

i:rl\l \ \

v, 1

si \ \ \ \

&

:+t{ \ \

d'' \ \

pi

Ed\ : \ \ \

tr! \ : \ \ \

'lr:(E+gr \ \ \ \

a)v\ \ \ \ \

Ei!Jtr|r<d

\

\JI

^i thFlxlt4

ltaItrtaIIiIE

!lhd6t

U)Q)T' EO

&,8{,

9,-, I r= |

EE l:;s laE EA :^ lE cd .X l,.Y * qriiHplSsEsolpH Ec€'H lE EEgl'F F,-' I65SEEIg!E:ISgHEtl-l lci lcj

FsE=

$fEHIri

Fttttctior'g.l Dolmrrin t47

thEJ

v)

\LO

s{"d\ \ \

$F \ : \ \

Ho

sn\ \ \

/i r- \ \ \ \

]glEEEd

\ \ \ \

EEdE

: : : :

Gx

si \ \ \

vq) \ : \ \

BT!i<{: \ :

r-8..(, -{dEa:8dtQi-

,JNEr Fr

!t-JOZ "b,gEH I Fp F:!E6EO:iE:gEHEHEd

aoI

tq..)

a()

t-

o

f,fiH Eit;t F,'edOr.F X C F?'E E E i-.9FEEE!'5 E.E 8.sqi

.\ Ft

-J:tr d

sfis$$Fsd;E Eb.E.E€ g

ot

148 Potuer tn the Fgopk

\

?

LOs*ss \ \ \ \ \

$F \ \ \ \ \

€€\ \

,!r

BE \ \ \

l#

ct

g$ ) \ \

E! \ \ \ \ \

ss\ \ \ \ \

d

.a)X

\ \ \ \ \

stFE<tr

\ \

Pxr q)

s!pi8d(J ,rj5s|

* lr l=xnrs l=g*nl",€

EslFEl5it;$al5E;€lg:

n)rlr:tlonrrlDc,matn 149

tas)

v)

\ \ \ \ \.5s*SF'-F

\ : : \ \

*rEns)xb \ \ \ \ \

tr6trlE<Esta-\ \ \ \ \

()\ \ \ \ \

Dt?*fi:l;I()|v>c

\ : \ \ \

E! \ \ \ \ \

s€\ \ \ \ \

P.a)r(

\ \ \ \ \

sfi*'xEF{d

\ \ \

|i

a)Qqlglt\)'uag€EQd

lorRr-

,:, o

gEHS-Q

boq bE 66 E

htrHh

o,

x..= e --

_e E !"'E+t>(.)trr'\XhHri

,o.^oEU'6otE gE e€ yEt6E qg-, i.9 "gEEE<j

o.,

g$ssgEb0-5H., .! b0 H.F

iEEesE ES; H

N

r-5oo 9.9lr* !l

9bEi toJJFpHSdi; bd

150 Power to the Fgople?

I rl\

o lXl

tlobl

r\lI

UI

;JI<l

L(IJ;*!;rJl

$j \ \

:{t'sE*6* \ \ \

]1s;BS>A

\ \ \

F!fil : \ \

F-l.5t \ \ \ \

ts

\(\ \ \

EitiL-F<d\ \

ta

$) iaElIglggggelaLlgs

nlglcdonalDomo.in 15r

q

o

\

L(4s*ssx?9{h5rX

\ : \

trrJ:! .r-a

'\.csla-

I'ts(.1

:d<I, l?

EEF1JR6FZEssr

\ :

q

X\ \ :

Eh!E<d

\

t4

$)

b EuiaiE.iE$ETE*EE -E 8s"q E

5:9558

o -.IhF9,o;E€H.JE e h"c+tN oH;;E_$;;E $

EEEAt

iE'.fi--E*En:: ic qEtt.!!.O,- O t<o E 9I o o.9

E€€ H gF€B

Potoer to tle People?

h

*rE.EEtIq

5E sH

Mo#s

ocJ

lU {)t +.!

oa

G)

i.€ot)

69p)fa

xxiHt:iJ )\

llH0) +J

gE

R obE^.,r E E#H FIb0= Y 5

FFEEE

0

IEEE

FETeEE

F\trlrctionrllDclmo.in r53

r.r 0J

t#s$8# F 8

EEAH€EE!€E.Q F 9 B!

odx>.,c9UHE HE q,^s;:Egc x= k trartr2gtrE h HI E.9d *. o lrgF F9 F"

,FI Ex:abt.!^,o

EE;iEEgxd2EdEEnE

EEEE$H€g.l xd >'gEE,E> dt a

Pouer to ttre F.eople?

bEp

E EEE

flEB$d E 6E

SseeEF;€

E$$5FEf,i

oof.

2otaF

o.9#(!X8X

155nllr.cdonrrlfumair-

YG9q.l=

a.E-.E-^45,il !r E?3€^u) a!

EquoAEEEgeE! 3sE AHE

r56

F4.S

2.

3.

, Hugh. Foundation oJ Local SeIJ Gouernment in Indicr:-.tn and Burma: Bombay: Lalwani publishing; 1967.rjee, Manideep in .Calcutta: The planning Ag;enctes ".Cities oJ India ed. Misra, R.p. Sustainable Dwelopment

Pouer to the peopte?

NOTES

tarangaiah M. and pattabhiram M. ed., Localtment bt Indra.. Delhi: Allied publishers, 1g69.

tion, Delhi: 1998.K.C. and Green Leslie. Metropolitan

Asian Experience. Washington Dc:OxfordPress for tvl/orld Bank, 198g.

M. Incal Gouernment in lndia.. Delhi: Allied1969.

on Nogarpalfka funvnelan. Delhi: Na onal Infqrmatics, 1989.mda Bharati vs. State of Kerala, AIR, 1978, Supreme1461.

ule; 64th Amendment Bill.; 72nd Amendment Bill.

Municipal Act, 1993.Munlcipalittes Act, 1994,

Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, 1999.

8.

9.lo.IL72.13.t4.15.16.

t7.

PuIbid..

l2ttrl2thWest

TamilDelhi unlcipal Corporation Act, l9BZ.

Pradesh Panchayat Act, 1994. Section 192"Package to Strengthen L,ocal Bodies-. Hudu

4 March 1999., O.P. State-Local Ftscal Relahons. Issues Before

the I th Finance Commission: A prelimlnary Note. Delhi:Instltute of Public Finance and policy, January

of the Seminar on TBrd andof Social Sciences Bangalore,

74th Arnendments:January lg9g.

Financial Domain

With some exceptions, bankruptcy has been arecurrtng feature of local body flnances in the country'It has been observed that apart from the noble motives

of local self government whtch some of the BrltlshViceroys nurtured, one of the important reasons forthe development of local bodies was to shift a part ofthe burden of the Imperial government's expenses to

local sources.r For lnstance' for several decades

mqnicipal boards were compelled to pay for 'town

poltce' though the subJect itself was entlrely outslde

municipal control. Levles made by provlnclalgovernments were also treated as a'flrst charge'uponlocal funds. In the early twentieth century, many

munlclpal boards ln the erstwhlle Bombay Prestdency

were semi-bankrupt because they had to meet thecost for plague control services operated by theprovincial government' The hlgh degree of controlexercised by the provlncial and Viceregal governments

over local flnance has also been an important feature'

Though government grants constltuted only a smallportton of the lncome of municipal boards' theprocedures for their utilisatlon and the scruunyexerclsed at various stages prompted a greater

attention to accountancy rather than conslderations

r58

ofd

Power to tle Feople?

increas

The Pre- SceneThe e reforms and {inancial devoluuon

during 1920-1923 witnessed the gradualof the government's hold over local authoritv

to process such increases was cteatedwithtn e municlpallties. At thet same timd. the

d its relinquishment in stages in fatbur ofmunicipal boards. 2 Municipalities were

most complete independence irr the

taxes sof publtc money. While proposals to raiserequlred government approval, the

minwith thtsshort expenditures grew f,aster than lncome. Theelected and tl.e provincial secretariats couldnot also hake off their old official ouUook. Ih the

ffnancethe nongiven

processsolution

Asfi

classeMunlci

dtrectincidence fall largely upon the general prnblic.L,ocal

did not have the requislte expefiencemanagement and, therefore, in dbalingvly found financial independence. In the

rny municipallties fell back upon the easyto balance their budget-appeafls to

for increased grants.

ostly lawyers, traders and teachers.flnancial policy clearly reflected this

Property owntng classes ffercely resistedand preferred indirect levies where the

ions of income or land taxes, such asfesslons and categorisafion of propgrties

taxatlon, it should be remembered thatboards of the twenteth century were ldrgelyof the members of the new urban middle

pment. More importanily, it also fosteredtg dependence of the rnunicipalitiles onl.r^"^--*^-r^governments.

taxes on

FbuncialDomain r59

based on location, were either not accepted or kept at

very low levels. The preference for indirect taxes is

revealed by the fact that the octroi sanctifled in history

by everyone from Manu to the Mughals has endured

over several decades. Octroi was lwied as a central

tax from 1808 but was abolished after Viceroy

Trevelyan's strong condemnation in 1835' The

provinces were reluctant to adopt it in the face of the

Vtceregal pronouncement. However, it reappeared inl87O in Mirzapur, U.P. The rates of the levy were

reduced to paciff opposition. It quickly spread to

other citles and provinces. By the time ofIndependence, it had become a promi;rent component

of most municipal budgets in the country' Several

enquiry committees at the State as well as the national

level durlng the post- Independence period have urged

the abolition of this tax but it has remalned a steady

and buoyant source of munlcipal income despite high

degrees of leakage and collection charges' In States

Ute Uaryana, Madhya Pradesh, GuJarat, Maharashtra'

etc. where octroi has been abolished, compensation

to the municlpalities, which depended on thisimportant source' has been less than adequate' In

Maharashtra octroi has been abolished only in the

case of medium and small towns resulting in the loss

ofrevenue ofabout Rs 4OO crores' It has been retained

in Greater Mumbai where in the six month period

from April to August 1999 receipts from octroi were

about Rs 54O crores, an increase of 27 per cent over

the perlod.3 In Pune and Nagpur the Corporatlons

have been given the option to substitute octroi by an

accounts-based system instead of collection at toll

boottrs. The All India Council of Mayors and other

160

has beenas wellnotarbitraryIt clearlyvoters orhowever,of wealthPercomparedIt wasthe perin 1937

and dLocal

in thespeciflc,

oflocal bodles have conflnued to reststabolltion octrol.

:r long-standing feature of rnuniclpal llnancethe poor record of property tax assessment

Potuer to the Feople?

collectlon. In most cases, property tax wason any scienffic or empirical basts, lt was

haphazard and quite often inequiltable.ted the preference of the influbntial

of municipal boards. I-arge dities,use of their comparatively higher levels

and income managed to do a litfle better.taxation was Rs 23 in Bombay in 1937,

to Rs 6 forty years earlier while in CalcuttaRs 14. In the case of other municipdlttiestaxation varied between Rs 3 and Rs S

and Committees Galorebe seen that municipal finance t'rever

compared to around Re I in lgog.4

It canfared tootheProblems local finance were the subJect ofextensive

v_ell in the British period. Unfortun4tely,dtd not improve even after Independence.

Taxation Commlssion chaired byJohn Mathalduring 19 55, and the Zakaria Committee of 1g63.5The ons of these bodies were elaborate: and

enqug by various bodies such a$ thece Enquiry Committee of I95O. the

of Zakaria Committee they were alsoch as professional valuafion of property,rd collection charges, taxation of unearned

incremen to land value and a rnore systerrlaticgrants-in- regtme combining earmarked taxe6 aswell as in tives for improved performance. The

cll of Locat Self Government lent itsCentral

support to these recommendations but the impulse

foictrange was not sustained since the political clout

of local bodies was further eroded by supersession

and diverslon of municipal responsibilities to special

FinarlcialDomrrin

boards and development authoritiesgovernments.

Durlng the 198Os the concerns

16l

set up by State

were picked uP

once again by the Planning Commission' One of the

four Task Forces it had set up to revlew urbandevelopment focused on finance was headed by RaJa

Chelliah.G The Task Force reported that localexpenditures as a percentage of all expendltures by

the Central, State and local governments had fallen

to a mere 4.5 per cent in 1980-81 as compared to 8per cent in 196O-61' The report highlighted the sedous

maintenance gap in urban public services as a m{orproblem. Funds were spent through a variety of State

agencies and when the assets were created they were

mlrely transferred to municipal authorities formalntenance. The report also drew attention to thegradual usurpation of local functions by Stategovernments, the ad hoc and unpredictable nature ofdevolutlons depending on the vagartes of the State

budget and the total denial to local bodies of access

to capttal markets. The Chelliah Task Force Report

also argued for a Municipal Finance Commission to

be established in the States at regular intervals and

a Municipal Finance Board to keep track of flnances

and allocations. Earlier such Commissions had been

set up-by Andhra Pradesh in 1971, Orissa and

Maharashtra in 1974, Karnataka and Kerala in 1976'

Tamll Nadu in 1980 and West Bengal in 1982'

thetax

rural orof the

andund9th

detatledinfof thetl.ese

matnlyArticle

the Finanprinciple

overcomecase.

es. However, after colle0ting all the data,neither e 8ft nor the gth Finance Commission wasprepared make any recommendation in this negard

r62 Power to tte peopte?

Flnance CommlsslonsThis

and theforFinanceIndia.Flnance Commissions, set up under Article ZgO of

of pedodic review of muntcipal llnances: of using devolutions as an insti.ument

I bodies and on what cohditions, pefhapsts posed by Article 280 could have been

n, had been the allocation of variousbetween the Central and the StateIncal body finances as such, whether, did not flgure in the terms of reference

n. Nevertheless, the Commissionthe impact of local bodies on State ffnancesnditure and wanted to have a better

of the position. Both the 8th arrd theCommissions therefore authorised some

and studies. Much of the time-basedn on municipal finances, in various States

has become available as a result of

of a rather narrow interpretadon of

Commission had at least laid down some

it limited their work only to issuesof distrib between the Union and the States.zCommen on this, the National Commission onUrbanisa on observed in its report of lggg that .if

Ung to grants-in-aid tro the StateS andstated portion ofsuch grants should be pAssedon to the Ithe cons

8 Unfortunately, this was not to be the

F.FcrrclalDomain

Altcrnatlvce ln thc Anendmcnt DraftsEven when the Constitution amendment exerclse

began, the Rajtv Gandhi government was prepared toundertake only a llmited foray into the flnanctaldomaln of the municipaltttes. Since a mandatory ltstof funcUons itself was not considered feaslble, therecould not be any list of taxes, devolutlons or otherllnanctal provisions. All these had to be left to theState governments. Howevei, the tdea of State-levelIlnance commlsslons was consldered attractlve andaccordirngly both the Panchayat and Nagarpalika Blllsmade provlslons for thls purpose. The Bill lntroducedby the V.P. Singh government, as also the draftprepared by the Naraslmha Rao government, repeatedthese provtslons. When the Nagarpallka Bill wasreferred to the Joint Parliament Commlttee, thatCommittee spent a great deal of time considerlng tlttssubJect. The members were confronted by the slmplefact that it was not lack of analysts or lack of datathat had stood in the way of any improvement lnmunicipal llnances. They also realised that the State-level flnance commisslons would only be a beginning.The Commlttee was forthright in its assertion that"while every effort should be made to increase taxauonat the Municipality level with a view to tap thelr fullpotentlal, responsibility for (flnding) resources forffnancing urban servlces cannot be left only to thelocal bodtes. Slnce citles contribute in a big way tothe State and the national economy, it should also bethe responsibility of the Centre as well as the State todovetail creation and maintenance of urban economlclnfrastructure rtrith overall economlc development.'e

163

r64 Power to ttuz People?

thc Ccntrd Flnance Ciomsrlssion) took note of the fact that though the 8thrtral Flnance Comrnissi0ns had deliherated

amenitles in the cities of Mumbdi andwas a stgnificant dephrture frorir past

Funds of the State to supplbmentof the munlctpalifles. In their view,

made by the Finance Commigsionste would have litfle value lrnless the eentral)ommisslon was constitutionally required totlrem. Arttcle 243Y of the draft Bill was$ amended and a new clatlse was also gddedrendment ofArtlcle 28O of the Consflt]ution,ttre terms of reference of the Central Finance

on the and magnitude of the problem a4rd alsoCETInC the conclusion that loeal bodies peeded

no recommendations wer,e made as ih theirPlanning Commission was the appropriateeal wlth these problems. The JpC also noted

support,

9th Flnance Commission'F recommeddationofa ttme grant of Rs 5O crores each to the

ts of Maharashtra and West Ben$al, forrtal improvement of shlms and prgvision

of basi

ARolcThe

and gth

vlewbody tothat the

Calcu

thethe

of theFlnanceconslder

practice. The JPC, therefore, reacfled the con0luslonthat the Plannlng Commissiofr and the Flnance

tn thewere selzed of the problem intelledtually,.ce of a constitutionalr mechanisni for a

regular t of the fiscall resource gap inon account of lncreaslng urbani$ation,

and declsi,ons for assistance wouldconUn to be sporadic and ad hoc. Accordiregfiy, theJPC ted the mandate of ther Central Finance

ion to be revised so that it specllftcallyColncluded conslderatlon of measures for augmenting

for the

FbuncialDomain r65

Understandably, the recommendatlon of the JPC

did not flnd favour with the Finance Mtntstry. DrManmohan Singh, then Finance Minlstel felt thatCentre-State flscal relations had already become

complicated and lntroducing problems of local body

flnances as an addltional dimenslon would onlyaggpavate the dlfflculties and controversies.ro Ttre JPC

was not moved by the. Flnance Minlstry'sapprehenslons and stuck to its recommendaUons'

It ls worth menflonlng that the JPC's review and

recommendations were limited to urban local bodtes

only. However, the government, after conslderlng theJPC's report, declded that the Amendments could

appty wtth equal loglc to the panchayats as well'Accordingly, the modlfled provlsions for the State

Flnance Commlssions, as also a new provtsion foramending Article 28O of the Consititution were

lncorporated in both the Panchayat and NagarpalikaBills. Thts change should be regarded as a htghlysigntffcant move to provtde an organlc link between

the Central and the State Finance Commlssions and

to permeate the whole process of devolutton fromCentre to the States and from States to the localbodles.

