
NATIONAL
COMMISSION TO REVIEW THE
WORKING
OF THE CONSTITUTION
A
Consultation Paper*
on
DECENTRALIZATION
AND MUNICIPALITIES

Email: <ncrwc@nic.in> Fax
No. 011-3022082
|
|
Advisory
Panel
on Decentralisation and Devolution;
Empowerment and strengthening of
Panchayati Raj Institutions
Member-in-charge
Shri
P.A. Sangma Chairperson
Shri
L.C. Jain Members
q
Dr. Abid Hussain q
Shri K.C. Sivaramakrishnan q
Shri M.C. Gupta q
Shri Sanjoy Hazarika Dr.
George Mathew (Special Invitee) Member-Secretary
Dr.
Raghbir Singh |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This Consultation
Paper on “Decentralisation and Municipalities” is based on a paper prepared by
the Nagarpalika Network of the All India Institute of Local Self-Government,
New Delhi, for the Commission.
The Nagarpalika
Network team comprising Shri Hitesh Vaidya, Shri Srinivas Varadan and Shri B.N.
Singh prepared the paper under the overall guidance of Shri K.C.
Sivaramakrishnan. The team also took
considerable assistance from the officers of different State Governments as
well as State Election Commissioners during its field visits. The team also received valuable guidance on
some items of this study from Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap, Member of the Commission,
former Secretary General, Lok Sabha and Visiting Professor, Centre for Policy
Research.
The Commission places
on record its profound appreciation of and gratitude to the Institute and its
team. The Commission also acknowledges
its gratitude to Shri K.C. Sivaramakrishnan for his contribution.
CONTENTS
|
|
|
Pages |
|
CHAPTER
1 |
CONSTITUTION OF MUNICIPALITIES, ELECTIONS AND STATE ELECTION
COMMISSIONS |
1009 |
|
|
A.
Constitution of
Municipalities |
1009 |
|
|
B.
Qualifications and
Disqualifications for Membership in Municipalities |
1014 |
|
|
C.
Regularity of Elections |
1015 |
|
|
D.
State Election
Commissions |
1020 |
|
|
E.
Wards Committees and
Proximity to Citizen |
1024 |
|
CHAPTER 2 |
FUNCTIONAL AND FINANCIAL DOMAIN
|
1027 |
|
|
A.
Functional Domain |
1027 |
|
|
B.
Financial Domain |
1030 |
|
CHAPTER 3 |
DISTRICT PLANNING COMMITTEES, METROPOLITAN PLANNING COMMITTEES AND
ORGANIC LINKS BETWEEN MUNICIPALITIES AND PANCHAYATS |
1036 |
|
|
A.
District Planning
Committees |
1036 |
|
|
B.
Metropolitan Planning
Committee |
1043 |
|
|
C.
Organic Links between
Municipalities and Panchayats |
1048 |
|
|
D.
Representation and
rights of MPs and MLAs in Municipalities |
1049 |
|
CHAPTER 4 |
INTEGRATING
THE 73RD AND THE 74TH AMENDMENTS |
1053 |
|
CHAPTER 5 |
SUMMARY OF SUGGESTED LEGAL CHANGES |
1054 |
|
|
Questionnaire |
1061 |
|
|
Annexures |
1072 |
CHAPTER – 1
1.1 Part
IXA relating to Municipalities which contains articles 243P to 243ZG was
inserted in the Constitution vide the Constitution (74th
Amendment) Act, 1992. Article 243Q of the Constitution specifies, in broad
terms, that a Municipal Corporation shall be constituted for a ‘larger urban
area’, a Municipal Council for a ‘smaller urban area’ and a Nagar Panchayat for
‘an area in transition from a rural area to an urban area’. The determination
of such areas is left to the States taking into account some criteria like
total population, density of population, non-agricultural employment, annual
revenue generation, etc. A lot of variation exists amongst the States.
1.2 To constitute a Municipality in Andhra Pradesh, the
population criteria is 40,000 and above. In Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan it
ranges from one lakh to five lakhs, in Himachal Pradesh it is from 5,000 to 50,000
whereas in Tamil Nadu the population should not be less than 30,000. The
definition of a Nagar Panchayat is
equally varied and the interpretation of population and other criteria are
often irrational and casual. Because of this, municipalisation of urban areas
is resisted. There are also considerations like lower tax liability,
availability of more grants in the case of rural areas, etc., which act as a
disincentive to municipalisation even though it may be justified. Recently it
is seen that areas already municipalised are denotified and made into
Panchayats once again as happened in 29 places in Haryana and in some parts of
the Mumbai metropolitan area.
1.3 Another criteria is density of
population per sq.km. Here also some
State laws take cognizance but some
others ignore it completely. In Andhra Pradesh for Corporations it is 10,000
and above, while in Karnataka it is 3000 and above. States like Uttar Pradesh,
Himachal Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Rajasthan have not
specified the required density range.
1.4 The
third criterion is employment in non-agricultural activities. In Andhra
Pradesh, to constitute a Corporation, 85% of the population should be in
non-agricultural activities. In Karnataka, this should not be less than 50%.
States like Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Rajasthan have not specified this criterion
in their Acts.
1.5 The fourth
criterion of annual revenue generation also varies from State to State. In
Andhra Pradesh, annual revenue should be rupees four crore and above, in
Himachal Pradesh it is rupees two crore and above, in Tamil Nadu it ranges from
Rs. 5 lac to 30 crore, whereas in Karnataka it is not less than Rs. 6 crore per
annum. States like Uttar Pradesh, Kerala, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh do not
specify any criterion of this nature.
1.6 The 65th
Constitution Amendment Bill, the precursor of the Constitution (74th
Amendment) Act, 1992 had specified a population range of 10 to 20,000 for a
Nagar Panchayat, 20,000 to 3 lakh for a Municipal Council and 3 lakh or above
for a Corporation. The definition of an urban area is relied on the Census.
These population criteria have been omitted in the 74th Amendment.
They need to be reintroduced to bring about some uniformity.
1.7 Article 243R
stipulates that all the seats in a Municipality shall be filled by persons
chosen by direct election from territorial constituencies. Though a State can
provide for the representation of MPs, MLAs, etc. a Municipality is regarded
principally as an elected body. The determination of territorial constituencies
referred to as municipal wards is a first and essential step for the
composition of a municipality.
1.8 However, the
number of wards within municipalities has been left to be determined by the
States. Here again the range varies from State to State. Generally, State laws
seek to limit the total number of wards based on population. In Uttar Pradesh
it is 60-110, in Himachal Pradesh it is not more than 25, in Madhya Pradesh it
varies between 40 to 70, in Karnataka it is between 30 to 100, in Rajasthan it
is between 60 to 70 and in Punjab it is between 50 and 100 for Corporations.
However, the population within each ward is the denominator and there has to be
parity in the ratio between population and the seats. The table below shows a
wide variation here. Within Maharashtra, for instance, the average population
per ward is 45,000 in Mumbai, 22,000 in Nagpur and 14,000 in Pune. Within West
Bengal, it is 31,000 in Calcutta, 19,000 in Howrah and 8,000 in Siliguri.
Article 243C specifically stipulates such parity within a State so far as
Panchayats are concerned. But there is no corresponding proviso in article
243R. Such parity is essential at least within the same State and the same
class of municipalities such as Municipal Corporations, Municipal Councils or
Nagar Panchayats.
Table 1
Average
population per Councillor in some Municipal Corporations
|
Name of Corporation |
Population 1991 |
No. of Corporators/Ward |
Average Population per Councilor |
||||
|
1.
Delhi |
7206704 |
134 |
53700 |
|
||||
|
2.
Pune |
1566651 |
111 |
14000 |
|
||||
|
3.
Mumbai |
9925891 |
221 |
45000 |
|
||||
|
4.
Nagpur |
1624752 |
75 |
22000 |
|
||||
|
5.
Calcutta |
4399819 |
141 |
31200 |
|
||||
|
6.
Howarah |
950435 |
50 |
19000 |
|
||||
|
7.
Asansol |
435119 |
50 |
8700 |
|
||||
|
8.
Siliguri |
376592 |
47 |
8000 |
|
||||
|
9.
Chandernegore |
120379 |
33 |
3700 |
|
||||
|
10.
Chennai |
3841396 |
155 |
25000 |
|
||||
|
11.
Bangalore |
2660088 |
100 |
26600 |
|
||||
|
12.
Ludhiana |
1042740 |
70 |
15000 |
|
||||
|
13.
Gwalior |
690765 |
60 |
11500 |
|
||||
|
14.
Bhopal |
1062771 |
66 |
16000 |
|
||||
|
15.
Indore |
1091674 |
69 |
16000 |
|
||||
|
16.
Ratlam |
183375 |
49 |
3700 |
|
||||
|
17.
Jabalpur |
741927 |
60 |
13000 |
|
||||
|
18.
Satna |
156630 |
45 |
3500 |
|
||||
|
19.
Raipur |
438639 |
54 |
8100 |
|
||||
|
20.
Durg |
150645 |
51 |
3000 |
|
||||
|
21.
Bilaspur |
179833 |
55 |
3300 |
|
||||
|
22.
Lucknow |
1619115 |
110 |
14700 |
|
||||
|
23.
Varanasi |
929270 |
80 |
11600 |
|
||||
|
24.
Kanpur |
1874409 |
110 |
17000 |
|
||||
|
25.
Agra |
891790 |
80 |
11000 |
|
||||
|
26.
Allahabad |
792858 |
70 |
11000 |
|
||||
|
27.
Moradabad |
443701 |
60 |
7500 |
|
||||
|
28.
Aligarh |
480520 |
60 |
8000 |
|
||||
|
29.
Dehradun |
270159 |
25 |
11000 |
|
||||
|
30.
Meerut |
753778 |
70 |
11000 |
|
||||
|
31.
Gorakhpur |
505566 |
60 |
8500 |
|
||||
|
32.
Gaziabad
|
511759 |
60 |
8500 |
|
||||
|
33.
Bareily |
587211 |
60 |
10000 |
|
||||
|
34.
Guntur |
471020 |
50 |
9500 |
|
||||
|
35.
Vijaywada |
757141 |
50 |
15000 |
|
||||
|
36.
Vishakapatnam |
720024 |
50 |
15000 |
|
||||
|
37.
Kurnool |
274795 |
44 |
6500 |
|
||||
|
38.
Warrangal |
466877 |
50 |
9500 |
|
||||
|
39.
Jaipur |
1458483 |
70 |
21000 |
|
||||
1.9 Regarding
representation of persons having special knowledge or experience in Municipal
administration, several States have made a provision and their numbers vary
from State to State. It is interesting to note that in Haryana, due to
political difficulties in nominating such persons, the Haryana Municipal
(Second Amendment) Act, 2000, has removed the provision altogether. In Delhi,
the provision for such nomination has also become the subject of litigation.
Since an acceptable definition of knowledge and expertise appears to be
elusive, it may be better to drop the provision altogether. Andhra Pradesh is the only State where one
person belonging to the Minority Community is nominated to a Municipality,
although without the right to vote.
1.10
Delimitation of municipal wards is an important step to elections and
constitution of municipalities. Though article 243U confers on the
Municipalities the “right to live" and a clear tenure of 5 years,
political and other considerations have prompted some State Governments and
individuals to delay the elections, usually by seeking the intervention of
courts. Hyderabad amply illustrates the problem. Elections have not been held
for the Hyderabad Corporation for several years. In 1998, the State Government
proposed to extend the city boundaries by including 11 adjoining
municipalities. Elections were deferred pending the reorganisation. Early in
2000, the decision to enlarge the boundaries was given up and elections were
organised for the 11 surrounding municipalities later in the year. In the
meantime a petition was moved before the High Court seeking delimitation of
municipal wards on the basis of the 1991 population, though such delimitation
has not been held anywhere else in the State. However, in the case of
Hyderabad, the High Court has stayed elections till delimitation is done. The
arguments made in this chapter on regularity of elections apply here as well.
Fresh delimitation should not be a ground for delaying elections.
Table 2
|
STATE |
ELECTION |
TERM |
|
Andhra
Pradesh |
Direct |
Five
years |
|
Assam |
Indirect |
One year |
|
Bihar |
Indirect |
-- |
|
Delhi |
Indirect |
One year |
|
Gujarat |
Indirect |
Two and
Half years |
|
Haryana |
Indirect |
One year |
|
Himachal
Pradesh |
Indirect |
One year |
|
Karnataka |
Indirect |
One year |
|
Kerala |
Indirect |
Five
years |
|
Madhya
Pradesh |
Direct |
Five
years |
|
Maharashtra
|
Indirect |
Two and
Half years |
|
Orissa |
Indirect |
One year |
|
Rajasthan
|
Indirect |
Five
years |
|
Tamil Nadu |
Direct |
Five
years |
|
Uttar
Pradesh |
Direct |
Five
years |
|
West
Bengal |
Indirect |
Five
years |
1.12 It is to be
considered whether the manner of electing a Mayor or a Municipal Chairperson
should be uniform and even if that varies the term of office should be uniform
or at least a minimum term should be prescribed. It stands to reason that the
term of office of the head of a municipality should be the same as for the
Municipality.
Removal of
Mayor/Chairpersons
1.13 The
provisions in State laws for removing a Mayor/Chairperson through a no
confidence motion vary from State to State. The table below indicates the
extent of variations. It may appear that some provisions limiting the frequency
of such motions and requiring specified majorities for their passage may appear
stringent in comparison to a Council of Ministers in a State. But these
provisions in some State laws were inspired by proposed articles 243B and 243R
of the 64th and in 65th Constitutional Amendment Bills
introduced in 1989. Some States went ahead and changed their laws without
waiting for the Bills to be enacted.