Thc K.C. Pant Flnance CornmlsslonThe loth Central Finance Commission set up by

Prestdential order dated 15 June 1992' and chalredby Shri K.C. Pant, had to decide how they could

respond to the amended provision of Article 28O' The

Commisslon noted that the amendment was notfollowed by any separate order enlarglng the terms ofreference. The Commlssion's view was that once the

State Ftnance Commlssions (SFCs) completed thelr

28O ofto make recommendations in terms ofArtlclehe Constttution". At the same time, theion felt lt was not precluded from entering

upon subJect and that the implications of localself-gove t for State financBs could not beoverloo The Commission, therefore, concluded.-while a per consideration of the measures to

I resources of the statqs must await ttreaugmentof the respective SFCs, sorhe adlns could be made which worrrld be

with the sptrlt of the Amendment.rrThe

166

task tt

streamsupple

avallablecast on it

hoclnk

the lOthffnancesfortheinadequa

of the

Pouer to tle People?

be obllgatory upon the Central Financeto assess and build into the expendlture

the State the funding requirements forting the resources of, panchayatF andies. However, as tJ.e SFC reports were not

the Commlssion felt there was "no dutv

of Rural Development suggested toFinance Commisslon that sinde the

panchayats had not been studied ln detailyears, and a projection of expenditdre onr available for LST6-ZT would be quite, it would be better to relate devolutions to

the Sta on account ofpanchayats on a percefrtagebasls to the Sates would provide from thetf own

DevelopOn this basls, the Mhntstry of Ruralt requested the Financb Commlsslbn to

earmark sum of Rs 7,5OO crores lbr distrtbutibn toral institutions during the flve-year perlodrnlssion's award. The Urban Developfnent

mtnistry, however, was far more modest in ttsCiung

to the loth Central Finzlnce Commlgsion.r trends of urbanisation, slum populations of the schemes that itrwanted pur$ued,and the

FYnrnrcialDomain 167

the ministry requested the Finance Commlsston toaward a sum of only Rs 5OO crores for the pedodf995-2OO0. The Nattonal Instltute of Urban Affatrs,on the other hand, estimated that the operation andmaintenance of core municipal servlces would need

about Rs 6,O00 crores annually in 1995, and twice as

much by 2O0O."The Commission did not choose to accept any of

these proposals and preferred instead, to make an adhoc award of about Rs 4,400 crores for panchayatbodies and Rs IOOO crores for municipalities. TheCommlssion stlpulated that these amounts should be

in addition to those coming from State governmentsand that local bodtes should be requlred to suitablymatch these contributions by raising thelr ownresources. The Commission also stipulated that thegrants were not lntended for salaries and wages. Itwas hoped ttrat these ad hoc awards, though modest,would prompt the local bodies and State governmentsto consider more systematically the issues of localbody flnances and to what realistic extent they couldbe supported by devolutions or grants-in-ald. ThePant Commlssion thus set the stage for the StateFinance Commlssions.

State Flnance CommissionsThough a few States had established Muntclpal

Finance Commissions previously, each was a one-time arrangement. It was not intended as a con0nuingmechanism for periodical review of local flnances,allocation of tax proceeds or establishing formulaefor grants-in-ald to the local bodies. GuJarat was anexceptlon; it established a Muntcipal Finance Boardin 1979,to make grants and loans to urban local

168 Fouer to tte People?

of the allocation of entertainment tax andmeasures to improve the llnancial

State Ftnance Commissions set up after.stltutlonal Amendmenlt, therefore, mav

I one in 1997 making 4 total of twenty-PunJab and Rajasthan submitted their

of the State Finance Commlssions

tons of Article 243Y of the ConstituUon.oftax proceeds, assignrnent oftaxeg and

that the State Finance Cotnmtssions qouldsubstantive issues in rrrunictpal flnance

bodlestoposlUon.the 74th

two.

be ed as the flrst generation SFCs i4 thecountry. tween April and November 1994, nlneteenStates set up such Commissions. TWo more follbwedin 1995

reports December 1994, most others made themavallable during 1996 and 1997. So far tqenfiState ce Comrnlssions have submitted theirreportsPondlch

udlng one interim repoft in the cage of

Theitself did follow any specific pattern nor was {here

as in the case of the Central Financefor which a separate act e>dsts. The terms

of of the SFCs were in most cases a repetitionof theDtstribgrants-ln- were common features. Howevetr in

relailng to these three items tended topracuce,be largelyin Artlcle

exerclse ln accountlnA.rTWo other itemsreferred to "the measures needed to

lmprove flnancial position of thO Municlpalities"and "any other matter referred to the Finance

ln the lnterests of sound flnance". thesebeerr interpreted in a broad proalctive

any cri

couldmanneraddressrather merely compiling fiscal deficits. Sincefunds and have to go together this was also

opportunlty for the SFCs to review thean excell

F-U:oncralDomain 169

erdsting situaton and recornmend a functlonal domaln

which would be both vtable and better sewe public

interest. Unfortunately, as discussed in the prevlous

chapter, most SFCs felt that thls was outstde thelrttrandate and did not touch the issue of functtonaldomain at all.

As regards the other aspects of devolution and

grants{n-aid, several SFCs have accepted the statusquo in respect of tax and non-tax revenues wlthoutrlcommending addlttons or exclusions' Part of the

reason appears to be that tax resources already

assigned tn the past have not been utllised fully and

new assignments might create inter Jurisdictlonallssues. On devolution' some SFCs have tried to create

a divlsible pool as done by the Central Flnance

Commisslon; some others have recommended sharing

indtvidual taxes or sharlng allocations of central taxes'

llke income tax, flowing to the States' Some SFCs

have also recommended transferring ffxed sums' While

the wide variance in the work and recommendatlonsof the SFCs can be attributed to the unlqueness ofdlfferent States, lt ts also to be noted that there was

very little attempt at the naUonal level to gutde thetrwork. The Committee chaired by RaJa Chellltah made

sporadic attempts to help the SFCs in the basic

exercises of revenue and expendlture forecast'establishing unit costs of services, etc', but there was

no attempt to prepare terms of reference with some

commonality for the different States and also include

in them items whtch would enable the work of futureFinance Commissions. The Ministry of UrbanDevelopment made some tentadve attempts to provide

such asslstance but they were not pursued'

t70

sltcOut

onlymanner.beenunder

.H"tyutra.

the acceptance has been limifed to a few ltems.Whlle in the apptoach of the various SFCsarecontextsdealtbasis oftotal vt

sed as inevitable because of the differingthe States, most of the Commissions travJexpenditure needs and forecasts on theit and current practice. Few have taken aof development needs and financial

SFCs

rates. ra

Statesforththe Stateformulate

The Ibya

bodles,Flnance

repofts

Lg ln allocating from 4O to bO per cent ofplan to urban and rural local bodies to

i. The West Bengal, Karnataka and plunJabbe the exceptions in addressing theus Lrr(: clucp Ltons In aooresslng the

domaln of local bodies. Regarding revenuets, the SFCs have generally supported morefor the local bodies in determining the

regard to plan funds, however, someKerala and West Bengal have been more

and implement their own schemes.Central Finance Commlssion was set upential order in July 199g undef the

of Dr A M Khusro. In the case of localTerms of Reference s{ipulate that themmission shall take into account themmlsslon shall take into account theations of the SFCs, and where SFCsnot available make lts town assessmentanner and extent of augmentation gf theabout thefund of the State. The Commissiorl has

Finnncio.lDomrrin t7l

been speciflcally asked to take into account theprovisions required to be made for the einolumentsand terminal benefits of local bodies including those

of teachers. The Terms of Reference also urge theCommission to consider the raising of additional taxes

by panchayats and municipalities and take intoaccount the power, authority and responsibilitytransferred to panchayats and municipalities underthe Constitutional Amendment. Prima facie, these

Terms of Reference provide a broad enough canvas

for the Finance Commission to undertake some pathbreaking work. The quesUon is, will it do so?

Part of the answer lies in the future-in the workof the second generation SFCs which are beginning

to be set up. Himachal Pradesh, Maharashtra and

Andhra Pradesh have already done so. Given the

constltutional provisions, the new SFCs have to shed

the reluctance of the previous ones to relatesystematically the functional responsibilities of thelocal bodles to flnancial requlrements. The SFCs willalso do well to spell out the principles and theirrationale on which the Commission's recommen-dations will be based. Fiscal autonomy of local bodies

can be reached only if they can build up thelr ownIlnances. Almost all the States are now under severe

flnancial straln. Current revenue balances which used

to flnance State plans to the extent of 40 per cent tillthe Sixth Five-Year Plan are now negaUve. State plans

have to rely increasingly on Central assistance' The

flscal malatse has spread across the States.ts If therevlval of local body finances is dependent on

devolution, it may well be a non-starter.

t72 Power to the Feople?

Access to Gapltal MarkbtThe come of the Central and State F.ihance

Commls ions may not be the only route forstrength municipal flnances; 'nor should it be.

from the Centre may only help meet in partre dellcits which are evetr-increasin$ as a

result of pay. The only Approach open tolocal

past fewtrying su

, several city goverffnents have beenopfions for mobilising fesources. Access

to the market has been an important step.The Municipal Corporation was the lirst

the

and

to float aobtained

other citiMumbat,

the mowas broand an

is to carve out a tax domatn of theif own: funding options by other means. In the

bond of Rs 10O crores.r6 The CorpofattonAA credit rating from ORISIL, which was

more value to the city governments thanitself. Ahmedabad, it must be mentioned

ln 1994; it had an overdraft ofRs 22 cborescash loss of F[s 35 croresi The

a pion exercise for both orgimisattons. .Apartfrom fin cial lnstitutions, the rbond has been

to by the general public of Ahmedabad asrating has since been obtained by sgverallike Pune, Surat, Vijayawada, Banghlore,

well.

cutta, etc. Bonds have $ince been flbatedby though by private placement instdad ofpublic as in the case of Ahmedabad.Medium llke Nasik, Aurangabad and Sholapurin plan to tap the debt markets.'Z

The of obtaining credit rating appears tobe of mu

fabled and business acumefi of the Guidratisdid not eem to help their c4pital cityi An

was appointed who made a deterrhinedbid to income from octroi, property tax and

173Ftwrclr.lDomain

non-t€x revenues and also cut costs' By March 1995'

all past losses and overdrafts were wlped out't8

ForLunately, the elected regime continued to support

the reform initiatives, including the proposal to obtain

credlt ratlng. Credit rating, invariably introduces

transparency and some minimum efficiency in keeping

accounts which may be more enduring benefits than

the credlt itself. Public subscription to municlpal

bonds also ensures increased awareness in municipal

matters and is a significant manifestation of citizen

ownershlp. A portion of the tax proceeds are usually

kept tn an escrow account, as in the case ofAhmedabad, or a sinking fund which in turn promotes

Ughter flnancial management'

Prlvate-Publtc PartnershiPsAdditionally, several cities have also moved towards

prtvatisation of public services, elther for capital

ievelopment or for management including public-

private partnerships. From such metropolitan towns

as Chennai, Bangalore or Pune to small towns like

Tiruppur or RaJkot, a variety of arrangements have

been made to secure such private sector participation

in services, for example' the provislon and

maintenance of water supply or collection of solid

waste. Ttre scope ranges from constnrction, operation

and maintenance of water supply treatment plants(as in Pune or Bangalore), construction only (as inChennat), or comprehensive partnership between the

muntcipallty and the main lndustry tn the city and

the State government (as in Tiruppur)' ConstrucUon

;rnd malntenance of urban roads and bridges have

been taken up through private sector partictpation inCoimbatore, Madurai' Karur' NOIDA' Udalpur' etc'

flnan is highly complex. The examples mer[flonedindicate a departure from the past pattern 0f totaldepen on the public exchequer; they also show

174

Similar

notof totalcity

recognipeopleWhat iorganispurpose

NaentitiesCorpora(whichFinancInfrastruhelped tIInanaid agecorporatiassistanStrenuodifferentproperLysystem,Yet, allsignificmagnitutheefforts to

Pouer to the people?

lnitiatives have commerlced in collectton.and recycling of city wastes as well.rs It is

that any of these cases offers an ekamplelsation. The building and upkebp of acture has many implications dnd its

n on the part of city governments thAt theirr, and €ue prepared to; pay for sdryices.needed is the willingness to devise

tlonal financial arrangements fof that

-level organisations like HUDCO, and Statee Karnataka Urban Development Flnance

on or Tamil Nadu Urban Developmeni pundLs become Tamil Nadu Urban Infrastructureg Services). as also companies like the

I-eastng and Financial Service$ haver promote innovative concepts of projectand maintenance. Bilateral and multilatlral

ln most

F]ll,l.arcialDomain t75

Flnance Commissions have a catalytic role in thls. Sodoes the Central Finance Commission.

The lacuna that remains is ln correlatlng theestablishment and work schedule of the Central andState Flnance Commissions. When the loth FinanceCommission was set up in 1993, the State Fin€rnceCommissions had not come into existence. The initlalview of the Pant Commission was that in thecircumstances it would not be possible for it toconsider the subject at all. However, in the end, asalready mentioned, some ad hoc recommendationsand awards were made. It ts only thereafter that theSFCs were formed. The l lth Finance Commission setup tn July 1998 will, therefore, have to go back to the1996 SFC reports even lf they have been limited tnscope and unlikely to be of much help to theCommlsslon. Its own term of offlce will end sometimein 2000. Reports of the second generaUon SFCs areunlikely to be avallable by then. There is thus a mls-match in the timing of the Central FinanceCommission and State Finance Commissions. Statelaws and executlve orders should, therefore, ensur.ethat SFCs are established and their reports madeavailable in tlme so that they could serve as inputs tothe Central Finance Commission. If not, there wlllnot be a substantlve response to SFC recommen-datlons and the local bodies are in danger of missingthe bus.

L76 Pouer to thC, People?

NOTES .

Hugh. Founda tinn oJ t ocal Slby-Gouernmenin maic-,t and Burma, Bombay: Lalwani Publishtng House,

tarangaiya, l\1 and Pattatrhiram, M. ed. Locolln Indi(J., Select Readings. BombaJr: Allied

1969.Network, October 1999. lssue: All India Institute

Self Government, Delhi., Hugh. op.cit.

atarangaiya, M. op.cit.Force on Housing and Urban Development, Shelter forUrban Poor and Slum Improvement, Flanningnlsslon, Government of India, New Delhi: September

Fourth Constitutional Amendment Act, Institutionaland Functional Devolution" An issue paperrs arl(I r unc[ronal uevolutlon ,An tssue paper

ted at the Regional Meet on Devolution of Fqnctionalrancial Powers to Urban Local Bodies, Regiondl Centre

'an and Environmental Studies, Osmania Universitv.Januarv 1999.

oJ The National Commission on Urbo;niso;ttoru August

)rt: l-ok Sabha Secretariat, July 1992.tion between Dr Manmohari Singh and thb author

latter's visit to Washington DiC for the Annqal BankMeeting, 1994.

oJ the l0th F1lrqnce Commission (1995-2O0O). New: Government of India, lgg4.

RQ Update. October 1998. Institute df Social.ces. Delhi.ur, O,P. Issues Bejore the Fttance Conunission: Stote-Flscal Relations, A Preliminqry Note. Delhi: National

of Public Finance and Policy, January 1999., Rakesh, "Achieving Economic Security, Ttle Fiscalmt". National Council of Applitd Economic Rbsearch,Mimeo, unpublished.

3.

4.D.

6.

2.V196

the

Ref

andfor

8.

9.10.

ll.

t2.13.

t4.

F-tnrlrrr:inlDomrrin 177

16. Nogarpoil|rkc- Netuork. December f 998. All India Institute ofLocal Self Government, Delhi'

t7. Ibtd.18. Kawsal, Anita. *Turning around the city of Ahmedabad",

Paper submitted at the Municipal Management Reforms

Seminar. October 1999, Lahore, Paldstan.

19, Nagaryaltko Network, February 1999' All India Institute ofLocal Self Government, Delhi.

-a-

Some Pending I$sues

the shortcomings and delays, the 73nd andAmendments to the Constitutiofi, thelaws, and the follow up actions taken sofar rep esent a wide range of beginntngs in

d governance. Several issues perFlstingfrompurpos

past and arising anew, will challenge theand substance of the Constiturtional

the 74

debate resolution. The role of the district as anenttty ofthetheso that and authority are not dlvorced.

r. Some issues need to be flagged morethan others as meriting public attention,

)vernance and as a platform for bridgingbetween the rural and the urban, vesUngheads of local bodies with executive flowers

t of multi-municipal aqglomerAtionsinterface between the ciflzens and ttle citv

theand

greater aare some. of the lssues which ,meriton than in the past.

The Contlnuumand urban arearb is aThe between rural

hangover from Indla's colonial histqry. However thatthe logic of the economic and politicalhiatus din contemporary India. On the political

Some Pendttg Isates 179

side, GandhiJl's name has been invoked frequenily tosanctt$r the hiatus. Apart from the well_knownstatement that India lives in its villages, GandhiJf dldhold forth against cities with some feroc$r. ,.I regardthe growth of cities as an evil thing, unfortunate formanklnd and the world, unfortunate for England andcertainly unfortunate for India. The Brttish haveexploited India through its cities. The latter haveexploited the villages. The blood of the villages is thecement with whteh the edillce of the cifles ls bullt."rStrong words, tndeed, but it should be rememberedtJrey were prompted by GandhiJi's anguish about thedecllne of the village economy, the impact of forelgncloth on indigenous spinnlng and weavlng, and thesiphoning off of the produce and raw materials toforelgn markets. GandhiJi's view on industrialisailonand materialism should not be assumed to convey aconsistent denunciation of ciiles en masse. On thecontrary, he wrote positively about clttes and theneed to manage them properly. ..I consider myself alover of munictpal life", he wrote ln young India ln1929, "I think it ls a rare privilege for a person to flndhtmself in the position of a Munictpal Councillor... itls a sacred task to be approached in a sptrit ofservlce."2 Elsewhere he observed that,.the governmenthas hltherto used them (municipaltttes) to consoltdateIts power. But when the cldzens are united they canattaln muntcipal home rule in a moment..3 There lsIttfle polnt, therefore, in lnvo}dng Gandh{t's nameand belabourtng a needless controversy on whatrepresents Indta today-its villages or cities. The truthis they both do. Especially ln post Independent Indiaurbanlsatlon is malnly the spatial mantfestaflon of

180

the

Power to tte PPopIe?

country.It ts known that the contributlon of agriculture

to the na domestic product in percentage termshas been steadily going down, while the share of

and, more signlflcantly, of servlces hasbeen ily increaslng. Thts, however, does not trnean

decllne ln agrlculture as such. Agricr,lltureconunu to employ a signiflcant part of the lAbour

in absolute terms the value of agriculturalalso been going up. Indeed, lncreaFes in

productlvtty and incomes have errlerged

as an t determinant of urbanlsafion acrossthe co . Dlstrtcts like Ludhiana, Gurdaspur,

rnal, Bardhaman, West Godavari,etc., whtch contrlbute more than I per

cent to India's total rlce or wheat crop, reveal agee of urbanisation as compared to thehtgher

res State averages.4 While manufacturingservlces also continue to be important

an

force andproducts

Hlssar,c

lndustrysourceschangesdtstrlcts

needsaslde.

constltuaverage.

c changes which have swept across the

f urbanlsatton, the economic and Focialplace tn the 'front line' agricultural

lndlcate strong potentlal. In terrtrrs of

voice ofthat electorate cannot be brlrshednumber of MPs and MLA's that the Urbanchoose may be less even though urban

ncles have a larger electorate than theThe reason for that ls the freeue on

emp t and lncome, the mandt towns are equallydynamicpolttlcal

centres of manufacture and trade. t\s force at least one-third of the country's

electoraGuJarat,

ls urban. In States like Maharashtra,

flgure isrll Nadu, Karnataka or Kerala the presently to be 40 per cent or even more. The

fume Pendhg Issues lgl

dellmltatlon slnce 1976 whtch has prevented anyrearrangement of Lok Sabha and Assemblyconstltuencles on the basls of current populauon.

Coplng wtth and managing these economlc changesand facllltatlng a more equltable dlstrlbuflon of thegalns are lmportant concerns of local as much asnatlonal and State governments. It makes no sense,therefore, to arttflclally separate the substance of ruraland urban self-governance. Democracy, decentra-llsatlon, people's parttcipatlon, empowerment of theweaker sectlons of the soclety, accountablllty orprodmtty to cltlzens are all lssues whlch cannot beclasslfled as etther rural or urban. Theyare tndlvlslbleand public pollcy cannot but treat them otherwtse.

As for the physlcal aspects of urbanlsaflon, lt lsoften argued that outslde of metropolltan areasurbanlsatlon poses no maJor issues tn regard toplannlng, development or admlnlstraflon. Thls lsstmply not true. From the l99l census we can lnferthat out of about 5OO dtstricts ln the country about32O may be regarded as predomlnanfly rural ln thesense that urban populatlon ln these dtstrlcts ls onlyabout 25 per cent or less. On the other hand, aboutthlrty dlstrlcts are predomlnantly urban wlth thelrurban populatton ranglng from 50 to IOO per cent. Inthe remalnlng hundred districts, urban populaUon lsmore than 25 per cent and is lncreaslng rapldly. Inseventy of these dlstrlcts the decenntal urban growthrate durlng the perlod l98l-91 exceeded 60 per cent.(rSuch dlstrlcts are to be found across the country, forexample Karlmnagar ln Andhra Pradesh, Kammp tnAssam, Kasargod ln Kerala, Chttradurga tn Karnataka,Banaskantha ln GuJarat, or Rewarl ln Haryana. Mostofthese dlstrlcts have at least a dozen towns ofvarylng

r82 PoLDer to the People?

growtng fast; these towns are not islands inbut closely linked to the surroundlng

last version of the 74th dmendment Bill, awas added to Article 243Q whereby

de.that urbanisation has been prompted

by mtc growth whether of industry, servlces oragrlcul , tt is surprising and unfortunate that in

slzes,tsolatlo

the veryprovlso

an lndrather

thet could exclude lndustrlal townships from

of the Act. The proviso states that "amav not be constituted ln an urban area

or part f as the Governor may, having regard tothe slze of the area and municipal services being

or proposed to be provided by an indllrstrialestab t ln that area and sueh other factors ashe may flt, by publlc notiflcation speciS to be

townshlp". Thts provlso appea-rs to be aaddltlon which did not flgure at all in

The co

any of e earlier versions of the ConstitutionalAmen t draft including the one which wasreported upon by the Joint Parliament Commlttee.

slderatlons whtch weighed with thet in maklng this proviso are not clear. Thewtth the so-called industrial townships or

townshlps ln post-Independence India hasbeen ahouslng

one. While standards of planning,roads, etc., have been qulte hlgh, the cost of

them has been a serious burden on theIndus . The Parllament Commlttee on Public

tngs had made several observations aboutthe non vlalblllty of such townships.T An extensive

comp.rny or proJect townships built in Indtastudyafter focusing ln partlcular on the so-

townshlps of Durgapur, Bhllai, Bokarocalled

fume Pending Issues

and Rourkela revealed that there have been se@usflnancial and management problems tn these pmpanytownships apart from signiflcant social lssues facedby a 'stngle employer and its captlve' populatton.E Theexperience with the so-called Tata Zamlndarl ofJamshedpur in Blhar has also not been a happy oneetther for the cttizens especlally those not worklng forany of the Tata Companles or the government,responsible for dealing wi,th the out growth andpertpherles of Jamshedpur. Yet the preservatlon ofthe Tata Company's Zamindari status appears to havebeen one of the reasons for inserting the spectalproviso. International experlence has also shown thatthis type of company town, where the companymanagement assumes a'womb to tomb' responslbllttyfor a dependent population, has been unwlse. Bydenylng partlctpation to the people in the managementof thetr town the companles have also dentedthemselves any prospects of taxatton. Agalnst suchexperience the proviso to Artlcle 2430 is lne:rpllcable.Prior to the Amendment many of these companytownships were administered by an Eurangementknown as Notified Area Committees. The 1989Amendment Bill speciflcally stated ttrat such NoUiedArea Commlttees would be deemed to be nag€rrpanchayats lf their population is less than IO,OOO.

The 74th Amendment as finally enacted does notcontaln any such clause. The only redeemlng featureis that no State appe€rrs to have taken recourse tothis proviso so far ln speci$rlng lndustrlal townshlpsand excluding them from the appltcatton of theamended constitutlonal provlsions.

Milltary cantonments however have always re-mained out of the purview of municipal laws in most

183

fore problems of coordtna,ting thelr develop-ment ttre surrounding areas.

Dlgtrlct

of 1924mentsThereExcep

lore,verythe oth

Tphyslcalasplaces.lnd

serlous

butform tonlng ls

Power to tte People?

of the world. In India the Cantonments Actthe admtntstratlon of such canton-

Boards constltuted for the pqrpose.only slxty-two such Boards in the cquntry.

ln metropolltan areas llke Kanpur,Pune, Secunderabadl Chennal, Banga-

or Calcutta where such cantonmepts area part of the total urban agglomerailon,

are somewhat secluded, and do not there-

Plannlng Commlttccand the countrv have to share the rfarlousand economlc resources of the dlstriCt suchtunlcatlons, water resources and tr'narketllocatton of water for lrrigation, drinking, orls alreadv a contentious lssue in mahv dis-

of small, medlum and large units in west-Pradesh, or the textlle and dying units ln

GuJarat or Andhra Pradesh foultrrg andwater courses are a well known phenom-

enon.s unlclpal solld wastes-be they chemlcals,plasttcs,tnto th

hospltal wastes or other debris-splll overcountryslde and ftnd thelr way into

streams. Agricultural lands at the fringelarge or small, are lncreaslngly prone to

lng andThese are problems that need undetrstand-ponse, not in a distant State head{uarterthe local area. The district needs a plat-

rrg with each other's wastes is anotherlem. The sugar mill and disttllery wastes

plre and resolve these lssues. Dlstrict plan-lmportant process for the purpose.

Some Pending Issues 185

While most of the States have provided for DtstrtctPlannlng Commlttees (DPCs) in the conformlty lawsand some like Andhra Pradesh and Orlssa have gotseparate laws for setting up the DPCs, in the llrstinstance only seven states-Haryana, Karnataka,Madhya Pradesh, RaJasthan, West Bengal, Tamll Naduand Kerala-established DPCs as envisaged ln the74th Amendment.ro The process has been delayedmainly because of some bureaucratic andorganlsational issues. First is the fact that the provi-sions on dtstrict planning are to be found ln the 74thrather than the 73rd Constitutional Amendment.Rural Development departments in the various Stategovernments have traditionally regarded distrtct levelplanning as falling in their domain but since theyflnd that the provlslons for the DPC are now a part ofthe 74th Constitutional Arnendment, under the tttlePart IX A Municipallties, their reaction sometimeshas been that these committees are the concern ofthe Urban Development or Municipal Affairs depart-ment ln the State. These departments, on the otherhand, do not have a clue about the obJectives andpurposes of the District Planning Committee and ex-pect that some other department, like Planning, wllltake care of it; The result is that the item often be-came orphaned between disinterested departments.

A second unresolved issue has been therelationship between the Zilla Parishad and the DPC.The amended Constltution envisages the DPC as astand alone entity. While Article 243 ZD provides formembers of a DPC to be elected by and from amongstthe elected members of the Zilla Parishad and of themunictpalitles in the distrlct, it does not speciS therelatlonshlp between the Zilla Parishad and the DPC.

186 Pouer ta the: People?

governments have, therefore, been left toown lnterpretatlons. In Assam, Karnrataka,

expected to lead and guide district planninghelp of the district adm-inistration.l2 The

Zilla Parishad President, the CEO of thethe Divtsional Commissioner and the

of the Dlstrict are ex-offfcio members. Thestlpulates that the Collector shall be the

The

Kerala, and West Bengal the State lawsenvisage the DPC as a part of the Zilla Parishad."The ofthe Parishad is also designated as

of the DPC. In Madhya Pradesh a mlrristergovernment ts the Chairperson of the

draw

of theDPC andwlth the

whlleParisCollectorAct also

lnvolved

c of the Zllla Parishad is a Vice Chatnman.GuJaratPlarming

d Maharashtra have long had DistrictDwelopment Committees with a mlnisrer

of the government as the Chalrperson. The viewgovernments has been that these districtare an adequate substitute for the DPCs.

of these

However, to fullil the Constitutional obligation, in998 Maharashtra enacted a separate DistrictComrnlttee Act.'3 The Act provides fbr the

OctoberPlannfngrninlster charge of the district to be the Chairperson

Member tary. The Maharashtra government hasthus co its past approach of treating Zilla

as one of the local bodles whtch will bedlstrtct planning but not take the lead.

Dlctrlct and DPCThe

DPC h itself been a matter of conslderablety and confusion. Even before thenal Amendment, the representatives of

of the district administratlon vis-a-vls the

varlous departments at the distrlct level did

fume Pending Issues t87

not regard district planning as an integrated exercise'

District Planning Boards or Councils, by whatever

name called, were regarded more as committees forhelping out interdepartmental cooperation in thelmplementation of various schemes. The formulationof plans and proJects, financial allocations, scheme

approval, technical supervision, monitoring' etc', were

all constdered the responstbility of the concerned

sectoral department. The Collector or the DistrlctMagistrate was regarded at best as a coordinator rather

than a leader or captatn ofthe team ofdistriet offlcials'

In fact. a team as such did not really edst except lna numerical sense. If some Collectors indeed performed

as a captain, lt was more because of ttrelr personality

and the degree of support they recelved from the

State governrnent.The language of the Constitutlonal Amendment

has also not helped to clarf the mandate of theDPC. Schedules l1 and 12 ltsted various items to be

entrusted to the panchayats and the municipalitleswhlch would require sector-wise planning' Apart from

the Schedule, the main body of the two Acts also

speclfies "the preparation of plan for economic

development and social justice" as a major purpose of

the panchayats and the municipaltties vide Articles

24g G and243W. The presumption, therefore, is thatboth rural and urban local bodies would formulateplans for thelr respective areas and then they wouldbe consolldated at the district level. At the same time,

"the consolldaflon and preparation of draft develop-

ment plan for the district as awhole" requlres matters

of common lnterest between the panchayats and the

municipalities to be consldered, including spatialplanning, sharing of water and other physical and

l

188

natu

Besides

nor anyare tosuchhealth,foof itandhave

dThus

howeverpoorlyon thebeenthethenls notbutStatestherelated

Power to ttrc people?

resources, tntegrated development ofcture, protecilon of the environmertrt. etc.the DPC ls also expected to consult variousons in its work. But neither the Constitution

f the State laws indicate which organibationsconsulted or what should be the process of

tatlon. For instancei a public iu/orks,

there not be much for the DpC to con$ult orconsoll ate. It is also observ€d that sectorald ts of a State do not really subscribqlto theconcept f their plans converging in a spatial sense inthe dis

role to play in these plans. In such a sltuation

lucation or agriculture departmerlt mayits own State-level sectoral plan with partsng to a particular district. The panchayatsclpalltles in that district may or may not

ct. Often their attitude is that any planby a Zllla Parishad or a Distrlct planning

be treaComml is Just another sectoral plan and should

ln the same manner as anv other

e scope and substance of dtstrlct plahnlng,uch its deslrabiltty, has remalned a verv

tal plan.

and a very badly lmplemented itemtrallsation agenda. Where DpC hds notwtthin aZllla Parishad, the ownership of

ttself has not been apparent. The DpC isas a one-shot one-tifne Commlttee. It

consldered a panchayati raj type of bodyan ad hoc group as in Tamil Naclu. In

Madhya Pradesh, GuJarat, and Maharashtrahas been that district planning can bethe pollcles, priorities and plans of the

State t only tf a minister of the State

r89Some Pendtng Issues

government presides over the process' Thts may not

f,e free of problems. A minister designated to head a

DPC may or may not hail from that dlstrict' If he

does, there may be charges from his fellow ministers

that he ts trytng to create a personal fiefdom in the

dtstrlct. If he does not, and is still nomlnated to head

the DPC, mlnisters hatllng from that district may feel

left out and also complaln that the DPC chairman

has no knowledge of the dlstrtct' The questlon wlll

also remaln as to who is responslble tn the State

Assembly for matters falling withtn the ambit of the

DPC. Will lt be the minister of the admtnlstrative

department for the panchayats, the sectoral mlnister

concerned, or the mlnlster designated for the distrlct?