Table 3
Procedure for No-confidence Motion against Mayor
|
State |
Tabling of Motion |
Notice of Requisition |
Passing of Motion |
Repetition of last motion |
|
Haryana |
|
|
By a
majority of not less than two-thirds |
|
|
Kerala |
Not
within six months of assumption of office |
By not
less than one-third of the Councillors. |
By more
than one-half of the elected Councillors. |
Cannot be
repeated before six months of the last motion |
|
Madhya
Pradesh |
Not
before two years of the assumption of office |
By not
less than half of the total number of elected councillors. |
More than
three- fourths of coun-cilllors present and voting, such majority should be
more than two- thirds of the total councillors. |
Cannot be
repeated before one year of the last motion |
|
Himachal
Pradesh |
Not before six months of the assumption of office |
By not less than
majority of total elected Councillors |
To be passed by majority of members pre-sent, the quorum of which
should not be
less than one half of its total elected members |
Cannot be
repeated before six months of the last motion |
|
Rajasthan |
Not
before one year of the assumption of office |
By not
less than one-third of the Councillors |
By a
majority of two-thirds |
Cannot be
repeated before two years of last the motion |
|
Uttar
Pradesh |
Not
before two years of the assumption of office |
By not
less than one-half of the total number of Councillors. |
By more
than one-half of elected Councillors |
Cannot be
repeated before two years of last month |
|
Maharashtra |
|
By not
less than one-third of the Councillor |
Majority
of the total number of members |
|
|
Tamil
Nadu |
Not
before six months of assumption of office |
By not
less than one-half of the total number of elected Councillor |
By
three-fourth of the total strength of the elected Councillors |
Cannot be
repeated before six months. |
|
West
Bengal |
Not
before six months of assumption of office |
By not
less than one-third of the members. |
By a
majority of the total number of members. |
|
1.14 So far as the
term of office is concerned, one year tenure makes the Mayor mainly ceremonial.
The provision of two-and-a-half years in Maharashtra and Gujarat is an after
thought brought about by a recent amendment and is really a compromise to give
a chance of holding office to at least two people within a municipality’s
tenure of 5 years. Some political parties find even two-and-a-half years as too
long and would like the Mayors to ‘resign voluntarily’ after one year. In April
2000, a lady mayor of Nagpur resigned after completing only 11 months in office
in obedience to her party's decision and another lady Councillor from the party
became the Mayor. The motive seems to be office rather than continuity in the
interests of municipal administration.
1.15 It will be
appropriate to elicit public opinion regarding the manner of elections and
removal as well as tenure of the Mayor/Chairperson. Amendment Bills of 1989
which required a majority of the total House plus two-thirds majority of those
present and voting for chairpersons of Panchayats and Municipalities to be
removed by motion of no-confidence were intended to enable continuity in
Municipal Administration and discourage frequent motions of no-confidence on
flimsy grounds.
1.16 Another important aspect related to the
election of Mayors and Municipal Chairpersons is who elects them. Where
elections are indirect as in many States, the intention is that the Mayors will
be elected by and from amongst the elected members of the municipality. In the
case of the Panchayats, Clause (5)(b) of article 243C of the Constitution
specifically states so. However, in the case of Municipalities, there is no
such provision in article 243R. In States where MLAs and MPs are represented
with voting rights a piquant situation arises as their votes have been the
determining factor in the election and removal of chairpersons rather than the
votes of the elected councillors. This is discussed in further detail in a
subsequent chapter on MPs and MLAs.
Suggested Legal
Changes
1.17 The suggested
legal changes are:
(1) Article 243Q provides for a Nagar
Panchayat for a transitional area, Municipal Council for a smaller urban area
and a Municipal Corporation for a larger urban area. While clause (2) allows
the States to take into consideration various other factors, given the very
wide variance, it is desirable that a population classification is provided in
the Constitution itself. Given the increasing rate of urbanisation, its density
and economic factors, a Corporation should have a minimum population of 5
lakhs, a Municipal Council 50,000 and a Nagar Panchayat 20,000. Provision can
be made to preserve previously existing municipalities.
(2) The proviso to article 243Q States that
a municipality may not be constituted for an Industrial township under certain
circumstances. This proviso did not figure in the Constitution Amendment Bill
relating to the 73rd Amendment Act introduced in Parliament in July
91 or in the Bill as reported upon by the Joint Committee in July 92. This
appears to be an after thought in response to some suggestions from certain
quarters. The provision goes against the grain of decentralisation and local
self-government. Hence, the proviso may be deleted.
(3) Article 243U (1) contains a proviso that
where a municipality is superseded “it shall be given a reasonable opportunity
of being heard before its dissolution”. There is no corresponding proviso in
article 243E relating to Panchayats. Hence, a similar proviso may be inserted.
(4) Whenever a Panchayat or a Municipality is
superseded a report stating the grounds for such dissolution should be placed
before the State Legislature. This will be a deterrent to treating supercession
casually and resorting to it because of political expediency. This provision is
on par with a report being placed before each House of Parliament in the event
of a proclamation of President’s rule in a State under article 356.
(5) In determining the number of municipal
wards and in delineating them, there should be parity in the ratio between a
seat and the population and such ratio should be uniform within a State among
any category of municipalities such as Corporations, Municipal Councils and
Nagar Panchayats:
(6) The term of the Mayors/Chairpersons
should be co-terminus with the term of the municipality. Provision for this
should be made in the Constitution itself.
(7) The procedure for removal of
Mayor/Chairperson through motion of no confidence should be uniform. Here again
a provision should be made in the Constitution requiring majority of the House
and two-thirds majority of those present and voting.
(8) Municipal Chairpersons and Mayors should
be elected only by and from amongst the elected members of the municipality.
B. Qualifications and Disqualifications for Membership in
Municipalities
1.18 Article 243V
of the Constitution provides that the disqualification for being chosen or for
being a member of a municipality shall be the same as is applicable for the
purposes of election to the Legislature of the State concerned. A State is free
to stipulate other qualifications. All the States have made provisions in their
respective Acts. Most States specify 21 years as the minimum age for contesting
elections. The name should be in the electoral rolls and in the case of a
reserved seat the candidate should belong to that category.
1.19 Regarding
qualifications and disqualifications of candidates for elections to Parliament
and State Legislatures, the Representation of the People Act, 1951 provides a
general framework which has been broadly followed in most of the States for
local elections also. Some additional qualifications prescribed by the States
vary significantly as can be seen in the table in Annexure 1.1. In some
States criteria like the two-child norm have been adopted and the impact of the
same on candidates and voter reactions needs to be studied in detail. The
Orissa evidence shows that the two child norm has not stood in the way of women
candidates from contesting elections. Orissa’s experience in the general
elections for six urban local bodies in April 2000 confirmed this, wherein all
seats reserved for women had multiple candidates contesting the seats.
1.20 Some
disqualifications, as in Himachal Pradesh or Haryana barring all licensed
architects, town planners, surveyors, etc., from contesting local elections
merely because they are licensed by the Municipality may be carrying the notion
of conflict of interest too far. It may be expected that the State laws will be
modified in the context of experience.
1.21 Contesting
simultaneously for a number of seats is a problem in some States. Rajasthan and
Madhya Pradesh are two States where contesting for more than two seats is not allowed.
This is in keeping with the stipulations for the Lok Sabha and Assembly polls.
Failure to submit accounts of election expenditure is a disqualification in
some States. The State Election Commissions have prescribed various norms in
this regard as may be seen in Annexure 1.2. In Kerala, failure to submit
accounts resulted in the disqualification of more than 12,000 candidates in the
Panchayat polls.
1.22 Whatever may
be the qualifications or disqualifications for contesting panchayat and
municipal elections are, presently they are found to be scattered in different
laws and regulations. A unified law for this purpose on the pattern of the
Representation of the People Act of 1950 and 1951 is needed.
Suggested Legal
Changes
1.23
The
suggested legal changes are:
(1)
Articles
243T and 243V contain identical provisions so far as disqualifications for
membership in a panchayat or a municipality is concerned. The main principle
followed is that the grounds of disqualification should be the same as applied
for elections to the State Legislatures.
State laws may make additional provisions. State laws may compile all provisions regarding qualifications
and disqualifications for elections in a single law and in the meantime, State
Governments should prepare a manual compiling existing provisions for public
information.
(2)
While
SEC should have the authority to prescribe ceiling of expenses and code of
conduct and while these may vary depending on the conditions of different
States, State laws should clearly specify the powers of the SEC to disqualify
candidates or set aside elections in the event of violations of those laws.
C.
Regularity
of Elections
1.24 The 73rd
& the 74th Constitution Amendments clearly make elections to
local bodies mandatory every five years.
Two rounds of elections have already been held in the States of Andhra
Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Haryana, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Kerala, Orissa, Andaman
& Nicobar Islands, Rajasthan & Uttar Pradesh (See Annexure 1.3). In the States of Assam, Goa, Himachal Pradesh,
Daman & Diu, Karnataka, Manipur, Tamil Nadu and Punjab and the National
Capital Territory of Delhi and Union territory of Daman and Diu, elections were
held once. Apart from the Union
territory of Pondicherry, Bihar is the only State where local body elections
have not been held so far. It has
recently announced to hold Panchayat elections after 23 years. Jammu & Kashmir has recently adopted the
74th Amendment and has announced that the local body elections will
be held in 2001. The 74th
Constitution Amendment has not been applied to Mizoram, Nagaland and
Meghalaya. There are no urban local
bodies in the Union territories of Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Lakshadweep.
1.25 Elections to
urban local bodies have returned about 73,000 representatives from about 3500
Corporations, Municipalities and Nagarpanchayats (See Annexure 1.4). The turnout during these elections has been
in the range of 65 to 75 per cent which is much higher in comparison to the Lok
Sabha and Assembly polls.
1.26 Though
elections have been held in most States, their regularity continues to be a
problem. In Uttar Pradesh, elections to over 58,000 Panchayats, 904
Intermediate Panchayats and 83 Zilla Panchayats were due in May 2000. Shortly
before, the State Government promulgated an Ordinance postponing these elections to October 2000 on the plea
that the delimitation process has not been completed due to creation of 12 new
districts in the State. The Ordinance was challenged in the High Court through
a Public Interest Litigation. The High Court quashed the Ordinance ruling that
it violated the Constitutional provisions fixing a five year tenure and asked
the Election Commission to hold elections as per Schedule. The State Government
then challenged this ruling in the Supreme Court. Elections were then conducted
in June 2000 only after the directions of the Supreme Court.
1.27 Similarly, in
Haryana, Municipal elections which were due in February, 2000 were deferred due
to the announcement of Assembly polls. In this case also the Supreme Court had
to give directions to the State Government to hold elections to local bodies
within a stipulated time. The elections could be held only in March and April
2000 after the Court’s intervention.
1.28 In Andhra
Pradesh, elections to Hyderabad and Rajahmundary Corporations and five
Municipalities were not held as the exercise of delimitation of wards had not
taken place. In the case of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, the High Court
has directed to postpone elections till the Wards are delineated on the basis
of the 1991 Census instead of 1981 Census (through WP No. 13097 of 1993
judgement on 29.12.1994). The Government of Andhra Pradesh has now issued a
notification on delimitation of wards in the twin cities of Hyderabad and
Secunderabad on the basis of the 1991 Census even though the 2001 Census has
already been completed.
1.29 Earlier, a
Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court had struck down an Ordinance
promulgated by the State Government in February, 2000 seeking postponement of
elections to Mandal and Zilla Parishads and ordered that elections be completed
before 30th June, 2000. The State Government’s contention was that
on the basis of an unanimous resolution of the Andhra Pradesh Legislative
Assembly, a Bill to amend the Constitution to allow State Governments not to
have territorial constituencies for Intermediate and District Panchayats had
been introduced in Parliament. Therefore, elections to such levels at that
stage would result in unnecessary expenditure and complications and hence the
Ordinance had to be issued. A writ petition was then filed by the State
Election Commission, later joined by some NGOs challenging the validity of the
Ordinance. The Andhra Pradesh Government filed a Special Leave Petition in the
Supreme Court against the High Court’s order. The Supreme Court has
subsequently dismissed the SLP (SLP (Civil) No.7979 – 7986/2000) filed by the
Government and has directed the State Government to complete the election
process by March, 2001.
1.30 However, it
is still uncertain whether elections would be held. Recently another Writ
Petition (W.P. No. 17501 of 2000) has been filed in the Andhra Pradesh High
Court challenging the method of allotment of seats to the Backward Classes
without their population being ascertained on scientific basis. The High Court
on 13th December, 2000 directed the State Government to collect data
of BC population once again on a scientific basis before 1st May
2001 and hold elections on 31st May 2001. The High Court asked the
State Election Commission to hold elections to Panchayats only after this
process was over.
1.31 It is thus
evident that elections to local bodies continue to be a problem even though the
73rd and 74th Amendments to the Constitution make
elections to these bodies mandatory. Time and again issues relating to
reservation and delimitation have been cited as reasons for postponing local
body elections by various States. In most cases, Public Interest Litigation and
Court orders have been necessary to ensure elections. The Supreme Court in its
judgement dated 12.08.1997 (W.P. Civil No.719 of 1995) clearly stated that
articles 243E and 243U on Panchayat and Municipal elections respectively are
mandatory and not discretionary. To quote “failure to hold elections except in
case of genuine supervening difficulties amounts to flouting the Constitution.
Supervening difficulties have been adequately described such as natural
calamities like flood, earthquake or extremely urgent situation prevailing in
the State for which election cannot be held within the time frame.”.
1.32 Delimitation
of Panchayat and Municipal Constituencies has been cited as an excuse for
delaying elections. This is because the responsibilities are not determined
clearly. In Haryana, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan and Punjab, the
task of delimitation of constituencies vests with the State Government. In
Gujarat, Maharashtra, Kerala and West Bengal, the State Election Commission is
the authority for delimitation of Constituencies.
1.33 The 73rd and
74th Constitution Amendments clearly vests the power to conduct local elections
in the State Election Commission. The delimitation process forms an integral
part of “conduct of elections”. It is neither necessary nor appropriate for the
State Governments to take up this responsibility. Besides, keeping in view that
the process and outcome of delimitation has come into criticism in some States,
it is better that this work is entrusted to the State Election Commissions,
which are neutral and independent bodies.