Underllntng all these confltcting positlons ls the

fear that lf dlstrtct level planning was tndeed to become

multl-sectoral and lnter-departmental and also cover

project allocatlon, monltoring and supeMslon' it would.rru"lty enhance the power and influenc-e of the Zllla

Parfshad and other local bodtes in the distrlct' There

ts a prevatling vlew that for some years to come'

decentraltsatton wtll be accepted' if at all' only tn the

gram sabha, the vlllage panchayat- or the small town

irunlclpality. In terms of populatton' electorate'

executlve power or authority these levels are regarded

as manageable and not perceived as a threat to the

polltlcal leadershtp of the State' On the other hand'

"" orr" moves up the scale and deals wtth the dtstrtcts'

medlum towns and large city, the leadership tends to

be more apprehenslve about local autonomy and

authorlty' The dlstrlct ls the flrst maJor level where

the demand for local autonomy and the deslre for

State control are ltkely to come into confllct' Identlcal

fears surfaced durtng the l97Os when the Zilla

fivethatto becooffice as part of the reservation approach.ra

Distrlct entThe pects of a district emerging as a dlstinct

tier ofof the

Pouer to thd people?

indeed became prominent and powerful inthe all n and dispensation of government fundsas lnThese6btheinstanterm forelecti

nataka, Maharashtra, Gujarat and RaJasthan.ears have also prompted somi State

to twenty months for thd ostensible reasonwould enable more Zilla parlshad members: chairpersons and facilitate rotation of the

)rnance needs to be considered in the lightcircumstances. Whatever be the loftv

as a speclfic objecflve. The word governancerr that matter what consdtutes a tier of

advisory functions on the one hand, to,lementing some schemes on the other.

ional Amendment as a body adequatelyor reflecting the characteristics qf the

of thee4pressed while debating the various drafts

titutional Amendment, this was not

Itself, or

loosely, was loosely understood, and even morecussed-ranging from Zilla pariShads

perfodlrectlyThe Zilla Parishad itself has not been conceived inthe Co

district.elected

te tl:e bulk of its members are to beterritorial cbnstituencies, Article 245 C

allows States to provide for the representailon ofns of intermediate level panchayats in theel. The intermediate panchayats, in turn,district I

Some Pending Issues l9r

can have representatives from ttre village panchayats'

The Zilla Parishad is, therefore, regarded as the apex

of rural panchayats though in actual fact this need

not be so. Ifthe territorial condtituencies are properly

delineated, ttre Zllla Parishad's composition would

reflect the rural-urban character ofthe dtstrict' Fune

or Nagpur Zilla Parlshad will not be the same as that

of Sangtf or Satara; nor will the Coimbatore dlstrlctpanchiyat be the same as that of Dharmapuri'Hopefully, If a Zilla Parishad's comPositlon is

adequately representative of the district's rural or

urban character, it will be reflected in its leadership

as well. It would also help if some representation ln' the Zilla Parishad is given to the urban local bodies

as well, in the salne manner as Panchayat Samitis'

The Zilla Parishad could then be regarded as a more

broad-based democratically composed body at the

distrlct level with the potential to emerge as a districtgovernment rather than an apex rural panchayat'

Why were these questions not raised before drafting

the Constituttonal Amendments? Indeed they were to

some extent. RaJlv Gandhl raised them when he

addressed the Dlstrict Magistrates during the

workshop series on Responsive Administration urging

them to conslder 'how best to marry the institutionsof Panchayati RaJ with the requirements of District

Planning. Panchayatt Raj without district planning

migh be a somewhat hollow shell, even as districtplinntng wlthout Panchayati RaJ would be

,rrtr.pt"""tttative. Democratlc district planningrequires expertise. Your task here is to see how''wiihout sacrlfictng technical excellence' districtplanntngl based on representative political insfltuilons '

wlll reflect the people's priorities and aspirations'"rs

r92

He hadlf posslbresponslrevenues,such as needs, requirements of the wbakersections, by changing the paternalisttc model ofdlstrict tlon to make it more responslveand partt"Would thbe best by Zllla Parlshad which is akln to a formof distrtct t or would it be better to have amulttpllci of bodies with separate Jurisdlctlons? Andif the centhe Zlllarepresen tlves like MPs and MI Asr.ro

Thewere limltable his ideals and ideas with a group likeDistrict Mhis own.numerous conferences and semlnars that follorved.

llltles to the district level by mobilltslngmaintatnlng a focus on some priortty areas

patory. He had also raised the questions:needs of responsive distrirct administtation

role ln district planning is assignbd tohad how do we associate other elected

.e dld take place, but the participantsPerhaps RaJiv Gandhi felt more comfort_

istrates who in age and temper matbhedthls workshop series, as well as ln the

Pouer to the Feople?

r urged consideration ofhow to relate. andlntegrate, decentralisation of powers and

r had cautioned there would be resis_approaches, whether from polluclaris or

RaJlvtanceotheronce

to

have made

people wo d come around to explore and devise thelegal andning to be

That diBengal andthe debat

ech ons of bureaucracy. His hope was thatthe tttutional mandate was secured, rhost

anisational arrangements,for distrlct plan_ut in place.I happen. More so, ironically, ln WestKerala which were stridently vocal dulingon the Amendment. These two Stateinslderable progress towards meaningful

decen tlon, gtving flesh and substance to lttreframe of Constttutional Amendm€nt. The Kefala

193fume Pendittg Issues

State Planning Board has taken the tnitiative inlaunching . ttigttty participatory and widespread

planning lrocess. The Peoples Plan Campaign as it is

""* Ltto*tt, has enabled the 1,142 village and block

panchayats to prepare development plans for their

o*r, "i."" with the help of statistlcal and other

information compiled by various voluntaryorganisations. rTThe Kerala Sashthra Sahitya Parishad

had strown the way for this in a small panchayat

called Kalyasserl in Kannur District' The integratlon

of these panchayat plans as well as those prepared

by fifty-flve municipalities and three corporations is

ttre tast of the fourteen District Planning Committees

in the State. Headed by the Zilla Parishad chairperson'

and supported by voluntary technical professionals'

the DPG were able to accomplish thts lntegration

while complementing the packages wlth their own

plans.18 Forty per cent of the outlay of Kerala's Ninth

iive-Year Plan is accounted for by the Peoples' Plan'

Apart from plannlng, the devolution of powers and

functtons and, more tmportantly, the transfer of the

related administrative apparatus to the control of the

rural and urban local bodies have rendered Kerala's

decentralisatlon programme one of the largest of its

kind tn the world.teWest Bengal, another State in the forefront of

oppositlon to n4iv Gandhi, has been largely successful

in tnfusing substance and strength to the obJectives

of the Constituttonal Amendment' Its DPC Act was

one of the flrst ln the country specifftng the Presldent

of the Ztlla Partshad as the chairperson of the DPC

and the DM/Collector as the Secretary'2o The West

Bengal Act has taken parttcular care to ensure that

ttre bpC addresses both rural and urban issues

Potuer to the people?

Is

aJlthe execution and mairrtenance of variou;

powerspan , power to levy ,tolls, rates, and fees. etc],In theDPC Act

a Marxist paraiox?

ofbe argued that such extensive devolution

onlypolitical ership. The question has been raisedhowa party is able to reconcile .democratic

provision of an urban ,development sub_e. The West Bengal pandhayat Act of l9Z3the Constltutional Amendrnent, it provideJlve mandate for the Zilla parishads covering

control over community assets, supef\risinger the intermediate panchayats and villagJ

ake of the Constitutional Amendmeflt. thehas added to this mandate.

in Kerala and West Bengal has been possibleuse of the dominance and conttnuity of the

, which is the party's organising principle,:ratlc decentralisailon', which is the essencerati raj. It has been suggested that pbwersdevolved to the lower echelons of the same

ta and about 30 per cerrt in West Bengalby Opposition parties, At least in these

both the States also point out the fallacvlation that 'decentralisation' has been ,rs.i

)mmunist party is really so authoritarianit want to share power with the Opposition

level?22 Prima facie the logic of theconvlncing; that powers have lndeed beenalso borne out by the facts. yet partisan

cenwith'ofhaveparfytell a

whywoulat theargument

not to the local bodies. Flowever the factsstory. About 40 per cent of the local

bodies ina.re conareas the writ of the "party bossesi' would not run.I.eadersin theto the centralism of the party. Their questionis if the

devolved

Some Pending lsxrcs 195

poltUcs is not totally absent. When some Manctst

members defected and tried to remove the chairman

from a panchayat in Payyavur, a Kerala village' the

CPM State leadership tried to prevent that by strong

arm tactics and also by further amending the antl-defectlon laws. The glare of the media and courtdirectives made the leadership retrace its shapes and

reconcllq itself to the "loss" of the panchayat' The

'Payyavur Portent'was highlighted by newspapers as

an-ominous sign for panchayats but fortunately the

event has not been repeated elsewhere'23

Sharing of politlcal power is a complexphenomenon ln any situation. It cannot be resolved

lnrougtr theoretical critiques on single or multi-partyrule, or organlsailonal arrangements however'elaborate

they may be. The problems of power sharlng also

depend on changing political circumstances'Karnataka's experience reveals how the course of

decentralisation, thought to have been established

well and truly after Nasir Sab's pioneering legislation

and the electlons thereafter, can still be deflected' For

a spell of nearly five years the prospects of thepanchayats, including the District Councils, emerglng

as viable and workable units of self-government

seemed to be bright. In April 1989, Karnataka came

under President's Rule because of very differentreasons. However, during the eight months of thatrule, powers of the local bodies were curtailed'drastically so in the case of the District Councils'24

This was around the same time that Rajiv Gandht

was trying to mobilise support across the country for

his decentralisation initiative. The NagarpalikaSammelan, held at Bangalore in June 1989' interesting

and constructive though it was' could not have gone

196

downthe ca

carne todid notthefunding

bodies

in the

ll with the Karnataka public as advancingse of decentralisation because of thi

in the host state. Though the Congress:r in Karnataka in December lgg9, things

Power to the people?

. The new government undetrmined

etc. The government's hostility to the localually threatened the very suiwival of

which had been so carefully nurtured

s of all the District Councils ln regard tochanges in the budget, hiring oi staff,

called totheir was cancelled at the last minute becauseof RaJivbetween

of party afflliations. power sharing becamea contenthings tothe 64theffect anagain.

Shartng and PatronageCon

bya

publtcabout

clout with the government, ability to accessor simply Jealousy and apprehension

mutuallylevels ofand

te. Both the Congress and the non_Congresselected to the local bodies resented the State

s stance. A special session of the Assemblv:nd the Panchayat Law and thereby crrrtuit

ndhi's intervention.2s Conllicts arose openlyState level and local level politicians

tlons regarding power shafing are prorrrptedety of considerations such as poliiical

. Resolution perhaps lles in devising areficial relationship between the different

clitical leaders. Elections at the nationallevels ln quick succession seem to have

brought sense of realism and the need for a more

Some Pending Issues t97

enduring political relationship between candidates andtheir constituencies which can ensure re-election.Instead of a mass of supporters whose loyalty dependson personal quid pro quo, political leaders in someStates appear inclined to favour a network of partyfunctionaries and grassroot workers at the pemchayat,town and district levels. A Lok Sabha or an Assemblyconstituency contains rep,resentatives of severalpanchayats and towns. It will not be easy for thecontenders to win at any one level without the supportof those who are already functioning at other levels.Allahabad, for example, comprises seven Assemblyand two tok Sabha constituencies. The Corporationitself consists of sixty wards with an elected Councillorfrom each and a directly elected Mayor. The MP, theML,A, the Mayor and Councillor all need each other.Each is as interested in his or her own re-election asany other and that task will be facilitated if they cancome together and function as a network, even if thatnetwork is transitional. The success of Digvijay Singhand the Congress in the Madhya Pradesh Assemblyelections in 1998, and the repeated re-election ofJyoti Basu's government in West Bengal, have bothbeen held up as examples of sustaining support fromthe people as well as party workers and functionariesin the decentralised levels. The various measures takenthereafter in Madhya Pradesh and, more recently, inother States like Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, andMaharashtra to strengthen panchayati raj are citedas an outcome of this lesson.2{i

The MPLADS as a DlstortlonThe Member of Parliament Local Area Development

Scheme (MPLADS) introduced in 1993 to enable

Co :. Since MPs are not a part of the executive

198

meiden

elemenschemeto eachand ge

andofaarguedtenable.theand

India. F

Power to the People?

of both the Lnk Sabha and RaJya Sabha tosmall works of eapital nature i4 their

has been an uncertain and distortingin the decentralisation scene. Under the

much as Rs. 2 crores per year is availableto be spent on schemes of his or her cholce

them implemented thrOugh the District

all items of works financed are essentiallynature and not in the Union List it mav be

t the whole arrangement is not legallydes, the provision of fr,rnds to be spent atr of the MPs and outside of the budgetory

procedures of the Central or the State

rt of the Comptroller and Auditor Gerleral offrom reforming and correcting tt, the L,ocal

gov ts may be considered extra constittrtlonaland ts to diversion of public funds to privatecontrol. in American politics is referred to as a"pork " has thus been institutionalised irl India.Unfort ately in most cases the selectiorr andtmpl tatlon of the schemes do not go throUgh thelocal like Panchayats or Municipalities. Thevarious deficiencies and irregularities in the

ntation of the MPLAD Scheme has beenimplembrought light and adversely comrnented upon in the1998

Area lopment Scheme has been extended toof State Assemblies as well in several states

to the t of Rs. 50 lakhs per mernber per year. Thetotal available through this discretionarjr routeis well two thousand crores gf rupees pe[ year.The tionary scheme is in glaring contrast tod n and local autonomy.

Some Pendirg lssrrcs

Multi-Munictpal AgglomerationsIf maintaining the rural-urban continuum

securing their inter-relationships through the

Parishad and the District Planning Committee

I99

andZlllahave

remained complex and unresolved problems the'ur-ban-urban continuum' has been no less intractable'

The census of 1991 identifies 296 urban agglomera-

tions in the size class I, that is with a population of

a lakh or more. If a larger cut off flgure of ten lakhs

or one million is applied, the number will be twenty-

three. Of these, barring a few like Ludhiana' Madural'

Lucknow, or Surat' which are large but single mu-

nicipal enilties, most others are urban agglomera-

tlons comprislng several municipal Jurisdictlons'27These multi-municipal urban a€€ilomeratlons have

reached their present dimension and conflguration

over a period of time. Growth has ovemrn traditional

boundaries. Initlally the boundaries of the central

city could be extended, two or three times as in the

case of Mumbai but after that such extensions were

resisted. Surrounding municipalities were not pre-

pared to give up their jurisdictions' The Calcutta

Metropolitan area now comprises three corporations'

thirty-four municipalitles and numerous non-munici-pal Lrban localities.2s The metropolitan areas of-Chennat,

Bangalore, Mumbal and Hyderabad cover

ten to thirty municipal jurisdictions' In Delhi' nomi-

nally there are only three--the Cantonment' the NDMC

and the Delhi Municipal Corporation (MCD)' But the

MCD itself is a leviathan covering nearly l '6O0 sq km

and stretching across vastly different localittes such

as Shakur Baiti' Rohini and Greater Kailash'2s World

experience has shown that devising a system of gov-

"ri*". reconcillng local autonomy with a metropoli-

200

WhiIe

their domain, the agglomeratton ltself needs

actlon.and dralnage, abatement of air pollution,

es of itenrs where one city corporrationor the cipality alone cannot achleve mu0h inisolatlon.

complexity of problems, are formidable.the tasks are numerous, multiplens for their discharge become inevltable.

us.the corporailons or the municipaliflesin these agglomerations may be zealous of

wlde perspective, plannlng, advocacy andces of water, disposal of waste, traffic

BMC for instance, horwever competentItself to be, cannot do much about

ort ln Mumbai if the Ministry of RallWayssuburban system does not subscribe to

plan. The Government of India's Ministrvment or Maharashtra's State pollrrtion

power to the Feople?

has not been easy. Their size, arrd the

cannot do much to mitigate polluilonC's acUve collaboration. Above all,, the

te and local governments, the public andsector, tndustry, comrnerce and the

First'is now a muctr heralded thinkby the Corporate Sector and one of its

tanscaleBecaus

BesldesCentralconsplcu

it maypubllchandllng

of EnvlroControlwithout

Central,the privcltizenry.tank set

maineconornlcmuch int on and collaboration between the

ce of the infrastructure to keep the mlghtyrachine of Mumbai going i$ a task requiring

tasks ls to develop a vision for Bombay,s future. TheMetropoll Planning Committee was envisaged asan inter- platform for simllar purpqses.The g of the tdea of an MpC, its inclusion in the

fume Pendirq lssues 20r

74th Amendment and its non-implementaUon have

been discussed in an earlier chapter. The Maharashtragovernment passed an ordinance in June 1999 to

enable the creation of a 45-member Metropolitan'

Planning Committee in Mumbai, Pune and Nagpur

metropolltan areas.3o Thirty of the members are to be

elected from among the elected members of the

municipalities and panchayats in the area inproportion to their populatlon' The other flfteen

including the chairperson, representatives of trade'

industry and other walks of public life are to be

nominated by the State government. While the

enabling legislatton has now been passed, the MPCs

have not been constituted so far when the MPC is

termed an opportunity will be available to bring thegovernment and industry together in chartlng a course

for Mumbat's future.