1.34 It is also
observed that in some States the delimitation exercise was taken up only when
the local elections were due even though the process could have been initiated
well before the elections. If the exercise is taken up only just before the
elections, it also provides a reason for possible postponement of elections.
The question that arises is that should not there be a provision to ensure that
the delimitation process is conducted at least six months or one year before
the expiry of the term of local bodies. The formation of new districts or
changing of administrative boundaries is another factor requiring fresh
delimitation and resulting in possible delay. It is pertinent to mention that
in the country as a whole delimitation of Lok Sabha and Assembly Constituencies
has not been done since 1976 and elections have been held on the basis of the
constituencies delimited at that time the insistence on fresh delimitation for
local elections appears to be motivated in some cases and used as ploy for
delaying elections.
1.35 Reservation
and rotation of reserved constituencies and the division of responsibilities in
this regard is another reason for delays. The responsibility vests in the State
Government in Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Andhra Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Tamil
Nadu, Karnataka, Haryana and Punjab and the State Election Commission has no
role to play. On the other hand in Maharashtra, Gujarat, Kerala and West
Bengal, the State Election Commission is responsible for the reservation
arrangements.
1.36 In Gujarat,
the State Government fixes the number of seats including those to be reserved
for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Backward Classes and Women. After the
seats have been quantified, allotment of reserved seats to various electoral
wards is the responsibility of the State Election Commission. Seats are
reserved on the basis of the percentage of population of Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes in different constituencies in a descending order. The
reserved seats are allotted by rotation to different constituencies. A note
describing the arrangements in Gujarat
in some detail is at Annexure 1.5. The procedure in Maharashtra is
explained in Annexure 1.6.
1.37 In Rajasthan
and Madhya Pradesh, the seats for Women and Backward Classes are allotted by
lottery. In Uttar Pradesh, though seats are reserved by rotation, the procedure
has been changed from one election to another. Rotation of seats during the
first elections in 1995 was in descending order but in the later elections of
2000, this was done in the ascending order.
1.38 In Andhra
Pradesh, it is the State Government which notifies the reservations and unless
this is done, the State Election Commission is not able to issue the election
notification. Because of this, the State Election Commission had to approach
the Court to direct the State Government to notify the reservation. Apart from
the issue of the Ordinance mentioned earlier, this was one of the important
matters to be considered by the Court.
1.39 Whatever may
be the procedure for reservation and rotation, its impact is also to be
considered when the rotation takes place during every election. A person
elected on the reserved seat does not get an opportunity of occupying the same
seat for a second term. This proves to be a disincentive for members to work
hard for their constituency. It is particularly disadvantageous to women and
fresh entrants to build up their capacity and experience as elected
representatives. The reserved seats of a constituency may be continued for a
fixed period and linked to delimitation on a periodical basis such as the
Census.
Suggested legal
changes
1.40
The
suggested legal changes are:
Ensuring regular elections
1.40.1 Articles 243E
and 243U of the Constitution contain identical provisions. Clause (1) of
article 243E states that every Panchayat, unless sooner dissolved under any law
for the time being in force, shall continue for five years from the date
appointed for its first meeting and no longer. Similarly, clause (1) of article
243U states that every municipality, unless sooner dissolved under any law for
the time being in force, shall continue for five years from the date appointed
for its first meeting. The provisions are clear and unambiguous and hence,
there is no scope for any other interpretation. Clause (3) of article 243E and
that of 243U further State that elections to constitute a Panchayat and a
municipality respectively shall be “completed before the expiry of its duration
specified in Clause (1)"
Both articles 243E and 243U, in sub-clause (1)
respectively contain a provision for dissolution of panchayat or municipality.
Here again sub-clause (b) of clause (3) in both the articles stipulate that
elections have to be completed “before the expiration of a period of six months
from the date of its dissolution.”
To reinforce the existing provisions in the
Constitution, the following additional stipulations may be considered:
(a)
It
shall be the duty of a State and the Union (in case of panchayats and
municipalities located in Union territories) to ensure the completion of
elections as stipulated.
(b)
It
should also be duty of the State Election Commissioner to ensure this and in
the event of possible delay make a report to the Governor of the State drawing
his attention to the problems and suggesting remedial action to fulfill the
requirements of the Commission.
(c)
Article
243K(I) and article 243ZA(I) State that the “superintendence, direction and
control of the preparation of electoral roles and the conduct of all elections
to the panchayats/municipalities shall be vested in a State Election
Commission.” This is a composite set of responsibilities. The
preparation of electoral roles and the conduct of elections involve several
processes and actions which are closely inter-related. The words,
“superintendence, direction and control” are comprehensive and unambiguous and
do not permit any artificial division. Clause (4) of 243K and Clause (2) of
243ZA do provide for a State
Legislature to make provisions with respect to all matters relating to
interaction with these elections. However, this has to be subject to the
provisions of the Constitution and can relate only to processes to be followed
and guidelines for this purpose so that such processes serve public interest
and ensure free and fair elections. They do not permit splitting up of the
composite responsibilities as stated in articles 243K and 243ZA. However, as
experience indicates, certain important parts of these responsibilities such as
delimitation of territorial constituencies or reservation of seats or rotation
of such reservation among constituencies have been assumed by some State
Governments. The effect of this has been to enable these State Governments to
intervene in the composite and integrated process of conducting elections and
thereby hold up the same if they so chose to do. Articles 243K and 243ZA may, therefore, be suitably amended to
specify that the responsibility for the conduct of elections shall include all
preparatory steps for the same including the electoral roles, delimitation,
reservation, rotation and matters connected therewith and the responsibility
for the same shall vest with the State Election Commission.
Electoral Rolls and Delimitation
1.40.2 (a)
Under articles 243K and 243ZA,
the preparation of electoral rolls is the responsibility of the State Election
Commission (SEC). The general practice has been for the SECs to adopt the
electoral rolls available for the Assembly and Lok Sabha elections. In some
cases, however, the electoral rolls for the local elections are prepared afresh
and the two rolls may differ. The Constitution should specifically stipulate
a common electoral roll. The processes for preparing the roll as also its
periodical revision should be uniform throughout the country.
(b)
The
Election Commission of India has been evolving over a period of time a system
whereby each polling station in an Assembly constituency has a unique identity
which is linked to the roll of electors using that polling station. It is
possible that panchayat and municipal elections may require more polling
stations. If so, these additional polling stations should be extensions or
sub-units of the main polling station. This will ensure a ‘building block’
approach for elections in the country whereby the smallest unit will be a
polling station on a sub-unit theory. A certain number of these will form a
‘panchayat ward’ or a ‘municipal ward’ which in turn will be grouped into
panchayats and municipalities or Assembly segments and Lok Sabha
constituencies. The voter is the same. The relevant R.P. Act and State laws
should specify that common polling stations should be used for elections to
local bodies, State Legislatures and Parliament.
(c)
While
delimitation of the constituencies for panchayat and municipal elections should
be under the control and direction of the SEC, the Constitution should
stipulate that such delimitation should be adjusted after every census and not
for every election. This will be in keeping with articles 82 and 170 of the
Constitution requiring readjustment of Assembly and Lok Sabha Constituencies.
(d)
The
State laws should provide guidelines for the delimitation work such as parity
in the ratio between the population of a territorial constituency and the
number of seats within the same class of panchayats or municipalities. The
extent of permissible variations should also be mentioned. Parity as a
requirement is already stipulated in the proviso to article 243C so far as
Panchayats are concerned but is missing in article 243R relating to
municipalities.
(e)
State
laws should specify that changes in the administrative boundaries of districts,
sub-divisions, taluks, police stations, etc., should not be made within six
months prior to a panchayat or a municipal election.
Reservations
1.40.3 (a)
Articles 243D and 243T contain identical provisions so far as reservation of
seats in panchayats and municipalities for SC/STs and women are concerned.
However, there are some ambiguities about the rotation of such reserved seats.
The words used in both the articles are “may be allotted by rotation”. However,
in the second proviso to article 243D regarding reservation of the offices of
chairpersons the words used are “shall be allotted by rotation”. The
Constitutional provisions also do not specify the frequency of rotation.
Moreover, in clause (4) of article 243T there is no stipulation for rotation.
To remove ambiguities, articles 243D and 243T should be suitably amended to
provide for rotation and changes only at the time of delimitation and not in
between.
(b)
State
laws should, however, provide the guidelines for the process of reservation
which should ensure transparency and adequate opportunities for eliciting voter
response.
(c)
Clause
(6) of article 243D and clause (6) of article 243T enable a State Legislature
to provide for reservation of seats as also offices of chairpersons in
panchayats and municipalities in favour of backward class of citizens. Neither
of the articles stipulate any ceiling for the total number of reserved seats
and reserved offices. Since not less than one-third of total seats has been
specified as the minimum for women; the reservation additionally made for
backward classes can take a large proportion. To remove ambiguities the overall
total of reserved seats and reserved offices should be specified in the
Constitution.
D.
State Election Commissions
E.
1.41 Articles
243K and 243ZA stipulate that the “superintendence, direction and control for
the preparation of electoral roles and the conduct of all elections to the
Panchayats shall be vested in a State Election Commission consisting of a State
Election Commissioner to be appointed by the Governor.” These articles further
State that the SEC shall not be removed from his office except in like manner
and on the like grounds as of a Judge of a High Court and the conditions of
service shall not be varied to his disadvantage after his appointment. The
provisions are similar to those contained in article 324 regarding the Chief
Election Commissioner. Both the CEC and the SEC are viewed as Constitutional
Authorities. While the process for their removal is indicated, the Constitution
is silent on the process of appointment itself. In the case of the CEC and
other Election Commissioners, the Parliament can make provisions by law regarding
their appointment, the tenure of office and conditions of service. In the case
of the State Election Commissioner, the State Legislature may make similar
provisions.
Setting up of SECs
1.42 There
has been some debate in the country so far as the procedure for appointment of
the CEC and terms and conditions of his service are concerned. There is no
denying the fact that the office of the CEC has been filled by persons of high
integrity successively. In particular, the former CEC, Shri T.N. Seshan helped
to establish in the public mind the potential strength of the Election
Commission of India derived from its neutrality and integrity. The present CEC
and his fellow commissioners have also helped considerably in widening public
awareness about the role and scope of the Election Commission’s
responsibilities and have made important suggestions from time to time to focus
attention and initiatives for electoral reforms.
1.43 Articles
243K and 243ZA have kept the Election Commission of India as an organisational
model. The successful conduct of local elections which has been done twice in
several States and at least once in several others in a fair and transparent
manner has demonstrated the usefulness of these provisions in entrusting
elections to a neutral and independent authority. The fact that the turnout of
voters in the local elections in many States has been about 65 to 70% also
demonstrates strong interest that the people have in local issues and local
self-governance. The democratic structure of the country is no longer limited
only to the Parliament and the State Legislatures. With more than three million
elected representatives from the rural and urban local bodies, the number of
elected representatives of the people has enormously increased. This is an
important beginning of what can be a highly representative system of democratic
governance in the country. It is, therefore, essential that the machinery for
organising the local elections is adequately strengthened.
1.44 In
case of appointments of the State Election Commissioner under the Constitution,
the Governor of the concerned State has been made the appointing authority of
the incumbent and the Legislature of the State has been authorised to make
provisions by law regarding the conditions of service and tenure of office of
the State Election Commissioner. There are wide variations regarding the
qualifications laid down for the appointment of State Election Commissioners
and service conditions like tenure of office, maximum age limit, etc., in different
States. The position, as obtained in this regard in most of the major States in
the country is can be seen in the following table:
Table 4
State Election Commissioners in Different States
|
Name of State |
Tenure |
Age limit |
Qualifications |
Status |
|
Assam |
4 years |
62 Years |
A person
having put in minimum 25 years of service in administrative. judicial or
legal service of the State or Central Government. |
Status: Equal to that of the Chairman,
Assam Public Service Commission. Scale:
Last pay drawn in the Government minus pension |
|
Bihar |
3 years |
62 Years |
Not below
the rank of the Additional Secretary to Government of India or equivalent
post in the State Government. |
Salary: Same as in Government service
minus pension. |
|
Haryana |
5 years |
65 Years (minimum
age: not below the age of 55 years) |
A Judge
of High Court or a person who has served the Government in the rank of a
Commissioner for at least 5 years. |
Salary: Same as in government service
minus pension |
|
Himachal
Pradesh |
5 years |
65 Years |
Not below
the rank of Additional Chief Secretary or equivalent position |
Salary:
of a Judge of a High Court minus pension |
|
Karnataka |
5 years |
62 Years |
No
qualification is prescribed |
Salary:
Same as he was
drawing in the Government at the
time of his appointment as State Election Commissioner or Rs.6500/- per
month (old scale) whichever is higher minus pension. |
|
Kerala |
4 years |
62 Years |
No
qualification is prescribed. |
Status: equal to the Chief Secretary of
the State. Salary: Rs. 8000/- per month (old scale)
minus pension. |
|
Madhya
Pradesh |
6 years |
62 Years |
A person
who has served at least for 2 years as
Additional Secretary to Govt. of India or equivalent post. |
Salary: Rs. 8000/- per month minus
pension. |
|
Maharashtra |
5 years |
|
A person
who has held a post not lower in rank of a Principal Secretary to the State
Government. |
Salary: Rs. 7600/- p.m. (also a provision
of pay protection) |
|
Orissa |
5 years |
62 Years |
Retired
Judge of the High Court or retired District Judge or a serving civil servant. |
Salary:
Rs, 20,450/- per month minus pension or last salary drawn, which ever
is higher, Other facilities as are
made available to the Chairman,
State Public Service Commission |
|
Punjab |
5 years |
64 Years |
Not below
the rank of Financial Commissioner or Principal Secretary to Government who
has served at least for 2 years on
that post or a serving or a retired judge of a High Court |
Salary:
equal to that of a High Court Judge. |
|
Tamil
Nadu |
2 years
(eligible for re-appointment for two successsive terms subject to a max. of
6 years |
62 Years |
Not below
the rank of Secretary to Government. |
As
admissible to a Serving Judge of a High Court |
|
Uttar
Pradesh |
5 years |
65 Years |
Joint
Secretary or 3 in the Central
Government and must have held the post of District Magistrate or Divisional Commissioner
and a senior administrative post in the Secretariat |
A person
appointed as State Election Commissioner shall be paid pay and allowances as
admissible to him in his parent department. . |
|
West
Bengal |
5 years |
65 Years |
A person
having sufficient experience in the affairs of Union or any State Government
in an administrative post |
Salary: Rs. 8000/- (old scale) minus
pension. |
It is evident from the above that there are great
variations in the qualifications and service conditions of the State Election
Commissioner from State to State. As regards the tenure of office, it is seen
that it varies from 2 years (Tamil Nadu) to 6 years (Madhya Pradesh). However,
most of the States have a tenure of five years.
Notification of elections
1.45 In
Assam, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh and Gujarat the State
Election Commission issues the notification for elections on its own. In Goa,
the State Election Commission issues the notification in consultation with the
State Government. In Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, West Bengal, Kerala and Orissa,
the State Government issues the notification on the recommendation of the State
Election Commission. In Haryana, for elections to the Urban Local Bodies the
State Election Commission issues notification on its own, while for Panchayat
elections the notification is issued in consultation with the State Government.
In Rajasthan, for municipal elections, the State government on recommendation
of SEC issues notification. Simultaneously, the SEC also issues the notification.
For Panchayat elections, the District Election Officer issues the notification
as per schedule fixed by the SEC. While in all cases some form of consultation
takes place between the SEC and the State Governments. There is no reason why a uniform procedure
cannot be followed.
Single election machinery
1.46 The
preparation of electoral rolls in a unified manner using the Panchayat and the
Municipal Wards as the basic building block has been discussed in the previous
section. The need to emphasize and reinforce the composite nature of electoral
tasks from preparation of rolls to the actual conduct of election has also been
stressed. At present, the Election Commission of India is responsible for the
conduct of all elections to Parliament and to the Legislature of every State
and all elections to the offices of President and Vice-President held under the
Constitution. Article 324(6) further provides that the President or the
Governor shall make available to the Election Commission such staff as may be
necessary for the discharge of its functions. The practice so far has been for
every State to have a Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) who is appointed by the
State government. Normally he may be entrusted with other works as well. But
during the period of elections the CEO functions very much under the
supervision and direction of the Election Commission.
1.47 In
the case of local elections the State government likewise makes available to
the SEC the staff necessary. It is common knowledge that the actual work relating
to elections, whether it is preparation and revision of electoral rolls,
dealing with nominations, setting up of polling stations or the actual conduct
of the elections, a vast army of returning officers, police and other
government personnel are deployed for the purpose. In effect, therefore, both
the CEO and the SFC have to depend on the same personnel.
1.48 Since
independence, general elections to the Lok Sabha have been held 13 times and
elections to different State assemblies a few hundred times. Now the local
elections have also to be added to this already large number. By-elections as
also elections to various positions of chairpersons in different States will
further add to what is already one of the largest set of electoral
responsibilities anywhere in the world. Elections at different levels should,
therefore, be regarded as a regular feature of democratic structure of the
country.
1.49 It
may, therefore, be considered that since we have in the SEC a replica of the
Election Commission of India in every State, the responsibility for conducting
all elections in the State both for the State Legislature and the Local Bodies
should be vested in the SEC. This will enable an independent constitutional
authority at the State level to attend to all matters relating to elections on
a regular and continuous basis. The relationship between the SECs and the CEC,
Election Commission of India can be developed through uniform procedures for
preparation of electoral roles, delimitation of constituencies, rotation of
reserved seats, dealing with nominations, conduct of polls, etc. In the past
two to three years, the CEC has taken the initiative to meet the State Election
Commissioners periodically and a process of active collaboration has already
begun. The establishment of a common electoral machinery with the Election
Commission of India providing over all direction and control at the time of
elections within which the SECs will carry out that tasks appears to be a
logical outcome. The matter deserves debate and consideration.
Suggested Legal Changes
1.50
Some
specific provisions should be added to the Constitution as follows:
(a)
The
State Election Commissioner should be appointed by the Governor on the
recommendations of a group comprising the Chief Minister, the Speaker of the
State Assembly and the Leader of the Opposition. This would make the selection
impartial in the eyes of all concurred.
(b)
The
State Election Commissioner should have a fixed term of 5 years.
(c)
In
rank and status the State Election Commissioner should be equal to a Judge of
the High Court.
(d)
The
broad qualifications for position of State Election Commissioner may be
specified in the Constitution itself or in the laws of the State. Since the
conduct of elections is a major logistical exercise, administrative experience
should be stressed.
(e)
Notification
for all elections to Panchayats and Municipalities should be issued by the SEC.
(f)
SEC
should be the single and common electoral authority in the State for all local
body elections and elections to the State Legislatures. The SEC will also carry
out the elections to Parliament under the supervision and control of the
Election Commission of India. What is envisaged is a strong link between the
State Election Commissions and the Election Commission of India so that the
Election Commission of India can reinforce the autonomy of the State Election
Commissions, support their functioning with expertise and technical help and
enable the whole election machinery of the country to emerge as an integrated
system.
E. Wards Committees and Proximity to Citizens
1.51 Existing
provisions in most State laws do not facilitate any effective participation of
the people themselves in the governance of their cities. Proximity between the
people and their representatives is essential for securing accountability. The
provision for Wards Committees in the 74th Constitutional Amendment
is designed to meet this need. In the 65th Constitutional Amendment
Bill of 1989, passed by the Lok Sabha but defeated in the Rajya Sabha, it was
provided that for Municipal Councils (with a population range of twenty
thousand to three lakhs), a Wards Committee should be constituted comprising
two or more Wards. In a Municipal Corporation (with a population of more than
three lakh), the Wards Committee shall consist of one or more Wards. It was
clear that grouping of wards would be needed only in Municipal Council areas.
The Bill introduced by the government of V.P. Singh left the entire matter to
the discretion of the State government. The Bill introduced by the Narasimha
Rao government also remained silent on the issue. But when the Joint
Parliamentary Committee considered the Bill it argued that "in the larger
municipal bodies the citizens do not have easy access to the elected
representatives since the ward size is very large. The Committee, therefore, is
of the view that in Municipalities having a population of 3 lakhs or more,
Wards Committees should be constituted". The JPC also recommended that
while the Councillor representing the ward should be the chairperson of such a
committee, the details regarding its composition, territorial area and the
manner of filling the seats can be left to the State legislatures.
Provision in the 65th
Constitution Amendment Bill
1.52 The 65th
Constitution Amendment Bill had also provided that in Municipal Corporations a
Zonal Committee should also be provided at an intermediate level, between the
Wards Committees and the corporation. The Bill left it to the States to
determine the territorial area of a Zonal Committee but stipulated that the
Chairpersons of all the Wards Committees within that area should be members of
the Zonal Committee. The 65th Constitution Amendment Bill thus
envisaged a two-tier set up of Wards Committees and a Municipal Council for
smaller urban areas and a three tier set up of Wards Committees, Zonal
Committees and Corporation for larger urban areas. This was to ensure
decentralisation not only at the city level but within the city as well. The
provision also enabled greater proximity between the citizens and the elected
representatives and was similar to the
three tier arrangements envisaged for the Panchayat in the 64th
Constitution Amendment Bill.
1.53 The JPC
recommendations, while leaving considerable discretion for the State Governments
in regard to the number and composition of the Ward committees also left it
open to the States to constitute committees at any other level. Though the JPC
did not name this as a Zonal Committee as the 65th Amendment Bill
did, it was expected that this would be so. However, what has happened is that
many States have taken advantage of the ambiguity in the provisions and have
set up Wards Committees for groups of many wards which in effect are Zonal
Committees. In effect, a two tier set up has been provided even in large
corporation areas requiring a three tier arrangement.
Varied Arrangements
in the States
1.54 At one end of
the spectrum, in Kerala, there is a Wards Committee for every Ward. The elected
Councillor of the Ward concerned is the Chairman of the Wards Committee. The
Committee consists of not more than 50 persons nominated by the Chairperson of
the Municipality in consultation with the Councillor. The members of the Ward Committee are drawn from various
categories such as residents associations, doctors, teachers, etc. and these
categories are mentioned in the Act. The Wards Committee will meet at least
once in three months. The Secretary and the Heads of Departments in the
Municipality shall attend the meetings of the Wards Committee. The Committee
will prepare and supervise the development schemes for the Ward, encourage
harmony and unity among various groups, mobilise voluntary labour for social
welfare programmes, give assistance for identifying beneficiaries for the
implementation of welfare and development schemes related to the Ward. This is
besides assisting timely collection of taxes, fees and rents for the Council.
The duration of the Wards Committee shall be for five years.
1.55 In
Maharashtra, on the other hand, Wards Committees have been set up for groups of
wards. In the Greater Mumbai Corporation there are 221 municipal wards. These
wards have been grouped into 16 Wards Committees. Similarly, in Pune, Navi
Mumbai and Pimpri Chinchwad, wards have been grouped. The wards committee comprises
all the councillors from the concerned wards and one to three representatives
of NGOs in the area as nominated by the Corporation.
1.56 West
Bengal is one other State where, like Kerala, Wards Committees have been set up
for each municipal ward. In the case of the Calcutta Corporation, in addition
to the Wards Committees, the Borrough Committees which are for groups of
contiguous wards have been in existence for a long time. These are in effect a
substitute for the Zonal Committees. Calcutta thus has a three tier,
decentralised arrangement. Though the actual work of Wards Committees has been
hampered due to political problems, West Bengal has accepted the need for
decentralisation within a city administration and enhancing proximity to the
citizens. It has, therefore, provided
that apart from the Calcutta Corporation, Wards Committees may be formed in the
Municipalities as well even though the population of such municipalities may be
less than three lakhs. The Ward committees will consist between 4 to 14 members
depending on the population of the ward. The West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993
has been amended to incorporate a provision regarding composition and functions
of a Wards Committee for each ward of a Municipality.
1.57 In
the other States the provisions vary considerably. In Chennai, the 155
municipal wards are grouped into ten Wards Committees, each representing a
population of close to four lakhs. Bangalore's Wards Committees cover an
average population of about two lakhs. In effect, these are Zonal Committees
and not Wards Committees. Similarly, in
the States of Andhra Pradesh & Uttar Pradesh, every Wards Committee is to
contest in not less than five Wards in a Municipality. In Himachal Pradesh, Wards
Committees are to be constituted for not less than ten Wards in the Municipal
Corporations. The Madhya Pradesh, Haryana and Tamil Nadu legislations only
specify that Wards Committee shall be constituted for Municipalities with a
population of three lakh or more.
1.58 A
major objective of providing for Wards Committees in the 74th
Constitution Amendment is that it enables closer interaction between the people
and their elected representatives and thereby more sensitive responses to local
needs and accountability of the elected persons to their Constituencies could
be obtained. The setting up of Committees for groups of wards with large
populations but calling them as Wards Committee in name only, defeats the basic
purpose of proximity and accountability. By restricting the membership only to
elected councillors as in Andhra Pradesh or allowing a sprinkling of NGOs as in
Bangalore or Mumbai the representative character of these committees is further
vitiated. Even in Kerala and West Bengal where provisions have been made for a
committee for each ward, the principle of election has not been accepted. The
preference appears to be for selection or nomination rather than election.
1.59 This
is in sharp contrast to the arrangement for the Panchayats. Whether at the Gram
Sabha, Village Panchayat or Intermediate level Panchayat, the emphasis in the
73rd Amendment is on increasing the number of elected
representatives from territorial constituencies at different levels so that
locally elected people can participate better in locally relevant matters. In
the urban areas, on the other hand, there appears to be a strong fear of
allowing such elective arrangement. If an urban citizen can be trusted to elect
an MP, an MLA and a Councillor can’t he be trusted to elect members of a
committee for his ward or neighbourhood?
1.60 While
the setting up of Wards Committees is an important requirement of the 74th
Constitution Amendment, the responsibilities and resources assigned will be the
real measure of implementation. In the case of Kerala and West Bengal the tasks
to be performed by these committees have been elaborated in the Rules. Orders
have also been issued for the Corporation/Municipal staff to be involved in
their work in addition to some financial allocations within the city budget. In
the case of Maharashtra, though the Wards Committees are in effect Zonal
Committees some specific functions have been assigned. Accordingly, Section
50(TT) and Section 29A have been inserted in the Mumbai Municipal Corporation
Act and Mumbai Provincial Municipal Corporation Act applicable to the municipal
Corporations of Mumbai, Pune, Navi Mumbai and Pimpri Chinchwad. The Committees
are to deal with grievances of local residents regarding supply of water,
disposal of sewage and solid waste, repairs of roads, maintenance of street
lights, public sanitation, etc. The Corporations have also made arrangements
for Municipal staff with necessary powers and funds to implement the decisions
of the Wards Committees.
1.61 While some
beginnings have been made, it is clear from the evidence available that the
Constitutional provisions regarding Wards Committees have been acted upon only
to a very limited extent. Even in the nation’s capital of Delhi, only Zonal
Committees for groups of 10 to 12 municipal wards have been formed
comprising exclusively of the
Councillors of the Wards. The Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi
under the initiative of the Chief Minister has commenced a scheme called
‘Bagidari’ seeking to mobilise in the city’s neighbourhoods, support and
participation of NGOs and individuals. But the programme remains informal and
by and large outside the structure of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi.
Suggested Legal
Changes
1.62
The
suggested legal changes are:
(a)
Wards
Committees should be mandatory for each of the ward in all Municipal
Corporations with a population of three lakhs or more, to comprise of persons
chosen by direct election from the territorial area of the Ward. The Chairman
of the Committee will be the Councillor elected from the Ward.