The East Aslan ExPerienceThe process of decentralisation itself may work

against a metropolitan perspective, because individualmunicipalities become reluctant to part with theautonomy and powers they have now derived' To give

provincial status to large cities, as has been done by

Cnitt", can be one possible approach' This would,

however, call for a greater degree of sophisticationand maturity than what this country has been able to

display so far. Beijing, Shanghai and TianJin are 'city

sta-tes' so to speak' The mayor appointed by the

national government is also the head of the province'

The province comprises several urban and rural

Jurisdictions. For instance, the province of Shanghai

consists of the old city of Shanghai as well as anumber of other urban areas and townshlps and

202

cities, e Tokyo or Seoul, have a federativet. The Tolryo Metropolitan Area is a two_

tier fed

severalof autoncountry,

one level;Metropoelectedthe me

MetropoliattemptsMetropoli

calledby the

up, oftengovernan

Potuer to the F,eople?

ups of villages as well. Each has a measureand functions as a Municipalityl or aa partlcular jurisdiction.3r Some other

on comprising several municipalities atey send their representaitives to the Tokyo

Assembly, The Governor is also an. The resources and functions between

politan area and various municipalities

. In Delhi, the executive domain is

', and the local bodies. Thls confused set_desiribed as a 'grand design for non-', cannot be a model for mega cityt. On the representative front, 7 memlbers

it are carefully demarcated. MetropolitanManlla :rs eighteen municipal jurisdictions. AMetro Commlssion, headed by Imelda Marcoswhen her usband was President of philippinesi wasdisband by Corazon Aquino and replaced by a weak

Development Authority. Despite variousuring the regime of Fidel Ramos, the

Development Authority continuds tostruggle search of a mandate and authoritv.s2

In the case of India, since most of the largemetropoli areas are also the seat of the State

there is no inclinatioh on the part ofany Statesuch citt

p to accord a provincial status to

between the Central government, the so_of the National Capital Territory headedMinlster, the Lt. Governor who is a kind

of mlx of a representative and an exec!.rtivefun

nt, 70 MLAs and 134 Corporationof Parare keen to occupy the same political

Some Pendmg Issues

space. They all regard themselves as representativesof the people and therefore want to be active at severallevels at the same time.

Because of the scale of their problems and highvisibility, the mega clties of India pre-empt much ofthe attention and resources given to address urbanproblems. The problems persist and, from time totime, they cast a shadow on the fortunes of the State'spolitical leadership. The CPM in West Bengal hasalways had a hard time dealing with Calcutta. TheShiv Sena and the B.JP have to continually watchMumbai and infuse it every nowand thenwith stzeableinjecilons of infrastructure investment. Elections havenot been held in Hyderabad for tJle past few years,because of the apprehension that the Mayor to beelected directly by the public at large for a five yearterm may emerge as a counter point to the Stateleadership. However, the offlcial reason put forth isthat the city's boundaries need to be enlarged toabsorb the edsttng nine small municipalities whichsurround it. The 1998 elections in Delhi, which sawthe Congress trounce the BJP, raised doubts aboutthe prowess of the nailonal government in managingthe capital city. This kind of reaction needs to beavoided. Multi-municipal urban agglomerations arecomplex entities on their own and they cannot betreated as mere extensions of State headquarters.They dre, ln essence, inter-governmental cities. Theyneed speclal and lnnovative arrangements reconcilingthe twin poles of centralisation and decentralisation,between aggregation-enabling scale economtes andefftciency on the one hand, and disaggregationpromoting proximity and sensitivity to local needs onthe other. Mega ciiles in India have largely avoidedfaclng this challenge.

203

204 Power to the People?

NOTES

"Back to the Village". ln the mtutd oJ ttecompiled by R.K. Prabhu in the RojgarPublications, Ahmedabad, 1945,in Young Indta. 28 March 1929.in Young India. 3 November 192 I .

GandhiGandhi,

Navj eevanGandhiGandhi

2.3.

J.

lo.

I l.12.13.

14.

Sab

K.C. Theme Paper on Urbanisotion. LBNational Academy of Administration, November 1996.

K.C. Under Flanchrlse oJ Urban Areas.ph, Centre for Policy Research, Delhi.of India 1991. Paper II of 19€11.

of the Committee on Public Undertakings: Third Lok8th August, lnk Sabha Secretariat, Delhi, 1965.

makrishnan, K.C. "New Towns in India:" Indiante of Management, Calcutta mimeo, June 1997.

' F$h Report. Delhi: Centre for Science and

8.Insti

v. tneent, 1999.

oJ Decentralised Gooernance in Rural India: Vol I &2, ed R.C. Chaudhurv & S.P. Jain, National Institute of

Development (NIRD), Hyderabad.Ibid.Ma Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act,

htra District Planning CommitteeOct 1998."Sta kvel Leaders and Panchayati Raj In Karnataka".

by Prof. B.K. Chandrasekhar, prbsented at the $eminar

r956.Ordinance.

on ts, Raiiv Gandhi Foundation, December 1997.15. Inau ural address to Collectors in the workshop on

Administration at Coimbatore, June l98E; Raiius Selected Speeches and Wnfings, Vol 4, PuL ication

Government ol lndia. 1989.Ibad.Ma George. "Kerala's Success Story". Hindu, 24 May1999

's Participation in Planning: Kerala Experiment", Dpadhayay Economic and. Folitical Weekly, 27

16.).7 .

18.Ban

-3 October 1997.19. Ri Frank & Barbara Chapin, "Power to the Mdlayalee

Some Pending Issues

people", Economic and. Political Weeklg,29 November 1997.20. District Planning Committee Act, West Bengal 1994.21. Chaudhury R.C, & Jain S.P. ed. patterns o.f Decentralised.

Gouernance in Rtro;l India Vol. I & 2. Hyderabad: NationalInstltute of Rural Development (NIRD).

22. lsaac Thomas, T.M. Peoples plan Campaign Kerala: StatePlanning Board, lgg8.

23. 'Payyavur portent", Indian Express, Chennai, 8 January1999.

24, Manor, James, Chapter on Karnataka in Democracg andDecentrolisdtion in South Asia end. West. Cambridge: lg9g.

25. "A Constitutional Outrage". Article by Mani Shankar Aiyar,Sunday Magozine, 3l January 1999.

26. Ibad.

27. Census of India 1991.28. 'Urban West Bengal". Institute of l,ocal Government and

Urban Studies, Calcutta: f995-96.29. Municlpal Corporation of Delhi Handbook3O. Shcnghai-Reuolutinn & Deuelopment in an Asian Metropotis.

ed. Christopher Howe. Cambridge University press, l9gl,31. Metroplitan Manogenant; K C Sivaramakrishnan and Leslie

Green;, Asian Experience; World Bank and Oxford UniversityPress. 1988

32. Matnrashtra Metropolitan Planntng Committees (Constitutionand Functions) Ordinance 1999 (Mah.Ord XI of 99): June1999.

205

that pan hayats and municipalities should functionf self-government. That objecttve will be lost

are treated merely as agents of the

them. It

Theand

as unitsif these

authoritatlves.

of authas the

10

thority, Accountability andProximity to Citizens

ce of the decentralisation exercise in Indtading the Constitution for that purpose is

ty should have a single person focus such

State Central governments for implementing ormonito programmes and projects sanctiorled by

also not the intention that the panchayatsand m cipalities would be merely an administrativere- ement with a layer of elected representatives

over them. Since "power to the people" haspresibeen th declared objective, obviously executive

has to be vested in the elected represen-responsibility for the functioning of the

local es, the exercise of executive authority forthat p , and accountability to the public whichthis en , all have to go together. Unfortunately,confuslo , contradictions, and inaction continue to

this regard. There are five issues whilch areprevailpertinen to the situation. The first ls whether e*ercise

ead of a panchayat or the president of a

Authoritg, Accountabilitg and Proimtty to Citizens 2O7

muntcipality. Second, in what manner should theday-to-day exercise ofexecuilve authority be detailedand allocated to the officials and other staffappointedby the local bodies? The third, arising fiom ttre second,is the inter-relationship between the electedrepresentatives and the officials. The fourth is thedegree ofcontrol to be exercised by a State governmentover a municipality. And finally, there has to beaccountabiltty to the public.

While the Constltutional Amendment has left it tothe States to determine whether heads ofmunicipaltties or city corporations should be directlyelected by voters, or indirectly elected by and fromamongst the elected councillors, it is not intendedthat all powers should be concentrated in theSarpanch or the municipal Fresident. Indeed, a fairmeasure of that may be unavoidable in villages andsmall towns where one person has to act and takeresponsibility instead of processing every decisionthrough an elaborate apparatus of committees. Inmedlum towns and large cities a simplistic 'StrongMayor' approach may not be workable. In fact, thestrength of the mayor may itself depend on the supporthe or she is able to mobilise and the extent to whichthe exercise of executlve authority is shared in aratlonal manner €unong the elected representatlves.

Tamll Nadu. Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Fradeshare the three States where mayors are elected directlyby the cit5r's voters at large. The Mayor of Chennai,for instance, has one of the largest electorates in thecountry. In all these three States the mayors have atenure of five years. The procedure for removing themis adequately complex and in effect makes them moresecure than the Chief Minister or other ministers in

208 Pouser to the Feople?

t In Uttar Pradesh, for example, a motion of

tive appointed by the State goverrrment.of whether a may€r is directly or indirectly

r whether the tenure is one vear or more.on prevails in most cities. Mayors or

e I lth, both former mayors, had pleadedements but in vain.2 The Eovernrnent's

was that the Constitution was not the place, the States should. Unfortunately. thfls has

no ce cannot be brought against the mayorfor the two years. Thereaftel it needs the supportofat I one-third of the members to be moved anda two- majority to be passed. However, Uhoughthe rs are blessed with a long life they have littlebyway o execuilve responsibilities. Powers are dsuallyshared tween various standing committees and achief

the S

Irrespecelected,this simunici

Rana infor suchresponseto do

past.

and

chairpersons in most States have thusceremonial entities, chiefly "cutting ribbons

and babies".Duri g the debate on the Constitutional

Amen t the need for an appropriate stnirctureu'ithin corporation and municipalities, and layingdown guidelines in this regard, were discussed.Haroob Mehta in the lOth Lnk Sabha and KaShiram

not ed. The inability to address the problemsof struc in municipal governance has resulted inthe con uation of several anomalies from the cdlonial

so-called distribution of powers between

Molines of distinction between delibefation

tion, between debate and decision, ca.n neverreality there is a large gap between what

the deli erative and executive wings of anyorg )n may be a good principle as set forth by

eu, but in running a city on a day-to-daybasis th

be clear.

Auttwrity, Accountabtlitg and. Proximifu to Citizerc

is declared as policy and what actually happens onthe ground; and the process of reconciling the two isoften erratic. In such clrcumstances, the electedrepresentatives find that legislation or so-called policy-making is only a partial exercise, often uninspiringand polltlcally unrewarding. For a municipal councillorto content himself with policy matters and to leaveadministration to others is considered the height offolly.3

In the various patterns which obtained in Indiancities during the British period the municipalCommissioner remained the kingpin of municipaladmlnistration. Usually, he was selected andappointed by the State government rather than thecity government. All the municipal staff worked underhis supervision and direction. More importantly, asan appotntee of the State government, he wasanswerable to that government and not to the city.This conflict of jurisdiction and loyalties withconsequent damage to the running of the municipalityhas for long remalned an ilem of much debate. In theabsence of a conscious search for alternatives, thecontrdversies usually degenerated into disputes ofpersonality and tended to focus more on the perksand privileges attached to the Commissioner's postrather ttran on the exercise of his substantive powers.The All India Council of Mayors, the Central Councilof Local Self Government and different StateCommissions and expert bodies have examined theproblem and agreed on the nced for better distributionof powers and responstbilites between the appointedCommissioner and an elected municipal chairpersonor mayor. It was expected that the Conformity laws inthe wake of the Constitution Amendment would

209

situatio has become worse. For examole. the DelhiMuni Corporation Act 1957, which was afnendedin 1996 stipulates that the entirerexecutive pdwer forthe of carryring out the provisions of the Actshall in the Commissioner.a In Mahat'ashtra,Presid ts of Municipalities are recognised as a"Muni Authority" and have been given some

thepowers and they also supervise the work ofofficer.s But in the case of Corpofations,Mumbai and Nagpur, the Mayor is not even

2to

addonehave

inclu

thishaveWest

Potuer to thA People?

these issues. Unfortunatelv, this has riot beenmost cases and the provisions of the past:n allowed to remain. In some cases. the

the State. Curtailing the executive domain, or placing it under vaiious kinds of State

t. In various other States, municipal lawssimilar provisions. Only in Kerala and

was a conscious attempt made to devise

a'Mprln

Authority' and the executive powers vestin the Commissioner.6 This is another

on of the fear of the large city, sirrrilar tothe fr of the district, emerging as a focus o[ powerparallelof thecontrol, has been regarded as a way of countering

a new cture and vest elected mayors and thechairperson with executive powers so thatand accountability can go together. The

Mayor- -Council. first introduced in Calcutta andlater to other municipalities of West Bengal,is the of this approach.

Authorltyayor-in-Council (MIC) system introduced inadopts the cabinet mode of governance.T

or is elected by the elected councillorb of the

The

Auttorlty, Accowtabrlitg and. Proximitg to Cillz-ens 2ll

Corporation. The mayor in turn appoints a deputymayor and a madmum of ten other elected councillorsand assigns to them different subjects. Together theyform the Mayor-in-Council, which is the executlveauthority ln the Corporation and ls collectivelyanswerable to the Corporation councll. TheCommissloner, though appointed by the Stategovernment, is answerable to the mayor and functlonsas the principal executlve oflicer in carrytng out thedecisions of the Mayor-in-Council. Another person iselected by the councillors to preside over the meetingsof the Council as lts Chairperson. A MuntcipalAccounts Committee, chalred by the Ieader of theOpposttlon parby ln the Council, performs monitoringand watchdog funcflons. The Mayor-in-Council ls ttrusa replica of the Cabinet with the Commlsslonerfunctioning as a Chief Secretary helping the Mayor-tn-Council. The Chalrman of the Councll is like theSpeaker of the Assembly or the Lok Sabha. It ts worthmeniloning that the Mayor-in-Councll system inCalcutta was adopted well before the T4hAmendment'The Calcutta Corporation had experimented withvarlous models for decades. In 1923, lt wasSurendranath Bane{ee's Swaral or self-governmentmodel with a parliamentary system. ChlttaranJan Dasas Mayor and Subhas Bose as Chief Executlveprefened to rrn the Corporation on rigid party Unes.

A strong Commlssioner system was established in1951. The MIC Act itself came into effect tn 1984after a long and patient search to reconctle thesupremacy of an elected Councll and the strengths ofan elected execuUve. In between, there were spells ofsupersession.

to the o munlclpalltles ln We$t Bengal aF well

212

The

underwhlch

and hasStates.

slngleNadu,mayor orby thea

slnceUttar

note thatorlglnate

a llmttedBlll was

Power to tte People?

-ln-Council system has been extended

name President-in-Council. The system,slmllar to a parliamentary form of

has been in existence for over ten vearsrecelving increasing attenuon in otherfrom provldlng execuUve autholity to

On the other hand, ln States like TamilPradesh and Uttar Pradesh whefe the

municlpal chalrperson is elected dtnectly, the arrangement prima facie resemblesform of government. In reality, however,

out earller, this form has been onlv a shellpowers have not been vested in them.has recently attempted a moBified

for a State governrnent. The s$condbut the llrst collapsed due to the

the el functionaries tt also enables the sharingof that thorlty by a grorrp of people rather than a

approach provlding for an pxecuilve Committee oftwelve ns to be elected by the Corporation

8 The Mayor presldes over this Comrdtteebut the members are elected bv the Councilthey arehave also

answerable to hlm. Other State lawsmaintained a Jumbled arrangement where

there ls clear focus of authority. lt ts interesUng tothe concept of Mayor-in.Councll dld not

Calcutta. A Bfll for setflng up sqch asyptem Delht was introduced by the Union flomeMlnlster early as 1966. There was a companlonBtll for se up a Metropolitan Councll for Delhi as

dlssolutto of the Lok Sabha.e1998, the Maharashtra government decided

to adopt Mayor-ln-Council system for Nagpur and

AutJartfu, Accorntabllilg and. Proximiv to Cilizens 213

Mumbai. Discussion about the legislatlon wasaccompanied by much acrimony in the Assembly.However, Chief Mintster Manohar Joshi steered itthrough, and gave assurances at several stages thatthe law was an experiment and changes would bemade as warranted by experience. The Act providedfor a mayor to be elected by the members of theCorporation for a term of two-and-a-half-years. TheMayor would then appoint a Deputy Mayor and suchnumber of other members of the Mayor-in-Council asthe State government prescribes. The size of theMayor-in-Council would thus be decided by the Stategovernment rather than by law. Further, deviatingfrom the Calcutta model, the Maharashtra Act taggeda Departmental Commlttee to every member of theMayor-ln-Council, comprising twelve Councillors ofthe Corporation. As a result, about l8O Counclllorsof the Corporatlon were sitflng as members of the 16-odd departmental committees. Since the Commltteeswere vested wlth powers to sanctlon works and awardtenders, there was litUe for the Member-in-charge todo. The departmental committees were empowered todeal wlth proposals cosfing up to Rs 2 crores; forproposals irrvolving higher sums, the Mayor-ln-Councilwas to be the sanctioning authority. The munlclpalcommlssloner, as in the case of Calcutta, was madeanswerable to the mayor.ro Whtle the arrangementvastly altered the previous situation of a strongCommissioner, nelther the mayor nor the othermembers of the MIC felt happy as they did not haveany speciflc powers. The expectation was that theMIC system would vest executive authority principallyin the elected representatives. The Commissioner andofflcialdom apprehended that the proposal would

to the Calcutta experience, where the draftlaw for -in-Council was debated in and out of

for nearly four years to anticipalte andsort as many difllculties as posslble, Mumbai

the MIC system hastlly. The law alsoa few other features whlch appeared to sow

the of dlscord rlght from the beginningrbetween the Bombay Corporation and

2t4

merelyvadousln the

theand

ManThe

Pou)er to the People?