(b)
The
State laws may determine the number of persons to be so elected but there
should be parity, within the city in the ratio between that number and
population of a ward.
(c)
State
laws may also enable Wards Committees to co-opt such residents of a ward who
are knowledgeable and can assist the work of the Committee.
(d)
In all
Corporations with a population of six lakhs and more, Zonal Committees at a
level between the Wards Committees and the Corporation Council should be
formed. State laws may determine the number and area of such Zonal Committees.
The Councillors of all the municipal wards represented in that area shall be
members. In addition, one other person from each of the Wards Committees
elected by and from amongst the elected members of that Committee shall be a
member of the Zonal Committee.
(e)
State
laws may determine the manner in which elections to the Ward and Zonal
Committees are to be held, their functions and responsibilities and the
allocation of funds to carry out the same.
(f)
Article
243S should be amended suitably to incorporate the proposals made in items (a)
to (e) above.
FUNCTIONAL AND FINANCIAL DOMAIN
2.1 The various
reports on the progress of implementation of the 73rd and the 74th
Constitutional Amendments as well as some scholars have commented that the
position in regard to the functional domain of the local bodies particularly
that of the municipalities, has become worse after the Amendment rather than
earlier. In the pre-independence period the functions assigned to the
Municipalities were broadly similar in different States. Laws in almost all
States envisaged functions such as water supply, drainage, sanitation, building
control, municipal road and street lighting, municipal markets, etc as falling
within the domain of a Municipality. In some States public health functions
like hospitals as also primary education were included. There was also a general recognition that a
Corporation or a Municipality was “in-charge” of the city or the town
concerned.
2.2 In the
period after independence, however, there has been a steady diversion and
diminution of responsibilities in the sphere of municipal functions. Many of
the functions were transferred to Development Authorities and parastatal
organisations. The phenomenon of frequent supersession of elected
municipalities added to the problem. By the end of the 1970s, State level water
and sanitation boards as in Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Gujarat and
Andhra Pradesh had come into existence. City development or special authorities
were also established in most large cities of the country. However, in course
of time most of these non-municipal bodies became afflicted with the same
maladies such as corruption, unresponsiveness, financial mismanagement, lack of
accountability, political interference, etc. which have been viewed in the past
as problems exclusive to municipalities. Barring a few most municipalities and
corporations in the country, the municipal bodies were left to deal with
non-remunerative and routine functions like sanitation and garbage removal. The
course of all these events and consequent decline of the Municipalities and
Corporations has been extensively documented elsewhere. Suffice it to say that
a widely held perception in the public mind is that ‘what is urban is municipal
and what is municipal is not worthy of attention’.
2.3 It was
expected that the 74th Amendment would reverse this trend and once
again entrust the range of responsibilities for the upkeep and development of
towns and cities to municipalities and corporations. Articles 243G and 243W of
the Constitution provide for the State laws to endow the Panchayats and
Municipalities “with such powers and authority as may be necessary to enable
them to function as Institutions of self government”. The 11th and
the 12th Schedules listing 29 and 18 items respectively were added
to the Constitution. It is important to note that neither of these Schedules
are exhaustive; nor can they be. They are broad headings signifying a whole variety
of functions. In essence, therefore, the Schedules are illustrative.
2.4 However, it
has been argued that they are restrictive, they are not mandatory and it is not
incumbent on the States to entrust the functions and responsibilities under
these Schedules to the local bodies. At best, this is a superficial view and at
worst a ploy to deflect or circumvent the intent of the Constitution. The 11th
and the 12th Schedules are an integral part of the Constitution and
have the same status and force as other Schedules. Further more, as part of the
73rd and 74th Amendments they have also been ratified by
the required number of States. The country need not have gone through the
elaborate process of amending the Constitution and ratifying the same if the
Schedules are regarded as decorative elements to be observed only as per
convenience.
2.5 Having said
this, however, it is pertinent to note that in content and description the 12th
Schedule leaves much to be desired. It may also be mentioned that in the 65th
Amendment Bill of 1989, the 12th Schedule was a larger list
incorporating the obligatory as well as several of the discretionary functions
already assigned to municipalities in the various State laws. Several new items
like welfare of the weaker sections, women and child development, family
welfare, urban electrification, non-conventional energy, urban poverty
alleviation, public distribution, etc. were also included. In the case of the
73rd Amendment relating to panchayats the 11th Schedule
which had been prepared earlier as part of the 64th Amendment Bill
was retained. However, in the case of the Municipalities the 12th
Schedule was prepared afresh. Some items such as urban housing, heritage
conservation, city passenger transport, etc. were removed. Some items such as
non-conventional energy, adult education, family welfare or women and child
development which were considered legitimate activities for panchayats and
included in the 11th Schedule were excluded in the case of
municipalities. The anomalies between the two Schedules should be recognised
and their existence as two separate Schedules needs to be reviewed. Most of the
items are similar and it will be far more forceful and useful if a common
schedule applicable to both rural and urban local bodies is formulated.
2.6 It was
expected that after the 74th Amendment the different State laws
would be modified or replaced to bring them into conformity with the
constitutional provisions especially in regard to the functional domain as
indicated in the 12th Schedule. . But only a few States have taken
the opportunity to go through this exercise. The Kerala Act is by far the most
elaborate list of functions assigned to the Municipalities. Under Section 30 of
the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994, 165 functions into 29 groups of items have
been transferred to the local bodies through the First Schedule to the Act. To
ensure clarity, the functions have been classified as mandatory, sector wise
and general functions. All urban local bodies have been given greater responsibilities
in their traditional areas of work such as all educational institutions upto
the high school, all health institutions upto the level of block hospitals, the
entire ICDS system in urban areas, roads other than highways and major district
roads, SC/ST hostels, etc. In addition, economic development functions like
improvement of agriculture and animal husbandry, development of small-scale
industries, anti-poverty programmes, etc. have also been entrusted to the
Municipalities. They are also responsible for selecting beneficiaries for the
various social welfare pension schemes of government covering agricultural
labour, unemployed youth, widows, old age destitute, handicapped, etc. A major
function entrusted to the Municipalities in Kerala is planning and
implementation of various developmental projects in the productive,
infrastructure and social service sectors.
2.7 West Bengal,
Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra and Gujarat are some other States where previous
municipal laws were comprehensively amended. Haryana, MP and Punjab have also
followed suit recently. However, changes in the laws alone do not ensure the
transfer of functions and responsibilities. The table below presents an
overview of the position in 13 States. It is important to mention that this table
alone will not give the complete picture. This is because where a particular
function listed in the 12th Schedule is shown as ‘Y’ meaning yes and
therefore, assigned to the Municipality, there could still be several
restrictions in the exercise of that function. Similarly where another item is
shown as ‘N’ and therefore, not assigned to a Municipality, there could still
be some part of that function discharged by a Municipality. The overall
situation, therefore, reflects considerable variation in detail.
Table 5
Functional Domain of Nagarpalikas – A Comparison
|
12th
Schedule Items |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
Andhra
Pradesh
|
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
|
Gujarat |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
|
Harnaya |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Himachal
Pradesh
|
N |
N
|
N |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
N
|
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
|
Karnataka |
Y |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
|
Kerala |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
|
Madhya Pradesh |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
|
Maharashtra |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
|
Rajasthan |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
|
Tamil Nadu |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
|
Uttar Pradesh |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y
|
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
|
West Bengal |
Y |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
|
Delhi |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y – Yes, assigned to Municipalities N – No, not
assigned to Municipalities
Items
listed in the 12th Schedule to the Constitution:-
1.
Urban
planning including town planning.
2.
Regulation
of land use and construction of buildings.
3.
Planning
for economic and social development.
4.
Roads
and bridges.
5.
Water
supply for domestic, industrial and commercial purposes.
6.
Public
health, sanitation, conservancy and solid waste management.
7.
Fire
Services.
8.
Urban
forestry, protection of the environment and promotion of ecological aspects.
9.
Safeguarding
the interests of the weaker sections of the society including the handicapped
and the mentally retarded.
10.
Slum
improvement and upgradation.
11.
Urban
poverty alleviation.
12.
Provision
of urban amenities and facilities such as parks, gardens, playgrounds.
13.
Promotion
of cultural, educational and aesthetic aspects.
14.
Burials
and burial grounds; cremation grounds and electric crematoriums.
15.
Cattle
Pounds, Prevention of cruelty to animals.
16.
Vital
statistics including registration of births and deaths.
17.
Public
amenities including street lighting, bus stops, public conveniences.
18.
Regulation
of slaughterhouses and tanneries.
2.8 The process
of assigning various functions thus becomes as important as the substance. The
Kerala Act clearly says that functions are to be assigned by law and once so
assigned can be withdrawn or modified only by a similar law. This is an
important aspect because in many States, the assignment of functions is done by
regulations or Government Orders and even if the initial assignment is by a State
law, they are made subject to the rules and regulations as may be specified by
the Government. The functional domain, therefore, becomes uncertain and
variable at the discretion of the Government in power. It is interesting to
note that while moving the 73rd Amendment Bill in December, 1992,
the then Rural Development Minister stated in the Lok Sabha, “we intend to
inscribe in the Constitution certain core elements of grassroots democracy to
take them beyond the pale of changing political expediency.”. But this has not
happened. Even in the limited experience since the 73rd and the 74th
Amendments became law, there have been several agitations on behalf of both the
panchayats and urban local bodies demanding from the State Governments the
functions listed in the 11th and 12th Schedules to be
assigned to them. Very recently, the All India Council of Mayors has also moved
the Supreme Court seeking a direction to the State Governments in this regard.
2.9 Functions,
functionaries and finances have to go together for any process of devolution to
be meaningful. Here again, except in Kerala where elaborate arrangements
have been made to transfer the Institutions, and staff along with functions, in
other States the process has been halting. The issue of finances is dealt with
in some detail in the subsequent chapter.
Suggested legal
changes
2.10
The
suggested legal changes are:
(a)
A
common Schedule of functions for both rural and urban local bodies is
desirable. The existing 11th and the 12th Schedules which
have several common items should be integrated. (see Annexure 2.1)
(b)
This
integrated Schedule should not be illustrative only, but should be
mandatory. It should be on par with the
lists in the Seventh Schedule in status and in the exercise of Legislative and
Executive p[owers, which should be co-extensive with the subject, listed in the
Schedule.
(c)
The
assignment of functions should be by substantive law rather than by rules and
regulations.
(d)
The
laws should also provide for the transfer to the Municipalities of organisations,
funds and staff who were previously responsible for discharging the functions
being assigned. The local bodies should have full control over its staff
including those transferred to them. Functions, functionaries and funds
should go together.
2.11 It has been
observed that the mismatch between functions and finances and near bankruptcy
in many situations have been recurring features of municipal body finances in
the country. The Constitution, even after the 74th Amendment does not
provide for an autonomous domain of tax or revenue raising powers to
municipalities. These continue to be determined and regulated by the State
Governments. The State Governments specify the taxes that the Municipalities
can levy and collect which are taken from the State List in the 7th
Schedule. Historically these taxes have included taxes on lands and buildings,
taxes on entry of goods into a local area for consumption, taxes on animals and
boats, taxes on entertainment, taxes on professions, trades, etc. There are
significant variations between the States. Since there is no distinct tax
domain of the Municipalities as such, the control of the State Governments in
determining the tax, tax rates or even tax exemptions is significant. The
Punjab Government has recently abolished the levy of taxes on properties for
domestic use. Within Rajasthan, several municipalities do not levy property
taxes.
2.12 Though the
Constitutional Amendment exercise provided an opportunity, neither the 73rd
nor the 74th Amendment attempted any new formulation of the
financial domain of the local bodies. Article 243X merely reconfirms the
previously existing position by stating that the Legislature of a State may, by
law, authorise a municipality to levy and collect property taxes, duties, tolls
and fees in accordance with such procedures and subject to such limits as may
be specified in the law. The other provisions in the article regarding the
assignment of taxes, grants-in-aid from the Consolidated Funds of the State or
Constitution on behalf of the Municipalities are also not new.
2.13 However, the
stipulation for mandatory State Finance Commissions (SFCs) under article 243Y
to review the financial position of the Municipalities and make recommendations
regarding distribution between the States and the Municipalities of the
proceeds of the taxes, criteria for grants-in-aid, measures needed to improve
the financial position of the Municipalities, etc. may be regarded as an
innovative and significant feature of the Amendment. Unfortunately the
provision lacks teeth and substance because there is no divisible pool of tax
resources between the States and the Municipalities. Articles 268 to 275 of the
Constitution contain various provisions about the distribution of revenues
between the Union and the States. Distinct categories such as duties levied by
the Union but collected and appropriated by the State (article 268), taxes
levied and collected by the Union but assigned to the States (article 269),
taxes levied and collected by the Union and distributed between the Union and
the States (article 270), grants-in-aid in lieu of export duty (article 273),
etc. provide a comprehensive frame work. No similar attempt was made to devise
such an arrangement so far as the States and the Municipalities are concerned.
It was left to the State Finance Commissions to suggest such a divisible pool
if the SFC was so inclined and if at all its terms of reference given by the
State government allowed it.
2.14 After the 74th
Amendment between 1994 and 1997, a total of 22 SFCs were set up. The
composition of the State Finance Commissions itself did not follow any specific
pattern nor was there any criteria provided for in a separate Act. as in the
case of the Finance Commissions set up by the Government of India under article
280. The terms of reference of the SFCs were also in most cases a mere
repetition of the provisions of article 243Y of the Constitution. Since funds
and functions were to go together there was an opportunity for the SFCs to
review the existing situation and recommend a functional domain which would
better serve public interest and also be financially viable. But most of the
SFCs did not touch on the subject at all. The table below summarizes the recommendations
of 15 SFCs.