authority and dllute responstbtlity, andand ad.lustments had to be made

brmulatlon and enactrnent of the law.

tra government have been numerous

have slidrmished for control frequently.t Act also contalned some perrricious

lasted for a long time depending orl partyat either lwel. Mumbai was always regarded

asah ey pot: both the Mahapalika and the

provlsl right from the start. Investirtg thetal committees with the power to award

the co was one. Another was that theCo er, supposed to be answerable to theMayor,every

nevertheless furnish a confldential reportonth to the State qovernment on the

of the Mavor-in-Cour,)cil.'r A third wasthe requlrlng the Commi$sloner to report tothe Sta e government promptly if any policles,

or actions of the Mavor-in-Councll wentagalnst e pollcies and programmes of the State

These provisions clearty showed theCo sloner to be a confidant of the State

rather than a trusted execuflve of theCtty Nelther the bureaucracv nor the

representatlves seemed very happy orelectedabout the Mayor-in-Councll systefn. The

Authorat1, AccomtobitiQ andProximitg ta Ci1zens 215

decislon to treat meeflngs of the Mayor-ln-Councll as

closed door sessions brought ln needless secrecy'

contrary to the open house tradition followed at the

Corporation Council meetings earller't2 In some

important cases of awarding contracts decisions ofthe Mayor-in-Council were reversed by the State

government. Differences of opinion between the State

".rO tt. Corporation surfaced and received much

attention in the press. Finally, when Manohar Joshlwas eased out of office in March 1999' his successor,

Rane, decided to scrap the whole system ln both

Mumbal and Nagpur. The decision to abandon the

system appeared to be as hasty as the decision to

adopt it in the flrst Place.However, the Mayor-in-Council system continues

to attract attentlon. Madhya Pradesh has passed a

law for a modified version applicable to its citles and

munlcipalitles.t3The mayors of GuJarat have favoured

the system and the State government has formed agroup to prepare a draft legislation' The DelhiCorporation has also requested the Centralgovernment to consider reorgantsing the citygovernment on this basis. The All India Council of

M.yo." has commended the approach.'a The tnitialperceptlon of most politicians is that the Mayor-in-bouncil system will increase their tenure and also

confer more authority on them. The Calcutta system

has been in operation since 1985. The elected

Councillors prefer it for the important reason thattheir own colleagues are Members-in-Charge of vadous

subJects and it is easier to approach them instead of

an appointed official like the Commissioner'rs The

interaction between the Member-in-Charge and an

elected Councillor is potitically more responsive and

2t6 Power to tlw People?

to what happens between a Minister and anMLA or MP. In the process, the Councillors flndtheir lmportance enhanced and expect a quickersolutlon the problems of their consiltuencles. Thebureau also seems to prefer the wider and easieraccess now have to the political executive ratherthan thethrough

ous system where everything had to goCommissioner.

Tbc Reprcsentatlves-Staff RclatlonshipAre some lessons from the MIC experlence

have been tried in different States. Intra, GuJarat and some other States th€ chiefofllcers of municipalities belong to a State

cadre and can be trarlsferred frofti onecity to . Additionally, ln some States, techntcalstaff like engineers, Ilnance, or health ofllcer$. canalso to similar cadres. Since these officers

State rather than the city, it is unrealisticbelong toto that they will diligently and expeditiously

in CaIof theappoinseveral

car5, outtn largertheir oposltionscases, a

which can be applied to the general issuebetween elected representatives and

offlcials? In staffing aity governments,

of the elected executives. Corporgtionsies may have more powers in appointingstaff to technical and admtnistfative

rut the Comrnissioner hinlself and. in somefew kev officials mnw trc sclenfed and

appotnew key officials may be selected andby the State government. A confllct of

loyalUes tnevttable.on separation of powers notwithsta4ding,

elected cillors consider their active participationon making at the Committee oT theln decis

t of the Corporation more signillcant and

At/ihor@, Accotn:diabilitA andProximifu to Citizens 217

important than their legtslative role' They always seek

to lnfluence the municipal bureaucracy regardlng

priorittes of development expenditure, award of

contracts, property tzxation or personnel matters' The

patterns of such inlluence and control have been

analysed extensively in the case of several Indian

cities.r6 Apart from municipal councillors, politicians

at other levels also seek to lnfluence municipalfunctloning in varlous ways. On some occaslons, the

process leads to maJor confrontations and attempts

to remove the Chtef Executlve Offlcer' The dramatlc

happenings surrounding the transfer of Arrn Bhatla'

the Commissioner of the Pune Corporation-the Publlc

Interest Liilgatlon and High Court decision reversing

the transfer order, and eventually the Stategovernment prevailing in its 'will' after the Pune

Corporaflon passed a resolutlon seeking Bhatia's

removal-are discussed in the next chapter' Even

wtthout reaching such extremes, the relattonshipbetween the elected representatives and staff are

fraught with a number of problems' The theory of

decentralisafion is that local bodies should have the

flnal say and full control over thelr staff' However' the

question is, given the demanding situatlon and the

.,r.r-p.."".tt potenUal for confrontation with elected

representatives, whether the local bodies will be able

to attract and hold good personnel' One obvious

answer is that the rights and responsibilitles of the

municipal offlcials and staff shotrld be laid down as

clearly and as elaborately as possible' The CalcuttaAct for instance, identifles over l7O items out of atotal of 3OO where the Commissioner has been given

speciflc powers and responsibiltties espectally ln regard

to ttre Corporation's flnancial and regulatory domaln'r7

2t8 Power to tlrc Feopte?

Statc trol over CifiegThe urth aspect relating to authority, and

example,of the bu

ures and restrictions on formulailon)t in a munictpallty are far too marry toThe bypassing of local authorities and

the of thelr responsibLlittes before andaft.er In ce have been discussed earlien Thefrequ and long periods of supersesslon of valrious

whtchttre onethe cradlthe roefflcten

en

Theln thesuperseslntrodu

.ity is State control over munlcipalities,been a long contested Subject. Whlle on

nd local self- government was heralded asof democracy, it was rocked frequenHy byhands of State controll in the ,rul rc ofpropriety and financian discipline. For

tr the counky have also been menfloned.CorporationAct of 1888 was an excqrtionthat it did not contain any provision for

lon. The Maharashtra governmenta provision for this duri4g the l970s; and

itsell the Delht Corporation has been

y ts a prominent feature of rnanvand bureaucracies. In the sub-continent

ls prominent in both the politlcal and

imposed a brief period an administrator's regime.Due toIn the

outcry, that measurd was withdrawn.

under from time to Ume. It was exp€ctedthat the 4th Constituilonal Amendment would atleast co on the Corporattons the right to live; butelecUons still not been held in many cfties.

which had been under Fupersession fortwenty- years, is once again without any eldctedcity

Hierar

such.lve arenas. The national governmelrt isto be higher than the States, and even the

Auttarifu, Accowttabtlitg and Proximitg to Cttizens 219

district admlnistratton is perceived to be superlor tothe rural and urban local bodies. While theConstituilon itself has allowed extraordinary powers

to these hlgher level governmentb to set aside those

below a whole gamut of rules and regulations have

been devised to keep in check the lower levels ofadmtnistration. Protest agatnst such a command andcontrol regtme has been met usually by appointingcommittees. The Committee on the Relationshipbetween State Governments and I-ocal Bodies was set

up as early as 1954. Like others before and after' thisCommittee paid lip service to the virtues of autonomybut also hoisted numerous flags of caution lnexerclsing that autonomy' Barflwala, a long timechampion of municipal autonomy in the country'argued tn his dlssentlng notes that the many vices

latd at the door of the local government can be

dlscovered also tn the upper levels.ts

Thc Clty and the CltizenIt is readily conceded in all literature relevant to

governance that authortty and accountability have togo together. An important question is: Accountabilityto whom? In an hierarchical administratlve setupaccountabtltty to the higher level government becomes

more prorninent. In a democratic setup, where thepeople are the real source ofpower, accountabillty tothe people is more important. Whatever tJre system ofpower for the elected representatives' the one factthat appears to be common to most citles is that theexisting organisatlonal arrangements preclude anyeffective partictpation of the people themselves and,

therefore, the means for securing public accounta-bility. The provision for the Ward Committee in the

220 Pouer to the People?

Co tional Amendment was designed to mdet thisneed. the Joint Parliament Commlttee fevivedthis on it argued that "in the larger rnunicipal

large.epresentatives since the ward size is verye Committee therefore is of the vtew that in

M having a populatlon,of 3 lakhs of more,Wards ees should be constituted'J.,n 'fhe JpCalso re ommended that while the couficillorrep the ward should be the chairpetson ofsuch a committee, the details regarding itscompos , territorial area and the manner of fillingthe can be left to the State legislatures. The JpC

bodieselected

furtherfor othintenoperateenhan

to estabfor the

has

e citizens do not have easy access to the

mmended that the States could providecommittees at the interfnediate level. The

thus was clear that Wards Committees wouldat the neighbourhood level and ttrrerebyproximity between the people and their

accountability and provide an opportunitypeople to have a say in how the city

exibility allowed to the State governlmentsused rather cynically to achieve the opposite

rep tives. It would also be an important forum

gove nts perform in their own localities. Inaddition or intermediate committees could be afurther

Theure of decentralisation.

of . Kerala and West Bengal are the onlyStates ere a committee has been provided foF eachward. In ther States, the Ward Committees are for agroup ofreduced

, which has thus increased rather thane distance between ther citizen and their

represen tives. In Hyderabad, a Ward Committee isto eover t less than ten wards.2o Ih Tamtl Nadu and

it is to consist of contiguous wards. Inln

AufhoritA, AccourtabilitA and Proximitg to Citizens 221

Maharashtra single member electoral wards are the

basic building block for constituting a corporaflon

though administrative wards may comprise groups ofthem. The Greater Mumbat Corporation, for example,

consists of 25 administrative wards with 22 ICounctllors. Each administrative ward has, on an

average, a population of five to six lakhs and covers

an area of 20 sq km. In keeping with the essence ofthe Amendment, it would have been appropriate toset up Ward Committees around a councillor's ward

or for a smaller group of them. Instead, the whole

administrative ward has been taken as the area for aWard Committee. The Committee's membership is toconsist of all the Councillors (1O to l5)' a few

corporation officials and not more than three NGO

representatives nomlnated by the councillors'2r As

against a ceiling of twenty-five, the number of Ward

Committees established in the BMC is sixteen'In Chennal, the 155 municipal wards are grouped

into ten Wards Committees, each representing a

population of close to four lakhs. Bangalore's Wards

Committees covers an average population of about

two lakhs. In effect, these are Zonal Committees and

not Ward Committees.22 There is' of course, no legal

bar to this but the composition of these Wards

Committees clearly betrays the intention of the State

governments not to regard them as platforms for public

interacflon since these committees are to conslst only

of the elected councillors and, in a few cases, a

sprlnkltng of non-officials. At any rate' the populationcoverage of these committees precludes any active

parttcipation of cltizens. In comparison, a Ward

Committee in Calcutta or Trivandrum will represent

a populaUon of 4O,OOO to 7O'OOO.

Commi will have the elected councillor as itsand not more ttran flfty persons norrlinated

by the cipal chairperson in consultation withthe .23 Heads of educatlonal institrlrtions.

tives of residents' assodiations, indlustrialand co establishments, sports and ctrlturalorg ons, doctors in government and private

, trade unions and prominent citizens arethe ories from which these persons are to benomina . The Ward Committee is to meet at leastonce in three months and it is given powbrs to

development and other municipal activitieswithin ward. In West Bengal, the size of the Ward

varies from seven to forurteen, half to beby the ward councillor and the other halfnomina

by the ration. Here again, ttre categorids aremention . In Karnataka, Gujarat and some otherStates,by the

of the committee are to be nominatedte government. In Andhra Fradesh, theare to consist of only ward councilllors.2a

It is the in Delhi, but some thlnkins has startedon Residents' Associatlons to undbrtake

222

particl

SU

complex.structureandin Chenneighbo

Power to tle people?

has provided by far thetmost broadl-basedtory arrangement. Each of the Ward

The morphologr and the socio-ecofiomicof the cities are also highly varied. Myltaporeare not the same as Royapuram or Sajldapetai. Banjara Hills in Hyderabad is ahood vastly different ftom Charnlinar.

a fewd t activities and look after comnlunitvparks in neighbourhood.

As es expand and densiff, problems of trrbangrowth d management will ortly become more

Bandra not the same as Prabha Devi or BycUlla in

AuttorttA, Accouttabilitg atd Proximitg to Citizens 223

Mumbai. While in Delhi, VasantVihar's nelghbourhoodneeds and its capacity for community action has littlein common with Paharyanj. The nature of the problems

faced in the ward or ttte ability of its cltizens tomobilise local resources to cope with them are

conspicuously different. For the average citlzen, the

City Corporation is as far removed as RashtrapatlBhavan. The quality of daily urban life depends muchmore on whether the roads and dralns in theneighbourhood are kept clean, the street lights workor garbage ls removed from the locality as perschedule, etc. The people in the neighbourhood have

a greater stake in ensuring that its few parks are notoverrun by ltlth or vandalised, and the chaos ofconstructlon and traffic, at least inside thenetghbourhood, is kept wlthin tolerable limits.

What happens ln the municipal ward' theneighbourhood-the mohalla, the palli or the pakkamby whatever name it is called-is much more importantthan the happenings, dignified or otherwise, in theState Assemblies and Secretariat. The ward is not

Just a territorial and statistical entity comprising so

many voters who are expected to go to the pollingbooths once in every flve years and remaln qulet forthe rest of the tlme. It can be an effective platform forthe citlzens' partictpatlon and support which are as

much a flnancial as a political necessity. The Ward

Committee ls thus the urban counterpart of the village-

level panchayat. It need not be as numerous but itcertainly has to be representatlve.

There is no logic in denying the elective principleto the city dweller. If he can be trusted to elect aCouncillor. an MLA and an MP, he can also be trustedto elect members of his own neighbourhood to a Ward

224

Commlof el

of the neselectionviewed

at therelteraU

consutu requirement. This is both wrong andunf . The Ward Committee is intendedl as a

platform for public particlpation, organised

wer to the FeopLe?

If the numbers involved and the pf.ocessis worrisome to the pollticians, at least a

can be made by providing for represenrtationood people through a transparent

process. The Ward Committee has beenmany States as a concesslon and not a

roots level. There can be no betterof its purpose than what has been stated

in the of the Joint Parliament Committee. Agroup or a Committee of Councillors cannot be asubstitu

Authoritg, Accountabilttg and Proximitg to Citizens 225

NOTES

l. Nagarpalika Netusork, Vol ll. All lndia Institute of t'ocal Self

Government, Delhi.2. lnk Sabha Debates. 8 August 1989 and I December 1992'

3. Church, R. "Authorlty and lnfluence in Indian Municipal

Corporations: Politics and Councillors in Lucknow" in D BRosenthal (ed.), ?he CitIJ in Indaa'n Politircs. Delhi: Thomson

Press, 1976.4. Delhi Municipal Corporation Act 1957 (as amended in 1994)'

5. The Bombay Provinclal Municipal Corporation Act 1949 (as

amended in 1996).6, The Bombay Munlcipal Corporation Act 1888 (as amended

ln 1995) and The City of Nagpur Corporation Act 1948 (as

amended in 1995).7. 'salient Features of the Mayor-in-Council System under

the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act 198O"' Paper

presented by R. M. Kapoor at the Workshop CoverningMetropolis organised by All India Institute of Local Self

Governrnent, Mumbai: December 1997.

8. The Uttar Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act 1959 (as

amended in 1995).9. "Saltent Features of the Mayor-in-Council System", op'cit'

lO. Palnitker, Sneha. Report on Mayor-in-Council System inMumbai, All India Institute of tocal Self-Government, April1999.The Mumbai Municipal Corporation (Amendment) Act 1998'

Sneha, - Palnitket, oP,cit.Madhya Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act' 1956'

Nagorpalllria Netlt)ork. Delhi: All India Institite of Local Self

Government, February 1999.Mukhopadhyay, Ashok. "Politics and Bureaucracy in UrbanGovemance: The Indian experience in India" in The Challenge

oJ IJrbon Governance: ed. Om Prakash Mathur' NationalInstitute of Pub lic Finance and Policy, Delhil 1999'

Rosenthal, D. B. The CttV in lndio:n Politics. Delhi: Thomson

Press, 1976.

ll.t2.13.I4.

15.

I tr.

17. 'salient Features of the Mayor-in-Council System", op'cit'

18. C D Barflwala's note of the dissent in Report of Committee

226 Power to the People?

Relationshlp between State Governments 4nd IocalGovernment of India, New Delht lg54, rnentioned

21. Theinl

Mukhopadhayay, op.cit.oJ tte Joint Pd'rlid;nrr]ntaLry Committee, tqk Sabha

July 1992.Pradesh Municipal Cori,poration Act [ 99b tas

bay Municipal Corporation Act lggg (as Amended

Nettuork. December 1998. All India Institute ofSelf Government Delhi.Municipalities Act, 1994.

Municipal Corporation Act 1955 (as amended tn

11

Prospects for the Future

Indla is not the only country to embark ondecentralisatlon; there are at least fifty to slxtycountries in the world engaged in similar exercises.

In some cases, the reason is merely disengagement ofthe national governments, abandoning some of theirresponsibllities because they cannot manage thempolitically or financially and, therefore, passing themto local governments. In some others-such as Poland,

Hungary or Czechoslovakia-it has been a consclousexerclse to create democratic space for cities andcommunities through decentrallsation. In thesecountries. the motivation has come from the politicalchanges in the wake of the dismemberment of theformer Sovlet Union. Philippines and Thailand have

pursued consclous programmes of decentralisationaccompanled by elaborate arrangements for functionaland financial devolution. Within the South AsiaRegion, Sri Lanka has been pursuing a

decentralisation programme as a means of reconcillngits nailonal integrity with ethnic diversity. Bangladeshhas set up an elaborate multi-tier system of rurallocal bodies: Nepal enacted a comprehensive l.ocalGovernment Act in 1999.

228 Power to tfui psepleT

The ence ofall these countrles is too trecentto arrlve at any deflnitive concluslon but it is clearthat ls a long and arduous ptrocess involved in

that decentralisation accomplishes ttsIndla's own experience ln the past Cleulyconsiderable efforts and preparations werefor even the modest sulccess that States

ensobJ

likeT Nadu, GuJarat, Maharashtra, Kerala otr WestBengalperiod.

in the pre-Constitutlonal AmendmentIndtan experience has also demonsrtrated

that whbecameState I the process was deratled by vAriousmeans. e present hope is that constituttonal

wlll protect the process. The large nutnbersofelected representatives who have now been released

shows

into thecarrytngmorerural anof themor selfseek awill undo

TheThere

decentralisatlon moved to a stage where itthreat to the power and patronage of the

litical stream have a basic responsibility inprocess forward. Todaf, the countX.y has

three milllon elected reprresentatives tn theurban local bodies. Even assuming a thid

clueless, and another third disintefestedif the remalning third are curious andfor themselves, the political chelnistry

change.

gcd Slzc of Representatlonis enough evidence to slrow that ttris isto happen. The elected representailves and

leaders Panchayats and N4garpalika$ arefrom time to time, implementafion Of the

consUtu provisions. These representatives arealready an important politlcal constitulency.The I in the States is also rlrore conscious ofthe need and the usefulness of local suppod. The

Prospects Jor the Fltfille 229

outcome of the Assembly elections in Madhya Pradeshin 1998, when the Congress was returned to power'

is regarded as a testimony to the beneflts of suchmutual support.'Whether such support is based onany rational system of sharing of powers and functionsor not, tt is clear that at the local level the elected

representatlves are demanding an increasing sharein the politlcal domain.

As this demand turns more vocal and lnsist€nt'changes in the legal and admlnistrative base of theNagarpalikas will bec,ome inevitable. The Stategovernments will have to IInd ways of dealing withthis demand in a ratlonal and systemaUc way. Denialof the demand, deflecting its direction, or diluting itsstrength by dtspenslng largesse through dlscreUonarygrants to MPs and MLAs, or by manipulatlng thechoice of local leaders may delay the process ofdecentrallsation but ls unlikely to defeat it' It hasbeen rightly observed that however much the higherechelons of political leadership rntght try' the vastnumbers of elected men and women in panchayatsand nagarpalikas will get restless, demandimplementation of constitutionally mandatedprovisions and succeed in gettinglater.2

In the process, the functional

their way sooner or

domain of the localbodies wtll slowly, but surely, increase. It wtll alsoinclude some critical ltems like environment' povertyalleviation, economic development and gender issues'The enlarged mandate will not be exclusive and otherlevels of government urill of course be involved ' Butthe ctty is where these problems are most visible.Globatisation is a comprehensive term which includesso many different elements. Economic liberalisation

230 Power to tle People?

wlth all up side and down side is one major ellement.When ts, lncomes andr their distrlbutlonare det rmlned by market forces rathef thangove t prescription, there are bound to bewlnners and losers. Cities are the theatres wherethese and losses take place. Citizens cannot bereduced to rrrere spectators when the cities becomethe of global players. We should not forgetwhat ha pened during 1997 and 1998 in the cflfies ofIn and Thailand where the bubble of the EastAslan e burst. Even wlthin India. fortunds havewavered between one city and another between

Mumbai, Bangalore or Hyderabad and in aindustries-from ga_rments to electtonics.

CalvarietySome ci es have lost Jobs, some others have $ained.Butciues,may befactors.dealinglnfrom th

on the

loyment and poverty were not invented byare simply more visible in the citi0s and

aggravated by national and internationalgovernments may not know much aboutthese problems, or economic developmentbut these concerns cannot be excluded

ir purvlew. Indeed, as, GorbachoV hadthe survival of the polity will ltself dependent to whlch that concern and responSibility

are by different levels of government.

The Vortralisation, it needs to be repeated, has been

deralled the past and it can be derailed again.safeguards alone may not be enough

to carry e momentum for decentfalisation fofward.Even the number of elected representatlves witha le assurance of a political life may not besufflclen Public opinion and pressure are es$ential

Prospects Jor tte Fltture 23r

for sustaining the impulse for change and keeplng ltin the right direcUon. Public Interest Llttgation hasbeen a very lmportant instrument of such pressure.

So far such littgation has focused malnly on the

holding of elections or the implementatlon of thereservatlon arrangements and formulae. In urbanareas, the voice of the people is usually heard as

demands for services or ventilatlon of grievances aboutproblems such as poor water supply' removal ofgarbage, or filltng up of potholes in the roads' Publicopinlon is rarely expressed on issues of governance

except when such reactions are solicited byresearchers. What happened in Maharashtra in Apr[1999, as an outcry at the State governmenfs removalof the Municipal Commlssioner of Pune, is thereforeremarkable.

Arun Bhatla, an IAS officer was posted as

Commissioner of the Pune Municipal Corporation on6 March 1999.'z On 8 March, he asked for a list of taxdefaulters and hotels encroachlng on publtc roads.

On 1l March thtrty-three structures were demollshedincluding a porflon of a 5-Star Hotel. On 13 March'i.e. withtn 7 days of hls assuming charge of tJre post,

Mr Bhatia recetved orders from the State government

transferring him as Director of the State Archtves.

The next day, citlzens of Pune arriived in largenumbers at the Municipal office to slgn a

memorandum protesting agalnst Mr Bhatla's transferorder and condemning politlcal interference in theaffairs of the Munictpal Corporatlon.s Wtthrr a few

days, some cltlzens' groups moved the High Courtthrough d Public Interest Litigatlon' The Hlgh Courttook quick cognizance of the case and, wtthin a monthof the event; passed orders holding that the transfer

Power Lo tlrc Feople?

e and reJected the State governfrent'sJusUfying the same. The High Court order

also indirect pralse on Mr Bhatia for thedrlve undertaken by hint. "It is one ttring",

sald the Hlgh Court, "for orders to be issutd forof unauthorlsed stmctures of powerful

lobbles, remaln on paper; it is another thtng tothese declsions. We wlsh to emphasise

that d the present days when unfortunatelyand dishonesty are rampant, qualtties lke

lntegrlty and honesty deserve a pat more than a1."4

The government wanted to appeal agatnstthe Htgh s orders but the Suprerne Court rdfusedan ln stay.s Mr Bhatla reJoined as MunlcipalCo oner on l5 April and the newsph.persheralded the outcome as a victory for the people.6

Pune case received a lot of publtclty, fourearller, in Thane, in almost similar

Whlle

)es, a part of the poliUcal leadershlp inas well as the State wanted the Thane

Commlssloner, Chandrasekhar, to bebecause of his orders of demolition of

more forty bungalows built on tribal land. lVhenthe Munl Corporation passed a resoluilon Urgingthe

the

months

Thaneof the Commissioner, the populatlon ofln revolt. A transport strike was called

and o professional groups Jotned. As the entireclty agelnsf what they saw as intimldatorytactlcs politlcal partles, the State leadership gotthe and declded not to transfer the Munticipal

er.7 Perhaps Chandrasekhar dealt wtththe with more sagacity and less confrontBtion.Perhaps actlon against encfoachments was

ProsryctsJort!le Ftrtwe

selective and not sweeplng as in Pune'

been suggested that Chandrasekharspecial efforts to secure support for his

233

It has alsomade someactions from

important Political sources.The personality and style of functlontng of the two

offlcers is not the lssue here. In both these cases' the

publlc outcry was not preceded by any careful

assessment of the character or personality of these

two tndtviduals. The strength of the spontaneouspubllc reactlon was lts perceptlon of what is rtghtand wrong. Most unauthorised structures are easlly

vlsible, they cannot be covered up or concealed from

a vigilant pubhc' Both in Pune and Thane the

Municipal Commissioners carried out a basicresponsibility of the Municipal Corporation to prevent

encroachments on public land and not allow lllegal

structures to stand. What they did was done openly'

fn full public view. It was also done speedtly' It is this

transparency that hetped to mobillse public opinton'

Aparf from prompting public offlcials to perform' the

"itt "tt"' acilon also sent a message to the elected

councillors that the public should not be taken for

granted. By seeking Judiclal interventlon, the Pune

"itr..t" also made it known that they did not expect

that the State leadership would be obJectlve and

therefore decided agatnst peilUoning ttrat government'

The outcry was sufflciently strong and visible to merlt

a swift. declsion by the Court' The Supreme Court' by

refusing to grant any stay of the High Court order'

also stgnalled that the runntng of a clty ls more the

concern of the cltlzens and thelr elected cttygovernment. Clearly, the message was that publlc

ipinion should be respected and that the State should

not indulge in any arbitrary action'

234 Power to tte People?

Publlc IntereetInterest Litigation and Judictal intervenilon)wever, be a constant response to theof municlpal management. The true

ated. On the one hand, there was the arravpulous bullders and traders flagrantly

The State government's action in rempvjnga week of his Joinlng stood out flagranily

to understand, nor be labelled so clearlywrong. It is also fortunate that individUals,

some business leaders found corrlmonPune episode.

signtflc ce of the Pune case ls not Just therelnsta of Commissioner Bhatia but that it

by people's resolve to mobilise ilrem$elvesin uphoPerhaps

public interest agairtst arbitrariness.e Pune case is straightforward and

uncompli

cannot,maladle

of

hlm

as rightNGOs,cause ln

The Bafter he

andofflcers.Court's

munlclpalremovalthe Munlon 8 June

violatlng planntng code, on the other was anuprtght cial determined to do his Job as laid downln the

as high ed. Other cases of mallbasance mav notbe as

story however did not end there. Soon

do whate er he had done in all his prevlousagalnst what he perceived as corrupuon

and

Joined the Pune Corporation somebegan. This time, within the Corpor4tion

the Commtssioner and some of histher Bhatia was emboldened bv the

or whether he merely conilnudd to

lel, events started to turn. Some of thecounclllors mounted a campaign for thethe'dogmatic' Commissioner. Eventrrrallval Corporation ofPune passed a resolution,1999, in which I 18 members out of the

total of I accused Bhatia of being ,,dogmatic,

Prospects Jor the Frth;;-:e 235

dictatorlal and unaccommodative" in his approach

and behaviour with the Corporation and called uponthe Maharashtra government to remove him underSection 36 of the Municipal Corporations Act'8 The

State government acted with alacrity and within a

few hours issued orders posilng Shri Bhatla once

again in the Archives Department of the Stategovernment. Public outcry was muted. The will and

resources needed for yet another round of litigationdtd not seem to be forthcoming.

Close on the heels of the Arun Bhatta case, the

newspapers carried a story about the MunicipalCommissioner of Surat, Jagadisan, and how thebuilders' lobby in the city was seeking his removalJagadisan was proposing that a municipaldevelopment fund be raised in part through a levy on

all new building proJects. He also recommended thata municlpal plot be used for a shopping centre. Some

private developers feared this might affect theirinterest. The local builders' lobby was reported to be

opposed to thts idea as well as the porposal to shifttransport godowns. "Another Bhatia in the Making" is

how the newspapers descrtbed the situation.s Withina few months Jagadtsan was transferred.

Whether the conflict of views and interest isbetween the Commissioner and elements of his staffor whether it is between the Commissioner and theelected representatives or some vested interests inthe city, it is to be accepted that as executve authorityls vested lncreaslngly in the muntclpallties and

corporations the scope for possible confltcts willlncrease, not dlminish' The long expressed desire ofthe elected leaders to exercise executive powers and

the opportunlties for doing so in the wake of the

isa

of the where the appointed Chief Executlve is aparallel

the

authori

cadre

and esMunicip

Power to tte People?

tional Amendment signify a maJor change intion. The solutlon is to break with the $vstems

centre of power. Clearly, the vesting ofln the elected representatives of the people

t that the process of selecting a Chiefls also particlpatory and transparerit. The

ablished through proper proceldure.Llities have to perform several huhdred

and that At its discharge they are accortrntableto the blic are essential objedflves of decentra-llsation. ltre executive has to be a part of the blectedmuni authortty, supportlve oflit, and ansWerableto lt. ubordination, however, does not meansurrend

ci are entitled to an efficient muhtcipalon. Their right is not only to vote in a

muni election; they also have a right to expectthat the machinery be in place to dlschargethe co ration's responsibtlities. It is, thetrefore.impoExecusources recruitment may vary; it may be from a

in Maharashtra or Gujarat, dr theappoin ent can be from selected service$. The6b t should offer a few names. Thdn thesel could be made by the elected head of thecity inCouncill

nsultation with a cross-section of thers. Once selected and appointed, the Chief

Execu should have a fixed term and his removalshould be for exceptional reasons, to be Veriffed

functio , and not all can be done bv the electedhead. t is important is to speciff the functibns ofthe Chie Executive, as also of other key exebutivepeople, make that known td the public. The

on Act under which the MaVor-ln-Calcutta

Prospects for tte FVhtre 237

Council system was adopted identifles in some detallabout 20O in a list of 30O tasks that the Commissionerhas to perform. The public thus knows who does

what.ro

Pollttcal Partles and DecentrallsationIn the general elections of 1998, most of the major

political parties included panchayati raj anddecentralisation as im'portant items in theirmanlfestos. The Congress-I declared its belief in a"strong centre, strong states and strong Panchayats

and Nagarpalikas". The manifesto went on to say

that, "Panchayats and Nagarpalikas are not the thirdtier of development. They are lnstead the first tier ofdemocrary". The Bharatiya Janata Party promised

that for better local self-government it would'introduce suitable changes in the 73rd and the 74thAmendments to the Constttution with a view to furtherstrengthening Panchayati Raj institutions and giving

them a greater autonomy."The United Front reiteratedits commitment to strengthen the process ofdecentralisation further. The United Front's manifestoalso declared that such "decentralisation is a surestguarantee to safeguard and strengthen democracy inthe country". While assuming office tJ:e BharatiyaJanata Party and its alliance partners also mentlonedln the national agenda for governance that"Panihayats and local bodies would be activated byglving effective decentralisation right up to thegrassroots level.ttAll these promises were repeated inthe crop of manifestos for the 1999 general elections

Notwithstanding these lofty statements, the factremalns ttrat none of the political parties have reallyspent Ume and effort to find out what has been the

decen n process. In some States like Keralaand Bengal the State leadership itself took theinitiativeMadhya

pursuing the decentrallsation agenda. Inand Rajasthan, the ruling parties

appear have shown some understanding bf thece of decentralisation fon mobilising and

sustal g grassroot political support. SomecornmenMadhya

rs have argued that in'West Bengdl andesh the kft Front and the Co/lgress

party able to overcome the so-called lncumbencv

238

progress

problemprogresstheir

and in

for the

Power to tle Feople?

d what problems are encountered in the

d return to power malnly because of thehieved in decentralisation which enabledcadres to come to power in various local

ure to think through the proces$ wasduring the campaign for the 1999

other in promising to be the "Iix-it" personal problems, be it water or drainage, road

bodies.t2of power

ugh this does not explain the BJP's lossRaJasthan in the State elections of 1998,

the su r Congress government appears td havethe signlflcance and ampliffed ttre initiative

for the ecentralisation process. Generallyi, theenth appears to be confined to the offlcials

leaders in the government rather thanpartles as such. There is no evlderrce of

and pothe politi

party entering into a Serious dlscoursethe political implications Of decentrali$afiont manner political power is to be shared at

differentThis

reflectedgeneral ons. Candidates for the l-ok Sabha viedwith

anyto cr

repair orfocus. To

treet lights. National issues were hardly lnbetween national and local issueb the

voter forced to reduce his expectations to very

Prospects Jor the friblre 239

simplistlc terms. The "Pehle Paani, Phir Advani"slogan, (Water flrst, Advani next), whlch became

popular in the Gandhinagar constituency where theBJP strongman L K Advanl was the candtdate, ts an

example of precisely thls approach. It ls both a trapand an opportunity-a trap, if leaders like Advani

and other MPs allow themselves to be portrayed as

the local problem solvers, an opportuntty if theycolloborate with the local bodies and their elected

representatives in working out a more enduringprocess for dealing with such problems.