Table 6
Andhra Pradesh
|
39.24% of State tax and non-tax revenue to all local
bodies |
|
Assam |
2% of State tax for local bodies, both rural and urban |
|
Himachal Pradesh |
An amount equal to Rs.12.2 crore as grants in lieu of
octroi for 1996/97, to rise to Rs.17.9 crore in 2000/01. |
|
Delhi |
9.5 per cent of the total tax revenue of the State with
MCD getting 96.85 per cent and NDMC 3.15 per cent. |
|
Karnataka |
5.4% of the total non-loan revenue receipt for meeting the
plan and non plan expenditure |
|
Kerala |
40% of State plan funds for plan scheme and 1% of State
revenue be transferred to the rural and urban local bodies in proportion to
their population |
|
Madhya Pradesh |
8.67% of the tax and non-tax revenues of State government |
|
Maharashtra |
25% to 100% of entertainment taxes collected from
municipalities of different grades, 25% of vehicle tax and 10% of
professional tax are recommended shares for local bodies |
|
Manipur |
Maintenance grant equal to Rs.88.3 lakhs to accrue to
municipalities in 1996/97. |
|
Orissa |
Rs.179.5 crore is the projected transfer (grant) to urban
local bodies between 1998/99 and 2004/5 |
|
Punjab |
20 per cent of the net proceeds of five State taxes, to be
shared with the Panchayats and Municipalities |
|
Rajasthan |
2.18 per cent of the net proceeds to the local bodies. The
division of these proceeds between rural and urban should be in the ratio of
3:4:1 |
|
Tamil Nadu |
8 per cent of the total revenue from all State taxes excluding
the entertainment tax, of which 15 per cent as equalisation and incentive
fund in the ratio of 60 : 40 and 85 per cent in the ratio of 55 : 45 among rural and urban local bodies. |
|
Uttar Pradesh |
7% of the net proceeds of State’s total tax revenue should
be transferred to urban local bodies |
|
West Bengal |
16% of the net proceeds of all taxes collected by the
State should be transferred to local bodies |
2.15 Out of the 22
reports submitted by the SFCs only 4 have been accepted without modifications,
10 with modification, 3 are still under consideration and in 5 no action has
been taken. Though article 243Y requires the recommendations of the SFC to be
laid before the Legislature of the State with the Action Taken Report in most
cases acceptance has been limited only to a few items. Most of the Commissions
have dealt with the expenditure needs and forecast on the basis of current
practice. Very few have taken a total view of development needs and financial
requirements. Regarding revenue assignments, the SFCs have generally supported
more autonomy for the local body in determining the rates. With regard to plan
funds, however, some States like Kerala and West Bengal have recommended an
allocation from 40 to 60% of State plan to rural and urban local bodies.
11th
Finance Commission
2.16 Against this
background, the setting up of the 11th Finance Commission in July,
1998 under the Chairmanship of Dr. A.M. Khusro and the terms of reference
specified for the same acquire significance. It is very important to note that
until the 73rd and the 74th Amendments the Finance
Commission set up by the President was not required to enter into the area of
local body finances at all. The Finance
Commission had its mandate and its hands were full in dealing with the distribution
of tax proceeds between the Union and the States and related matters. The
provision for setting up State Finance Commissions was no doubt inspired by the
model of the Central Finance Commission. However, neither the 64th
nor the 65th Amendment Bills which were the pre-cursors of the 73rd
and the 74th Amendments provided for any links. That the reports of
the SFCs could be used as an input by the CFC was an idea inspired by the Joint
Parliamentary Committee.
2.17 The
Committee took note of the fact that though the 8th and the 9th
Finance Commissions set up by the Centre had deliberated on the nature and
magnitude of the problem and also came to the conclusions that local bodies
needed financial support no recommendations were made as, in their view, the
Planning Commission was the appropriate body to deal with these problems. The
JPC, therefore, reached the conclusion that while the Planning Commission and
the Finance Commission were seized of the problem intellectually, in the
absence of a constitutional mechanism, recommendations for assistance would
continue to be sporadic and ad hoc.
The Committee therefore, wanted the mandate of the Central Finance
Commission to specifically include consideration of measures for augmenting the
Consolidated Funds of the State to supplement the resources of the
Municipality. Accordingly the Committee recommended a new clause to be added to
amend article 280 of the Constitution. This amendment suggested by the JPC for
urban local bodies was considered relevant for the rural local bodies as well.
Accordingly sub-clause (bb) and sub-clause (c) were added to clause (3) of
article 280 requiring the Finance Commission at the Centre to take note of the
recommendations of the SFCs in recommending measures needed to augment the
Consolidated Fund of States to supplement the resources of local bodies.
2.18 However, when
the 10th Finance Commission was set up in June 1997 chaired by Shri
K C Pant, no SFC had been set up. The Commission felt that there was no duty
cast upon it to make recommendations in terms of article 283 (bb) and (c).
Nevertheless, the Commission recommended an ad hoc award of about
Rs.4400 crores for Panchayat and Rs. 1000 crore for Municipalities. In the case
of the 11th Finance Commission chaired by Dr A M Khusro, the terms
of reference were sufficiently large. The Commission also authorised major
studies about local body finances by the National Institute of Rural
Development and the National Institute of Public Finance and Policy (NIPFP).
2.19 The NIPFP
study presents by far the latest picture in regard to municipal revenues and
expenditure. The salient features are given below:
Ř Per capita revenue receipts of
municipalities in 1997-98 was estimated at Rs.821.5. However, this figure drops
down to Rs.421 if the income of large municipalities with over one million
population is considered.
Ř The total resources generated by all
municipalities in the country was Rs.17785 crores. This, however, amounted to
less than 17% of the own resources of all the States put together.
Ř Of the total municipal revenues,
nearly 82% were internally generated revenues. This belies the popular
perception that municipalities across the country depended overwhelmingly on
grants.
Ř On the expenditure side per capita
municipal spending was Rs.747. Here again the figure would drop down to Rs.372
if the million plus cities are excluded.
Ř The total municipal spending was
approximately Rs.19542 crores which amounted to only 10.2% of the total revenue
expenditure of all the States combined. Here again the large city overshadows
the rest.
Ř The revenue expenditure of Bombay
Corporation alone represents 13% of the total municipal expenditure of the
country.
The overall position
in regard to the country, however, does not convey very large and serious
interState differences in regard to both revenue and expenditure. The tables
below on the Composition of Revenue and Expenditure indicated the position in
respect of 19 States covered in the NIPFP study.
Composition of Municipal Revenues (%) (1997/98)
|
State |
Own resources |
Tax Receipts
|
Non-tax Receipts
|
Shared revenue |
Grants |
Others |
|
Andhra Pradesh |
51.17 |
36.37 |
14.80 |
33.56 |
13.03 |
2.25 |
|
Assam |
59.08 |
23.24 |
35.84 |
0.00 |
23.37 |
17.55 |
|
Bihar |
52.77 |
36.86 |
15.91 |
2.99 |
40.31 |
3.93 |
|
Gujarat |
87.45 |
79.74 |
7.71 |
0.18 |
11.10 |
1.27 |
|
Haryana |
80.51 |
42.80 |
37.71 |
13.44 |
3.95 |
2.09 |
|
Karnataka |
43.18 |
18.12 |
25.06 |
5.67 |
43.62 |
7.53 |
|
Kerala |
70.32 |
44.69 |
25.63 |
20.65 |
4.74 |
4.29 |
|
Madhya Pradesh |
47.34 |
22.61 |
24.73 |
11.88 |
39.90 |
0.88 |
|
Maharashtra |
95.40 |
65.44 |
29.96 |
0.53 |
3.84 |
0.23 |
|
Orissa |
67.12 |
46.92 |
20.20 |
0.93 |
28.59 |
3.36 |
|
Punjab |
89.02 |
69.60 |
19.42 |
6.14 |
3.81 |
1.03 |
|
Rajasthan |
89.80 |
62.90 |
26.90 |
0.17 |
9.30 |
0.74 |
|
Tamil Nadu |
44.34 |
21.21 |
23.13 |
21.93 |
29.49 |
4.24 |
|
Uttar Pradesh |
19.44 |
13.50 |
5.95 |
0.36 |
79.14 |
1.06 |
|
West Bengal |
59.33 |
36.51 |
22.82 |
5.05 |
30.53 |
5.10 |
|
Himachal Pradesh |
25.86 |
15.27 |
10.59 |
0.00 |
72.04 |
2.09 |
|
Manipur |
98.29 |
90.42 |
7.87 |
0.20 |
0.15 |
1.35 |
|
Meghalaya |
46.27 |
37.66 |
8.62 |
0.00 |
40.09 |
13.63 |
|
Tripura |
42.92 |
27.31 |
15.61 |
0.00 |
33.74 |
23.34 |
|
|
82.78 |
56.40 |
26.38 |
4.05 |
11.99 |
1.19 |
Table 8
Composition of Revenue Expenditure (%) (1997/98)
State
|
Wages and salaries |
Operation and maintenance |
Interest and Debt |
Others |
Andhra Pradesh
|
49.21 |
49.60 |
0.24 |
0.95 |
|
Assam |
42.43 |
54.14 |
1.90 |
1.53 |
|
Bihar |
1-77.21 |
21.13 |
1.03 |
0.63 |
|
Gujarat |
53.20 |
30.02 |
6.30 |
10.48 |
|
Haryana |
48.76 |
44.49 |
0.00 |
6.75 |
|
Karnataka |
20.93 |
78.11 |
0.48 |
0.48 |
|
Kerala |
55.04 |
34.57 |
5.19 |
5.20 |
|
Madhya Pradesh |
51.01 |
37.67 |
0.61 |
10.71 |
|
Maharashtra |
61.50 |
13.29 |
9.89 |
15.31 |
|
Orissa |
38.30 |
21.61 |
0.00 |
40.09 |
|
Punjab |
52.46 |
28.68 |
4.27 |
14.59 |
|
Rajasthan |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
Tamil Nadu |
49.13 |
47.49 |
2.53 |
0.86 |
|
Uttar Pradesh |
69.18 |
29.62 |
0.00 |
1.20 |
|
West Bengal |
71.09 |
18.52 |
1.01 |
9.38 |
|
Himachal Pradesh |
46.98 |
52.32 |
0.00 |
0.71 |
|
Manipur |
70,69 |
8.73 |
0.00 |
20.58 |
|
Meghalaya |
52.28 |
30.37 |
0.00 |
17.35 |
|
Tripura |
56.64 |
1.15 |
2.26 |
39.95 |
|
|
60.34 |
20.00 |
7.17 |
12.51 |
2.20 Though such
detailed and comprehensive data was available before the 11th
Finance Commission and its terms of reference were wide enough to address the
subject, the Commission has chosen to make only an ad hoc awards of Rs.
1600 crores for rural local bodies and Rs. 400 crores for urban bodies. This is
a much lower figure than whatever the 10th Finance Commission made
on an ad hoc basis. However, the Commission has made a number of other
recommendations which are of significance to municipal finances. These are
identified below:
(a)
The
levy of taxes on land/farm income to strengthen the resource base of the local
bodies and also to augment the Consolidated Fund of the States.
(b)
Surcharges
and cess on State taxes.
(c)
Profession
tax under article 276 to be levied by all the States and the rates to be
revised upwards.
(d)
The
ceiling of Rs.2500 per annum fixed by a Constitutional Amendment in 1988 to
article 276 (2) should also be revised. Parliament should be empowered to fix
this ceiling on the basis of prevalent economic situation without going in for
a Constitutional Amendment every time.
(e)
Property
and house tax laws, assessment and collection of machinery to be substantially
improved. (The wide variance in levels of property tax may be seen in Annexure
2.2)
(f)
User
charges to be revised periodically with local bodies being given the power to
fix the rates.
(g)
Transfer
of funds and functions to local bodies should be made by law and changed only
by law rather than by regulations and government orders.
(h)
The
number of centrally sponsored or State sponsored schemes in matters usually
dealt with by local bodies should be reduced and the implementation machinery
for the same integrated with the set up of the local bodies.
(i)
The
setting up of the SFCs should be so timed as to make their inputs available in
time to the CFC. The Finance Commission should be empowered to make its own
assessment in cases where SFC reports were not forthcoming or SFCs had not been
set up.
2.21 The 11th
Finance Commission has also suggested that the C&AG should be involved in
setting up an Accounts system for the local bodies as also the audit of the
same. Given the existing work load of the CAG and the considerable variance in
the internal structure and staff of rural and urban local bodies it is to be
considered whether this is feasible. Besides articles 243J and 243Z envisage
that State laws should make the provisions for maintenance and audits of
accounts. The CAG’s involvement at all levels in this regard may be construed
as centralisation rather that decentralisation.
2.22
The
suggested legal changes are:
(a)
The
concept of a distinct and separate tax domain for municipalities should be
recognised. This concept should be reflected in a list of taxes and should form
part of the common schedule of functions and responsibilities for local bodies
or in the event it is decided to continue with the 11th and 12th
Schedules as separate, the tax domain should figure in the relevant schedule.
Carving out items from the existing State lists such as item 49 (taxes on land
and buildings) and item 52 (taxes on entry of goods into a local area for
consumption) should not be difficult.
(b)
Similarly,
the concept of a divisible pool of taxes which can be shared between the Union,
the States and the Municipalities should also be recognised similar to the
provisions in articles 268 to 274. There should be categories of taxes and
other levies specifying who will collect the same and how it will be
distributed between the 3 levels.
(c)
In
case of taxes and levies, the proceeds of which are to be shared with
municipalities, prior consultation will be required before any modification is
made in the scope of the tax or its rates.
(d)
Article
276 on taxes on professions, trades and employment should be amended as
suggested by the 11th Finance Commission. The ceiling should be
specified by Parliament from time to time rather than requiring amendments to
the Constitution.
(e)
State
laws should provide for composition of the State Finance Commission and the
criteria for its membership similar to the provisions in the case of the
Finance Commission set up by the President under article 280.
(f)
State
laws should provide for the establishment of the SFCs in a periodical manner
and determine a time schedule for the same so that the work and output of the
SFCs are synchronised suitably with the Central Finance Commission.
(g)
Articles
243-I and 243Y should be amended to ensure that the Action Taken Report by the
Government is laid before the State Legislature within six months of the
submission of the SFC recommendations.
(h)
Sub-clauses
(bb) and (c) of clause (3) of article 280 should be amended so that the Central
Finance Commission while taking into consideration the recommendation of the
SFCs, is not circumscribed by the same.
(i)
State
laws should also provide for establishing and maintaining a financial database
as suggested by the 11th Finance Commission.
(j)
State
laws should specifically empower municipalities to borrow.
(k)
State
laws should also provide for the preparation and adoption of municipal budgets
in a transparent manner in keeping with the public right to information.
CHAPTER 3
DISTRICT PLANNING
COMMITTEES, METROPOLITAN PLANNING COMMITTEES AND ORGANIC LINKS BETWEEN
MUNICIPALITIES AND PANCHAYATS
3.1 The
constitution of District Planning Committees (DPCs) is mandatory under article
243ZD of the Constitution and is a common item for both Panchayats and
Municipalities. The District Planning Committees are to take up integrated
planning for urban and rural areas in the District. As urbanisation increases,
the need for such an integrated planning will become more important. Town and
the country have to share the various physical and economic resources of the
district such as communications, water resources and market places. Allocation
of water for irrigation, drinking or industry is already a contentious issue in
many districts. Dealing with each other's wastes is another serious problem.
The sugar mill and distillery wastes of numerous small, medium and large units
in western Uttar Pradesh, or the textile and dyeing units in Rajasthan, Gujarat
or Andhra Pradesh fouling and poisoning water courses are a well known
phenomenon. Municipal solid wastes-be they chemicals, plastics, hospital wastes
or other debris-spill over into the countryside and find their way into
neighbouring streams. Agricultural lands at the fringe of towns, large or
small, are increasingly prone to conversion. These are problems that need
understanding and response, not in a distant State headquarter but within the
local area. The district needs a platform to umpire and resolve these issues.
The Zilla Parishad and District Planning are an important process for this
purpose. Planning should be an obligatory function of panchayats and
municipalities. Such plans at the local level are the building blocks for a
district plan. District Planning itself should be an integrating process.
3.2 While the
composition of the DPC and the manner in which the seats are to be filled have
been left to the States, article 243ZD stipulates that four-fifths of the total
number of members of DPC will be elected by, and from amongst, the elected
members of the Panchayat at the district level and of the municipalities in the
district in proportion to the ratio between the population of the rural areas
and of the urban areas in the district. The rest are to be nominated.
3.3 While most
States have made enabling acts to constitute District Planning Committees, very
few have actually constituted them. This is because of both political
apprehensions and bureaucratic problems. First is the fact that the provisions
on District Planning are to be found in the 74th rather than in the 73rd
Constitutional Amendment. Rural Development departments in the various State
Governments have traditionally regarded district level planning as falling in
their domain but since they find that the provisions for the DPC are now a part
of the 74th Constitutional Amendment, under the Part IXA relating to
Municipalities, their reaction sometimes has been that these Committees are the
concern of the Urban Development or Municipal Affairs department in the State.
These departments, on the other hand. do not have a clue about the objectives
and purposes of the District Planning Committee and expect that some other
department like Planning, will take care of it. The result is that the item
often became orphaned between disinterested departments. The political
apprehension is about the DPC emerging as a dominant body deciding on public
investments and thus reducing the influence and patronage of State level
political leaders.
DPC and Zilla Parishad:
3.4 A second
unresolved issue has been the relationship between the Zilla Parishad and the
DPC. The amended Constitution envisages the DPC as a stand alone entity. While
article 243ZD provides for members of a DPC to be elected by and from amongst
the elected members of the Zilla Parishad and of the municipalities in the
district, it does not specify the relationship between the Zilla Parishad and
the DPC. It is pertinent to mention here that this aspect was well understood
and specifically addressed in the 65th Amendment Bill, 1989. Article
243Y proposed in that Bill stipulated that the DPC should be constituted “in
every Panchayat at the District level”. Proposed clause (3) of the article also
laid down that the “Chairperson of the Panchayat at the district level shall be
the chairperson of the Committee”. The locus and stewardship of the DPC as part
of the district panchayat or Zilla Parishad was thus established beyond doubt.
Unfortunately, article 243ZD of the Constitution as enacted has allowed serious
ambiguities to persist.
3.5 The State
Governments have, therefore, been left to draw their own interpretations. In
Assam, Karnataka. Kerala, Rajasthan and West Bengal the State laws envisage the
DPC as a part of the Zilla Parishad. The Chairperson of the Parishad is also
designated as Chairperson of the DPC. In Madhya Pradesh, a Minister of the
State Government is the Chairperson of the DPC and is expected to lead and
guide district planning with the help of the district administration. The
Chairperson of the Zilla Parishad is a Vice-Chairman. Gujarat and Maharashtra
have long had District Planning and Development Committees with a minister of
the State Government as the Chairperson. The view of these two Governments has
been that these district committees are an adequate substitute for the DPCs.
The table below indicates the varied arrangements in different States.
|
State |
Total Members |
Elected Members |
Nominated Members |
Chairperson |
Secretary |
|
Kerala |
15 |
12 |
03 |
President of the Zilla Parishad |
District Collector |
|
Madhya Pradesh |
15-25 |
Four-fifths |
‘One-fifth |
Minister nominated by the State Govt. |
District Collector |
|
Maharashtra |
30-50 |
Four-fifths |
One-fifth |
Minister nominated by the State
Govt. |
District Collector |
|
West Bengal |
10-100 depending on size of the
district |
Four-fifths |
One-fifth |
President of the Zilla Parishad |
District Magistrate |
|
Rajasthan |
25 |
20 |
5 |
President of the Zilla Parishad |
Chief Planning Officer of ZP |
|
Uttar Pradesh |
20-40 |
Four-fifths |
One-fifths |
Minister nominated by the State
government |
Chief Development Officer of the
District |
|
Karnataka |
|
Four-fifths |
One-fifth |
President of the Zilla Parishad
Mayor/Municipal President of District Hq. Vice Chairman |
CEO of Z.P. |
|
Tamil Nadu |
|
Fourth-fifth |
One-fifth |
Collector; ZP President Vice
Chairman |
CEO of District Panchayat |
3.6 The
designation of a Minister as the President of the DPC virtually makes it an
extension of the State Government and goes against the intent of the
Constitution. It also defeats the principle of decentralisation. Even before
independence District Boards were perceived and set up as important centres of
decentralisation. In Karnataka, Maharashtra, Gujarat and Rajasthan, the Zilla
Parishads set up during the first initiatives of decentralisation enjoyed
considerable autonomy and powers. The District is the first major level where
the demand for local autonomy and the desire for State control are likely to
come into conflict. Similar fears surfaced during the 1970s when the Zilla
Parishad became prominent and powerful in Karnataka, Gujarat and Rajasthan.
These fears and apprehensions continue to hold sway and if the highly varied
arrangements in the different States continue to prevail, the Constitutional
intent in establishing district level panchayats and district planning process
will be defeated. To quote “Panchayati Raj without district planning might be a
somewhat hollow shell, even as district planning without Panchayati Raj would be unrepresentative”.
This observation of Late Rajiv Gandhi was only a reflection of the consensus
held by stalwarts of the panchayat movement like Ashok Mehta, Abdul Nazir Sab.
Ramkrishna Hegde or Nirmal Mukherji.
3.7 In the case
of Madhya Pradesh it has been claimed that the District Planning Committee is
really a step forward towards the establishment of a district government. The
DPC has been given the powers to supervise and monitor district level schemes
undertaken by different departments of the Government. Amended in 1999, the DPC
Act of 1995 has also given to it the powers of administrative approval and
financial sanctions subject to some limits. The DPCs have also been entrusted
some other functions previously performed by the State Government in respect of
urban areas such as delimitation of municipal wards, land acquisition, etc.
However, in keeping a Minister of the Government as the Chairman of the DPC and
the District Collector as the Secretary, the DPC has emerged as a body distinct
from the Zilla Parishad exercising more powers on behalf of the State
Government. It is not the intent of the Constitution that the DPC should emerge
as a super body at the district level dominating even the Zilla Parishad. To
that extent the intent and working of the DPC in MP needs careful watching.
District Planning
Process
3.8 The
extensive arrangements for decentralised planning which have been made in
Kerala particularly in the case of Panchayats at different levels have been
well documented and discussed in various sources. So far as the DPC is
concerned the State Planning Board and the NGOs have also helped to identify
and provide district level resource persons with the required professional background.
The DPCs guide the intermediate and village level panchayats in the preparation
of their own plans and the approval of the plan is the responsibility of the
DPC though it cannot change the priorities determined by the PRIs in the
district.
3.9 In October
1998 Maharashtra enacted a separate District Planning Committee Act. The Act
provides for a Minister of the State Government to be the Chairperson of the
DPC with the President of the Zilla Parishad, its CEO, the Divisional
Commissioner and the Collector of the District as ex-officio members. The Act
also stipulates that the Collector shall be the Member Secretary. The
Maharashtra Government has thus confirmed its past approach prior to the
Constitutional Amendment, of treating Zilla Parishads as just one of the local
bodies rather than a body which should take the lead in district planning.
3.10 In West
Bengal, the organisational arrangements are similar to those in Kerala though
there has been no supporting programme for identifying resource persons and
training PRI and Municipal staff in planning. West Bengal has also revived a
previous practice of District Planning and Development Co-ordination Committee
(DPDCC) presided over by a Minister of the State Government. Though the
President of the Zilla Parishad continues to be the Chairman of the DPC, the
DPC is expected to consult the DPDCC. Here again the arrangement appears to be
a dilution of the position of the Zilla Parishad.
3.11 In Rajasthan,
DPCs have been formed in all the districts with the President of the Zilla
Parishad as the Chairperson and the Chief Planning Officer of theDistrict who
is a functionary of the Zilla Parishad as the Secretary. In UP and Karnataka
the DPCs have been set up but they are not functional. In Tamil Nadu until
recently the DPC was perceived and operated as a non PRI body with the
Collector as the Chairman and the Zilla Parishad President as the Vice
Chairman. Recently, the position has been changed with the President of the
District Panchayat designated as the Chairman of the DPC.
3.12 The highly
varied organisational and operational arrangements for the DPC confirm the fact
that the provisions of the Constitution have remained very poorly understood
and very badly implemented. Where the DPC has not been located within a Zilla
Parishad the ownership of the process itself has been left to doubt. The
induction of a State Government Minister appears to be a deliberate attempt to
dilute the position of the district level panchayat and forestall possible
attempts of that panchayat to assert its preeminence as a distinct body of
elected representatives. The operational arrangements for the preparation of a
district development plan and merely forwarding it to the State Government also
reduces it to a paper exercise. If, on the other hand, district level planning
becomes multi sectoral and inter-departmental and also covers project
allocation, monitoring and supervision and if that district level planning
becomes a part of the Zilla Parishad’s responsibilities it would undoubtedly
enhance the Parishad’s power and influence.
3.13 As presently worked, the Panchayat at the District level or the
Zilla Parishad is construed as a Zilla Rural Parishad. The reality is that a
District is an important administrative entity and its jurisdiction covers both
the rural and the urban. Its composition should reflect the character of the
district as a whole. Its territorial constituencies should, therefore, comprise
all parts of the district. Such a Parishad will truly be a Panchayat representing
the district as a whole. District Planning has to be one of its firm and
continuing responsibilities.
3.14 The
Panchayats at the district level, in other words, the Zilla Parishad is to be
composed principally of representatives elected from territorial
constituencies. As suggested above these territorial constituencies should
cover the district as a whole. We have suggested in an earlier section [see
para 1.40.2 (b) above] the need to adopt a building block approach in the
preparation of the electoral rolls as well as the composition of both
panchayats and municipalities. The basic electoral unit will, therefore, be the
territorial wards which elect representatives to the village panchayat. A
certain number of these panchayat wards can then be grouped into wards for
intermediate level panchayats i.e. panchayat samitis. For urban areas we have
urged earlier, the formation of Wards Committees for each municipal ward or
groups of wards to comprise representatives elected from territorial constituencies
into which a municipal ward area will be devised. This will be the basic
building block. A certain number of
these blocks can then be grouped into a municipal ward. If there are no Wards
Committees comprise of representatives elected for this purpose, then the
municipal ward itself becomes the building block. The territorial
constituencies of the Zilla Parishad will then be a grouping of panchayat
samiti as well as municipal wards. In delimiting the panchayat samiti wards the
State laws should provide that any given village panchayat should form part of
a panchayat samiti wholly and not be split. Similarly the constituencies for
Wards Committees will be grouped in their entirety within a given municipal
ward. By the same principle a panchayat samiti ward or a municipal ward should
form part of a Zilla Parishad constituency wholly and not be split. A schematic
diagram is placed below to illustrate the suggested arrangement.
S U G G E S T E
D A R R A N G E M E N T O F Z I L L A P A
R I S H A D

Note:
Some
explanation about the arrangement may be useful. At the basic level there are
voters in the rural and urban areas. A certain number of rural voters usually
ranging from 500 to 1000 are listed in the electoral roll organised for each
panchayat ward. This is the territorial constituency from which a
representative is elected for the Village Panchayat. We may call this
constituency as Level I. This is the basic building block in the electoral
system. A certain number of these Level I constituencies will be grouped into
another territorial constituency for the panchayat at the intermediate level usually
called the Panchayat Samiti, the Block Panchayat or the Kshetra Panchayat. The
ward of a Panchayat Samiti which may be called as Level II will be much larger
and will comprise several Level I panchayat wards. Similarly in the case of
urban areas, the urban voters will be grouped into a Level I territorial
constituency. In small towns this may be a Municipal Ward from which a
councillor is elected by the voters. In larger cities where Wards Committees
are set up whose members are elected from different areas of the municipal
ward, each of this area will be a portion of the ward. Thus, the Level I
constituency may be either the territorial constituency for a wards committee
or a municipal ward itself.