Local Governmcnt and the SocletYIn Ume tl.e general and growing disenchantment

with politics and politicians wlll surely extend to the

elected representatives of panchayats andmuniclpaliUes as well. Corrr.pUon, undoubtedly, is amajor cause for this disenchantment. Though stories

of rectitude, good performance and responsiveness to

local needs continue to emanate from Panchayats

and Nagarpalikas, these are not enough to counterthe charge that decentralisation has only decentralised

corruption. Some States have already seized theopportunity to increase State control over localbodies,l3 There is no real alternative to ensure betterloeal performance than proximity of the elected

representatives to the people and, therefore' closer

scrutiny by voters. Many community basedorganlsatlons also hold and advocate the view thatPanchayats and Nagarpalikas cannot and will nottake care of peoples' needs whereas the NGOs are

more sensitlve and responsive' These organisationsalso lnvoke the nascent concept of civil society as

dtstinct from all levels of government. That concept

240 Potoer to the People?

e and acqulre substance differerltlv lnof the society. Given,the fact that Local

ment has been revived after a long period, there is a need for its convergence with

c postulate of all democratic dispensb.tionsrle are the real source of power arld not

levels of government. Indeed, many ofwhich assall the decentralisation process

the flawed perspective that it is a descendingf power from the Centre to the States and

comm initiaUves rather than divergence.

will evodifferentSelf-ofd

Theis thathiethe proarisecascadefromdecen

Panchayquestion

A vast an

much asmembers

expedien nor a reuurangement of the financial domain:in it moves a people, and thus a sociefu,towards

Quesulti-level governance.oning the purpose of the Constitutional

Am a decade ago Shahabuddin had askedin the Lo Sabha whether the intention was to ctrangeIndia a "Union of States to a Union of States,

e States to the local bodies. Butsation is not merely an administnative

and Municipalities". Unwittingly, the

of leadership or institutions of governance.varied socie$ with immense diversitv such

We need our panchayats And town hallls asur assemblies and Parliarnent house. Theirare all representatives of the people and

the essence of the 73rd and the74tb Co titutional Amendments. A countrv of abillton ople cannot forever adhere to a givenheirarchy

as India have multiple aspiratiorts. They will needto be arti ted, analysed, and answered in mrlltipleplatforms

none ca be regarded as superior or fnorerep than another. This recognition, indeed,

flection of our political pluralism arid inwill be a

ProspectsJor the F-uhte 241

that sense a "Union of States, Panchayats and Munici-palities" can well be a true measure of the success ofthe 73rd and the 74th Amendments.

242 Pouer ta the People?

NOTES

Oytrage". Mani Shankar Aiyar, Sunday3l Januziry 1999.

2.J L. C, Nofronal Found.ation Jor India, Report. on theWorkstrop. Delhi: 7 October lgg4.

Bulldozer Throws Out Pune's Demolition Man,'.item in Express, Neros Seruice. 13 March 1999.

rged Pune sends stern message to Rane on Bhatia..item in Indlan Erpress Neus Seruice. pune. 14 March

Court reinstates.Arun Bhatia", News item in ptoneen: 14 April 1999. "Court gives pune favourite

back". News item in Indran.Express, Mumbai:l3 1999.

5. 'SC to Stay Bhatia's Reinstatement". News item inoJ Indin. 15 April 1999.

Returns with Cheers". News item in Indran Express.1999.

Peoples'Rally around the Bureaucrat'. News item inTimes, 16 December lgg8.

3.

6.

8.

L

lo.I l.

shifted after Recall Motion". News item in Hindustan9 June 1999.

Forestalling Development". News Item in HihdustanSurat: 9 June 1999.Returns with Cheers". op.cu.Bodies in Election Manifestos',. News ltem in

Netuork Neu-rsletter. Nl India Institute of Localt, Delhi, Apnl 1998.

Outrage". op. cit.

Self12. 'A

Index

Adtamma, l17Advani, L.K., 47,53' 62' 239Aiyar, Mani Shankar, 24-26'

30-3r. 44, 53,62.64' 67,73

All India Council of MaYors' 12'

43, r32, 159, 209' 215

Ambedkar, 42Aqulno, Corazon, 2A2

Arora, GoPi, 24Arya, Anita, ll8Arya, Shakuntala, I 18

Asoka Mehta Committee. 4. 49'60, 83

BMRDA, IOT

Balanandan, 46Balram, N.E., 67Balwant Rai Mehta Committee'

3, 23, 60, 83Banatwala' 44Banedee, Surendranath, 2l IBansal, Pautan' 67, 72Barfiwala,219Basu, Chitta, 49, 67Basu, Jyoti, 19, 51, lO7' 197

Bhagat, H.K.L', IBhajan Lal, 9, f9, 45Bhaua, Arun, 217, 231'35Bhatnagar, K.K.' 13

Bhattacharya, Malini, 67

Bihar PanchaYati Raj Act' l0gBofors controversY, 44, 49

Bombay MunlciPal CorporationAct of 1888, 107' zla

Bommai, S.R., 54Bommai Committee RePort' 55'

5t'Bose, Subhas, 2I1

Calcutta Corporation Act' 236Calcutta ImProvement Trust

Act of 191l, 129

Calcutta MetropolitanDeveloPment APthoritY(CMDA), 35-36, I'or

Calcutta MetroBolitan PlanningOrganisation, SS

Cantonrnents Act of 1924' 184

Central Council of Local Self

Government, ll-I2' 43' 2Og

Central Finarrce Commission,164-65, 170, 172

Chandrasekhar, B.K.' 54, 62'a4,232-33

Chatterjee, Somnath, 4l-42Chauhan, Vandana, ll8Chelliah, Raja, 161' 169Chelliah Task Force, 16lChidambaram, 6CiUes.

anid citizen' 219-24state control over' 218- 19

Citizen and cltY ' 219-24City Improvement Trusts, 128-

29

244

Conformity

-f

Cons

84-85,L24, I237,

2,65-74,r 12, I15,

178, 185,

88- 104of municipali-

Ues,develop ent authorities.

lo1district p 95-98local elections, 94-95MPs andmetropo

role, 9O-94tan planningee, 98-lol

m functions, 139-43size ,89State ce Commissions,

fuuer tothe People?

article ?80, 70,72, tO!, 162,164-66

article 33O, 123article 832, 123article 356, lO7-08

Correa Commission onUrbanization, I, f l, 13, 37,43, 83

Dandavate, Madhu, 41Das, Chittaranj an, 4lDecentralibation of power

accountability, 2lgBills

debate in Parliamertt, 44-46, 73-74

features of, 75-85JPC on, 67-68, 75-EsN.F. Government antd, 59-

62,75-a5Nara6imha Rao Govern-

ment and, 62-85passed in Parliament, 44-

46, 73-74Rajiv Gandhi and, 42-55,

75-45Citizen and, 219-24debate on ln,

Lok $abha, 42-44Parlia.ment, 40-55, F5-83Rajya Sabha, 46-53Public,53-55

East Aslan experlence on,20r-03

efforts towards, l-20elected representativd-staff

relatibnship and, 216-l8future prospects, 227.41lssues ln, 206-rolocal government and

society, 239-41

of India,Ttlrr rth ule, 134-35, 143-

44, Il2th 134-40, 144,

146- t8764th 8, 23, 38,

44, 53 55,58,83. 19665tfi 42-44.53,

a472nd dment, 65-74.

84-85,73rd Am t

, lo8,-44,

I74th Am t, 2, 88, 93,

108, I 2-73, Lt5, r24,, 143-44, 168,r 36-3

l7a, r -43, 185, 201,2tt,2 8,237, 240-41

article 40 8. 59, 87, 89, 9r-93,loo, lo8, lt4,

article96, 98r64, I , 182-83, r85.

llr87, I

article

Index

Marxist and, 194-96Mlnistry of Urban

Development role in, I l-15

N.F. Government and, 59-62,75-43

Narasimha Rao Governmentand,62-85

political parties and, 237-39public lnterest safeguard in,

234-37Rajiv Gandhi initiatives on'

5-20, 42-55,75-45Sammelans on, 9-l l, l3-2Osharing authoritY ln, 21O-16size of representation, 228-

30state control over cities and,

218-r9Delhi Development AuthoritY

(DDA), l0rDelhi Mlnicipal Corporaflon Act

1957, 142,2LODesai, Morarji, 4, 60Deshmukh, 24, 29, 31, 6lDwe Gowda, 67Development Authorities, lOl-

o3Devi l,al, 59Dey, S.K., 4Dharmaraj an, 13

Dighe, Sharad, 72Dtstrict administration and

DPC, 186-90District government, 190-94District Planning, 6, 26-29 ' 52District Planning and

Dwelopment Council, 27District Planning Committee

(DPC), 69, 95-98, 10r-O2,122-23, 184-90, r93, 199

245

district administrauon and,r86-90

Zilla Parishad and, 185-86District Planning Commlttee

Act 1998, r22, 186, 193-94

East Asia decentrallsation,experience in, 201-03

Elected representative-staffrelationshlp, 216- 18

Election Commission, 5, a,4l'55,6r,63, 71,79

Fatima Bee, I 16

Ford Foundation, 34-35, 13O

Gandhi, Indira, 34, 36Gandhi, Mahatma, 179Gandhi, RaJiv, l, 5-7, I, l r '

15-20. 23-26, 28, 30-32, 37 -3a, 40, 42-44, 46, 48-52, 60,62-65. 67 -68. 7 3-7 4, 43, 9r,95-96, 108, 115, r35, 163,l9r-93, 195-96

Ghosh, 8.8., 35Ghosh, Deepak, 67Godbole, Madhav, 64Gorbachov, 16-17, 23OGorphade, lllGoswami, Dinesh, 4l-42, 59'

84Gundiabai, 117GurupadaswamY,46

HUDCO, 12, r74Hegde, Ramakrl slrrra, 27Housing of the Working Classes

Act 1890, U.K., 129

Indian Institute of PublicAdmiiistrauon 0IPA, f2

246

Inter-

Jain, L.C.Jawahar

48-49,

Jag

Ram, 49Johnson, yndon, 74Joint Par ent Committee

(JPc), -7r,75-a5,95, rO0,r82,220,224on decentralization

r63-65

,67-68, 75-85Commission, TO-

onJoshi,Joshi,

Committees, 69-70213-r4

Urban DwelopmentCorporation, 174

Kaul,18,93, lO7

64-65,67,7r,84Kennedy, 4Kerala palities Act 1994,

140-41KeraIa

r93Bharati case,

r33Kesri, SiKhusro,Kidwai,

459, 19,33,38,

Koli, ll8v.R., 54

Council,4l

Chandra, 19

235J4

Yojana (JRY),

r 18

ashthra Sahitya

Power to tle People?

Krishna$wamy, K.S., 24, 29,31,54

Lawand, Satyabhama, I 16

Leelavati, 117Local Finance Enquiry

Committee (1950), 160Local Government Act, 227Local Government and Society,

239-41

Mahajan, Sumitra, 67Malaviya, Satya Prakabh, 48Mandal issue, 6l-62, 123Maran, Murasoli, 49, 6lMarcos, Imelda, 2O2

Mathai, John, 160Mathew, George, 54Mathur, Om, 13Mayor-in-Council (MIC) system,

210-16,2s6-37Mayor -in-Council

2tlMehta, Haroobhai, 45; 208Member of Parliament Local

Area Development Scheme(MPT,ADS), 197-98

Metro Manila Commlsgion, 2O2

Metropdlitan Council for Delhi,212

Metropolitan DevelopmentAuthority, Philippines, 2O2

Metropolitan Planning, 52Metropolitan Planning

Committee, 69, 98-lr02, 2OO-

olMill, John Stuart, l9Ministr]t of Urban Deveflopment,

10-15Mlrdha, Nathuram, 67

Actt 1984,

64170

KrishnaT.T., 34

Irdex

Mishra, Chaturanand, 49

Mitra, Ashok' 35Montague reforms, 158

Montesquie,2OSMore, Meena, l17MukarJi, Nirmal, 54

Multi-municipal agglomera-tions, 199-201

MuniciPal bodies'access to capital market,

172-73bypassing city governments '

r2a-29elections,

holding ol 1O9-12in Bihar, 1O9- I Iin Karnataka, 1l l-12new representatives, I l9outcome, 107-24rePresentatlon in, I 12- l5resewation manner, I 19-

24reservation of seats in'

1r5-r9finances, 157-75

alternatives for, 163

caPital market access'172-73

Central Finance Comml-ssion role, 164-67

Commissions, 162Committees for, 160-61preJndePendence Period'

r58-60Private-Public Partner-

shiPs in, 173-75SFCs and, 167-71

functions, 127-55and l2th Schedule'

CD

247

list ol 132-39

Municipal Finance Board, 16l -ttl/

Municipal Finance Commi-ssion, l6l-62, 167-68

Nagarpalika Bill,approval in Lok Sabha' 44-

46chairPerson election in' 37-

38debate on in,

Lok Sabha, 42-44' 65-43public, 53-55Rajya,46-53

district Planntn g' 26-29drafting, 23-38metroPolitan areas Planning'

33-37objectives,4l

' Parliament debates on, 40-

55, 65-83Planning Commisslon on'

29-30rural-urban interface in' 30-

32Nagarpalika Sammelans, 7' 9-

ll, l3-20NagarPalikas, functional

domain ol 146-55Naraslmha Rao, 19' 62-63 ' 67

'73-74, 84-85,95, 98' lo8'134, 163

Nasir Sab, 27' 195National Commission on

146- Urbanisation, 9, 162

National DeveloPment Council'

conformitY laws on, 139- 2943 National Extension Service' 3

248

National

NazirNehru, JNehru

49,New

Act I

Owaisi,

JPCN.F.

Institute of Urban(NrvA), l2-13, 69, 88,46

,4,34Yojana (NRY), 48-

Municipal Council, rl3

Rajand, 7-9, 42-55,

of, 75-8567-7r,75,85Government, 59-62,

Pouser to the People?

reservation manrrer, I lg-24

reservation of seats, I l5-l9

women's partici$ation in,I l6-19

Finance Commisslons and.87, t67-71

nnances, Ic/-/bML,As/MPs representation,

78-79Mayors and Munlcipal

chairperson eledtion, 80metropolitan planning, 8lnumber of tiers in, 75-76

- population limit on each typeot,76

removal of chairperson, 8Oreservation of seat$. 78tenure of, 76War d / Zonal Commlttees,

76-7aPandey, Vinod, l, 7, 24-25, 29,

3r,53,66Pant, K.C., 165Pant Commission. 166-67Patnaik, J.8.. f9Peoples' Plan Campaign, 193Planning Commisslorl, 29-30,

34, 16r. 164view$ on Nagarpalika Bill,

29-30Politic0l parties and

decentralisation. 287 -39Prabhavalkar, Nirmala, I l8Prakash, M.P., f 12Premajam, I 18

Ram Devi, 24,31, 38Rama Rho, N.T., 18-lgi 51, lO7Ramos. Fidel. 2O2

Rao Govern-t, 62-85

of in Parliament,,6,73-74Gandhi Govern-t, 42-55,75-A5

tv laws on. 88- lO4debate

Lkon Bill in,

42-44,65-83pu C, CJ-DD

Sabha,46-53MPs MI-As representa-

tion on. 68-69. 78-79Rajiv initiatives on,

5- 42-55. 75-A5

condu of elections, 79-8O,t07

to7-24, to9-lltaka, I I l-12

representatives, l19

Raj

inin

el

newI l2-15

I

Index

Rana, Kashi Rarrl 72, 2OA, 215Rane, Pratap Singh, 19

Rao,24Rasul, Gulam, 67 '

Reddy, Jaipal, 41-42Representation of PeoPle Act,

90Roy, Sudhir, 67Rural-urban continuum, I78-

84, 199

Sankaran, S.R., 63-64Sarkarla Commission, 5, 29-30'

41.48-49,83Sayeed, P.M., 67Seshan.31,7lShahabuddin, SYed, 44-45' 73'

240Sharma, E}.D., 65Shetkari Shangatana, 116Siddhi, Ralegaon, 116Singh, Arjuna, 64Stngh, Digvijay, 197Singh, Dinesh, ISingh, Manmohan, 70, 165Singh, V.P., 54-55, 58, 60-63'

65. 84. 9r, 95, 98, rO8, r23,134. 163

Singh Deo, K.P., 67Singhvt Committee, 5, 83Sivaraman, 35Society and local government'

239-4rSolanki, Madhav Singh, 19, 29Special purpose authorities,

t29-32State Election Commission, 94,

ro9, l1l, 118, 120, 143-44,165-72, 174-75

State Finance Commission'l03-o4

Sukhthankar, D.M', 1lSundaram, 13

249

Swamy, Subramanian, 67

Tamtl Nadu Urban DeveloP-ment Fund, 174

Tamil Nadu Urban Infras-tructure Financing Services,174

Taxation Enqulry Commission,160

Thakkar, 13Tienanman incident, Beijing'

l6Times Research Foundation, 88Tiwari, N.D., 19,6lTokyo Metropolitan Assembly'

202Town and Country Planning

Organisation (TCPO), 12

Trevelyan, 159

Upendra, 46-47, 6l

Venkataswamy, 64-65,67 ' 71,84, 142

Verghese, E}.G., 54Vora, Moti Lal, 5l

wHo, 34, 129-30Ward Committees, 69-7O, 219-

24West Bengal District Planning

Committee Act 1994, 96West Bengal MuniciPal Act

r993, 139-4rWest Bengal PanchaYat Act of

1973, 194World Bank, 129-3O

Yotng lrLdio, 179

Takaria Committee 1963' 160Zilla Parishad, f85-86, 188-94'

r99