According
to the present proposal the Zilla Parishad should be composed of
representatives from territorial constituencies organised for this purpose.
These constituencies may be called Level III. These constituencies will be even
larger than Level II and will comprise several of them. A level III Zilla Parishad
constituency in some cases may consist entirely of level II Panchayat Samiti
Constituencies or in some cases Level II Municipal Ward constituencies or in
some cases a combination of the two. The main principle will be a broad parity
in the population seat ratio between the various Zilla Parishad constituencies.
A Zilla
Parishad set up by such an arrangement will obviously reflect the character of
the district. In a predominantly rural district the Zilla Parishad ward will be
mainly rural. In a predominantly urban district, they will be otherwise. In
districts which are partly urban the number and character of the Zilla Parishad
wards will also reflect this partly rural character.
MPs/MLAs and DPC
3.15 The
representation of MPs and MLAs is a related item. Both the 73rd and
the 74th Amendments specifically enable State Legislatures to
provide for their representation in Municipalities and Panchayats. It makes far
more sense and can be of much more value if the participation of MLAs and MPs
is secured in District Planning. Two alternatives can be considered in this
regard. One is for the MPs and MLAs to be the honoured invitees of the DPC and
contribute to its deliberations without having to be its formal members. The
alternative is to provide for their representation in the DPC by specifying its
composition.
3.16 At present
under article 243ZD, four-fifths of the total number of members of DPC are to
be elected by, and from amongst, the elected members of the Panchayat at the
district level (the Zilla Parishad in other words) and of the Municipalities in
proportion to the ratio of the rural and urban populations. This component can
be changed to three fifth of the total number. One fifth can be elected by and
from amongst the MLAs and MPs from the district. Out of these the number of MPs
can be fixed as two. The participation of the MPs and MLAs should be in person
and not through agents as allowed in M.P. The remaining one fifth of the DPC
members should be the representatives of such organisations and institutions as
the State Government may consider necessary for carrying out the functions
assigned to the DPC. This is important because within a district there will be
important institutions representing industry, trade and commerce, NGOs,
professionals, etc., who will be in a position to make valuable contributions
to the process of district planning. At present, article 243ZD does not contain
a provision for this purpose. So far as officials of the Government and
Government’s agencies are concerned, they should be nominated by the State
Government, ex-officio, to participate in the DPC but without being formal
members.
Suggested Legal
Changes
3.17 The suggested
legal changes are:
(a)
As per
the definitions given in article 243, ‘district’ means a district in a State
while ‘Panchayat area’ means the territorial area of a Panchayat. The Panchayat
at the district level should, therefore, be for the district as a whole instead
of the rural areas only. The definitions under article 243 should be amended accordingly.
Clause (1) of article 243 ZD should be amended to stipulate that the District
Planning Committee shall be constituted within the Panchayat at the district
level or Zilla Parishad.
(b)
Sub-clause
(d) of clause (2) of article 243 ZD should be amended to provide for the
Chairperson of the Panchayat at the district level to be the Chairperson of the
District Planning Committee. The Chairperson of the largest Municipality in the
District should be the Vice-chairman.
(c)
In
clause (1) of 243ZD, the words “consolidate the plans prepared by the
Panchayats and Municipalities in the district” should be omitted so that the
DPC’s main task of preparing a draft development plan for the district is not
contingent or dependent on individual plans prepared by the Panchayats and the
Municipalities. However, clause (3) of article 243ZD can provide that in
preparing the development plan the DPC will have regard to such plans as are
prepared by the Panchayats and the Municipalities. Zilla Parishad should help
panchayats and municipalities to prepare these plans which will serve as
building blocks for preparation of Development Plan for the district.
(d)
Article
243ZD should also contain a provision to enable the State laws and State
Governments to entrust additional responsibilities as monitoring of development
schemes and programmes in the district, co-ordination of their implementation
including powers to modify sanctions to ongoing schemes subject to limits.
(e)
The
Zilla Parishad should be the technical and administrative secretariat for the
DPC independent of and distinct from the District Collector or the District
Magistrate.
(f)
The
State laws should provide for association and involvement of government and
non-government agencies and professionals in the DPCs. MPs, MLAs and Ministers
desiring to participant in the District Planning Committee should be welcome as
invitees.
(g)
State
agencies, district agencies and district administration should assist the DPC
with data and technical know-how in preparation of the development plan for the
district. State laws should provide for this.
(h)
Where
Metropolitan Planning Committees (MPCs) are required to be set up, State laws
and regulations should determine the functional and territorial jurisdiction of
the DPCs as distinct from the MPCs. Where Metropolitan Planning Committees
exist for predominantly urban districts, they should be deemed as DPCs, as no
separate DPC is necessary.
B. Metropolitan
Planning Committee
The rationale
3.18 According to
the 1991 Census, we have 23 metropolitan areas in this country each with a
population of 10 lakhs or more. When the Census figures 2001 are released, the
number of such cities is likely to exceed 40. These areas are agglomerations
administered by several municipalities. Even Greater Mumbai though it is called
by that name does not cover all of the Mumbai Metropolitan area. Thane.
Bhiwandi, Ulhas Nagar or Navi Mumbai are all different Corporations. These
multi-municipal urban agglomerations have reached their present dimension and
configuration over a period of time. Growth has overrun traditional boundaries.
Initially 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 prepared to give up their jurisdictions.
The Calcutta Metropolitan area now comprises three corporations, thirty-four
municipalities and numerous non-municipal urban localities. The metropolitan
areas of Chennai, Bangalore, Mumbai and Hyderabad cover ten to thirty municipal
jurisdictions. In Delhi. nominally there are only three-the Cantonment, the
NDMC and the Delhi Municipal Corporation (MCD). But the MCD itself is a
leviathan covering nearly 1600 sq. km and stretching across vastly different
localities such as Shakur Basti, Rohini and Greater Kailash. World experience
has shown that devising a system of governance reconciling local autonomy with
a metropolitan perspective has not been easy. Their size, the scale and complexity of problems, are
formidable. Because the tasks are numerous, multiple organisations for their
discharge become inevitable. Besides many of these mega cities are also the
seat of Central or State Governments and their presence is conspicuous.
3.19 While the
municipal corporations or the municipalities comprised in these agglomerations
may be zealous of their respective domain, the agglomeration itself needs a
metropolitan wide perspective, planning, advocacy and action, Sources of water,
disposal of waste, traffic and transport, drainage, abatement of air pollution,
etc., are examples of items where one city corporation or the municipality
alone cannot achieve much in isolation. The B.E.S.T which is part of the BMC
for instance, however, competent it may be, cannot do much about public
transport in Mumbai if the Ministry of Railways handling the suburban system
does not subscribe to a common plan. The Government of India’s Ministry of
Environment or Maharashtra's State Pollution Control Board cannot do much to
mitigate pollution without BMC's active collaboration. Above all, the
maintenance of the infrastructure to keep the mighty economic machine of Mumbai
going is a task requiring much interaction and collaboration between the
Central, State and local governments, the public and the private sector,
industry, commerce and the citizenry. The Metropolitan Planning Committee was
envisaged as an inter-institutional platform for similar purposes.
3.20 Metropolitan
areas are also the main engines of growth and economy in the country. Urban
transport. water supply, waste management., police, public health, etc.,
require metropolitan level planning, implementation and coordination. Besides
the scale of services needed in these metropolitan areas is huge and it is not
possible for City corporations or Municipalities to address all of them. The
suburban railways or metropolitan transport systems as in Calcutta. Mumbai or
Chennai are handled by the Ministry of Railways. The ports in these cities have
a separate set-up. Metropolitan Development Authorities or Departments of
Metropolitan Development in the State Government cannot be an adequate answer
for these multi-municipal problems. Since the 74th Constitution Amendment,
Mayors and Municipal Chairpersons are moving increasingly to assume executive leadership for managing
their respective areas. A bureaucratic set up cannot bring these elected
representatives and leaders together at the metropolitan level.
Background to the
Constitutional provision
3.21 That is why,
article 243ZE in the 74th Constitution Amendment provides for the Metropolitan
Planning Committee (MPC). It is pertinent to mention that while the 65th
Amendment Bill contained this provision, the Bill relating to 73rd
Constitution Amendment introduced by the Narasimha Rao government did not do so.
It was the Joint Parliamentary Committee, which revived the provisions for
a Metropolitan Planning Committee and
based on its recommendation. Article
243 ZE became a part of the 74th
Amendment. The rationale is well expressed in the Report of the Joint Committee
and is reproduced below:
"There are twenty-three metropolitan cities in the country where
the metropolitan area would encompass not only the main City Corporation but
also a number of other local bodies, both urban and rural, surrounding the main
City Corporation. By the end of the century, this number may rise to about
forty-five. To ensure that there is an orderly development of the vast area,
proper plans need to be drawn up in association with the plan of the main city.
Considerable investments in these cities are also undertaken by Central and
State government agencies. It is necessary to coordinate these investment plans
with the development plans and requirements of the metropolitan city.”
“There is, therefore, need for a suitable planning mechanism which would
take care of the interaction between the various local bodies, both rural and
urban in such metropolitan areas. At present, the system that is adopted in
many metropolises is the creation of a metropolitan development authority. The
functions assigned to the metropolitan development authority differ from case
to case. In some cases, they are only planning bodies while in some cases they
take on executive function, particularly of major schemes. Further, at present,
these bodies are not democratic institutions. The Government nominates them.
The Committee therefore, feels that there should be a provision for
constitution of a Metropolitan Planning Committee to prepare a draft
development plan for the Metropolitan area as a whole. In order to impart a
democratic character to the said Committees not less than two-thirds of the
members of such Committees should be elected by. and from amongst, the elected
members of the municipalities and Chairpersons of the Panchayats in the
metropolitan area in proportion to the ratio between the population of the
municipalities and of the Panchayats in that area. The other details relating
to composition of the said Committees, the manner of filling the seats therein,
the representation in such Committees of Government of India and the Government
of the State and other organisations and institutions, the functions relating
to planning and co-ordination for the Metropolitan area to be assigned to such
Committees and the manner in which the Chairpersons of such Committees shall be
chosen may be left to the State Legislatures."
3.22 The Joint Parliamentary
Committee accordingly recommended the insertion of a new provision-article
243ZE for establishing an MPC and a new clause in article 243P which defines a
metropolitan area as ‘an area having a population of ten lakhs or more.
comprised in one or more districts and consisting of two or more
municipalities’. The multi-municipal character is, therefore, an essential
requirement of a metropolitan area. Prima facie there are twenty-five such
urban agglomerations according to the 1991 census. With a population of ten
lakhs or more located in the States of Andhra Pradesh. Tamil Nadu. Kerala.
Gujarat. Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Punjab. Uttar Pradesh, Bihar
and West Bengal. So far as these States are concerned, the MPC is a
constitutional requirement. However. as in the case of the DPC, while
conformity legislation or enabling laws have been passed by more or less
reproducing the language of the Constitutional Amendment not a single State has
set up an MPC so far.
Failure to set up
MPCs.
3.23 The reasons
for this sorry State of affairs are a mixture of bureaucratic confusion about
the purpose and role of the MPC, lack of political interest and. most importantly, the fear of the
Development Authorities, which exist in most of these twenty-three cities that
their domain will be undermined. While the Calcutta Metropolitan Development
Authority itself was brought about in special circumstances-more for mobilizing
funds and coordinating implementation-most of the development authorities in
the other cities were inspired by the Delhi Development Authority model of
large scale land acquisition, real eState development and housing construction.
Eventually these bodies became conspicuous empires of public works and
patronage as in Bangalore, Hyderabad or Jaipur. The creation of these
authorities was no doubt facilitated by the fact that most of the city
corporations concerned were under supercession as was the case in Chennai and
Calcutta. In the case of greater Bombay consistent opposition from the
Corporation limited the BMRDA mandate to some broad areas of planning control
and coordination and selected real eState activities. The Calcutta Authority
also eventually became a huge amalgam of public works. State Governments have
been rather apprehensive about the large staff which these development
authorities have acquired over a period
of time, which would become surplus in the event separate Metropolitan Planning
Committees are established. This is a totally mistaken perception. The
Metropolitan Planning Committee is expected to be a high level, democratically
set up body, which will bring a constitutional mandate to the whole exercise of
metropolitan development planning. The development authorities could serve
these Metropolitan Planning Committees as their technical secretariat.
3.24 Another
misconception is about the possible conflict of jurisdiction between MPCs and
DPCs. Since metropolitan areas are predominantly urban, the rural or the
Panchayat component in the MPCs would be rather small. Where the urban areas
are co-terminus with revenue districts, such as Bangalore, Chennai or the
Calcutta urban district, the problem does not arise at all. In such cases a DPC
is not necessary. Where a part of a revenue district is included in a
metropolitan area, State Governments can suitably redefine the boundaries for
the purpose of DPC and MPC work. Alternatively, a functional delineation is
also possible. The Tamil Nadu Government attempted to do this by providing that
the MPC for the Chennai
metropolitan area will be deemed
to be a DPC for those portions of the revenue districts which are included in
the metropolitan area. Under the Constitution it is up to the State Governments
to determine the jurisdiction of the D PC and the MPC to avoid conflicts, if
any.
3.25 In the composition for MPC it is envisaged that one-third of its members are to be elected by and from amongst the elected representatives of urban and rural local bodies in the metropolitan areas. The others are to be nominated, representing Central Government agencies and various State Government agencies, other organizations and institutions responsible for various services in the metropolitan areas. More importantly, the nomination also enables representatives of the private sector and community at large to be mobilised. The manner of choosing the Chairperson of the MPC, and the planning and coordination functions to be entrusted to it,is left to the State Legislature. In preparing the draft development plan the MPC should have due regard to the plan prepared by the Municipalities and the Panchayat, matters of common interest to them, objectives and priorities of the Government of India and the State Government, available financial and other resources for integrated development of infrastructure, environmental conservation, etc. The MP