Panchayat raj had to go through various stages. The First Five Year Plan failed to bring about active participation and involvement of the people in the
Plan processes, which included Plan formulation implementation and monitoring.
The Second Five Year Plan attempted to cover the entire countryside with
National Extensive Service Blocks through the institutions of Block Development
Officers, Assistant Development Officers, Village Level Workers, in addition to
nominated representatives of village panchayats of that area and some other
popular organisations like co-operative societies. But the plan failed to
satisfactorily accomplish decentralisation. Hence, committees were constituted
by various authorities to advise the Centre on different aspects of
decentralisation.
Balwant Rai
Mehta Committee
In 1957, Balwant Rai
Mehta Committee studied the Community Development Projects and the
National Extension Service and assessed the extent to which the movement had
succeeded in utilising local initiatives and in creating institutions to ensure
continuity in the process of improving economic and social conditions in rural
areas. The Committee held that community development would only be deep and
enduring when the community was involved in the planning, decision-making and
implementation process. The
suggestions were for as follows:-
- an early establishment of elected local bodies and
devolution to them of necessary resources, power and authority,
- that the basic unit of democratic decentralisation was
at the block/samiti level since the area of jurisdiction of the local body
should neither be too large nor too small. The block was large enough for
efficiency and economy of administration, and small enough for sustaining
a sense of involvement in the citizens,
- such body must not be constrained by too much control by
the government or government agencies,
- the body must be constituted for five years by indirect
elections from the village panchayats,
- its functions should cover the development of agriculture
in all its aspects, the promotion of local industries and others
- services such as drinking water, road building, etc.,
and
- the higher level body, Zilla Parishad, would play an
advisory role.
The
PRI structure did not develop the requisite democratic momentum and failed to
cater to the needs of rural development. There are various reasons for such an
outcome which include political and bureaucratic resistance at the state level
to share power and resources with local level institutions, domination of local
elites over the major share of the benefits of welfare schemes, lack of
capability at the local level and lack of political will.
It was
decided to appoint a high-level committee under the chairmanship of Ashok Mehta
to examine and suggest measures to strengthen PRIs. The Committee had to evolve
an effective decentralised system of development for PRIs. They made the
following recommendations:-
- the district is a viable administrative unit for which
planning, co-ordination and resource allocation are feasible and technical
expertise available,
- PRIs as a two-tier system, with Mandal Panchayat at the
base and Zilla Parishad at the top,
- the PRIs are capable of planning for themselves with the
resources available to them,
- district planning should take care of the urban-rural
continuum,
- representation of SCs and STs in the election to PRIs on
the basis of their population,
- four-year term of PRIs,
- participation of political parties in elections,
- any financial devolution should be committed to
accepting
That much of
the developmental functions at the district level would be played by the
panchayats. The states of Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and West
Bengal passed new legislation based on this report. However, the
flux in politics at the state level did not allow these institutions to develop
their own political dynamics.
G.V.K. Rao Committee
(1985)
The G.V.K.
Rao Committee was appointed by Planning Commission to once again look at
various aspects of PRIs. The Committee was of the opinion that a total view of
rural development must be taken in which PRIs must play a central role in
handling people's problems. It recommended the following:-
·
PRIs have to be activated and provided with all
the required support to become effective organisations,
·
PRIs at district level and below should be
assigned the work of planning, implementation and monitoring of rural
development programmes, and
·
the block development office should be the
spinal cord of the rural development process.
L.M.Singhvi Committee (1986)
L.M.
Singhvi Committee studied panchayati raj. The Gram Sabha was considered as the
base of a decentralised democracy, and PRIs viewed as institutions of self-governance
which would actually facilitate the participation of the people in the process
of planning and development. It recommended
·
local self-government should be
constitutionally recognised, protected and preserved by the inclusion of new
chapter in the Constitution,
·
Non-involvement of political parties in
Panchayat elections.
The suggestion of giving panchayats
constitutional status was opposed by the Sarkaria Commission, but the idea,
however, gained momentum in the late 1980s especially because of the
endorsement by the late Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, who introduced the 64th
Constitutional Amendment Bill in 1989. The 64th Amendment Bill was prepared and
introduced in the lower house of Parliament. But it got defeated in the Rajya
Sabha as non-convincing. He lost the general elections too. In 1989, the
National Front introduced the 74th Constitutional Amendment Bill, which could
not become an Act because of the dissolution of the Ninth Lok Sabha. All these
various suggestions and recommendations and means of strengthening PRIs were
considered while formulating the new Constitutional Amendment Act.
The 73rd
Constitutional Amendment Act
The idea which produced the 73rd Amendment was not a response to pressure from the
grassroots, but to an increasing recognition that the institutional initiatives
of the preceding decade had not delivered, that the extent of rural poverty was
still much too large and thus the existing structure of government needed to be
reformed. It is interesting to note that this idea evolved from the Centre and
the state governments. It was a political drive to see PRIs as a solution to
the governmental crises that India
was experiencing. The Constitutional (73rd Amendment) Act, passed in 1992 by
the Narasimha Rao government, came into force on April 24, 1993. It was meant
to provide constitutional sanction to establish "democracy at the
grassroots level as it is at the state level or national level". Its main
features are as follows:
·
The Gram Shabha or village assembly as a deliberative
body to decentralised governance has been envisaged as the foundation of the
Panchayati Raj System.
·
A uniform three-tier structure of panchayats at
village (Gram Panchayat — GP), intermediate or block (Panchayat Samiti — PS)
and district (Zilla Parishad — ZP) levels.
·
All the seats in a panchayat at every level are
to be filled by elections from respective territorial constituencies.
·
Not less than one-third of the total seats for
membership as well as office of chairpersons of each tier have to be reserved
for women.
·
Reservation for weaker castes and tribes (SCs
and STs) have to be provided at all levels in proportion to their population in
the panchayats.
·
To supervise, direct and control the regular
and smooth elections to panchayats, a State Election Commission has tThe Act
has ensured constitution of a State FinanceCommission in every State/UT, for
every five years, to suggest measures to strengthen finances of panchayati raj
institutions.
·
To promote bottom-up-planning, the District
Planning Committee (DPC) in every district has been accorded constitutional
status.
·
An indicative list of 29 items has been given
in Eleventh Schedule of the Constitution. Panchayats are expected to play an
effective role in planning and implementation of works related to these 29
items.
Present scenario
At present, there are about 3 million elected
representatives at all levels of the panchayat 1/2th[clarification needed] of
which are women. These members represent more than 2.4 lakh Gram Panchayats,
about 6,000 intermediate level tiers and more than 500 district panchayats.
Spread over the length and breadth of the country, the new panchayats cover
about 96 per cent of India 's
more than 5.8 lakh villages and nearly 99.6 per cent of rural population. This
is the largest experiment in decentralisation of governance in the history of
humanity.
The Constitution visualises panchayats as
institutions of self-governance. However, giving due consideration to the
federal structure of our polity, most of the financial powers and authorities
to be endowed on panchayats have been left at the discretion of concerned state
legislatures. Consequently, the powers and functions vested in PRIs vary from
state to state. These provisions combine representative and direct democracy
into a synergy and are expected to result in an extension and deepening of
democracy in India .
Hence, panchayats have journeyed from an institution within the culture of India to attain
constitutional status.
This is one of the biggest democracy in the
world where village level democratic structures are functioning for their
development.






0 comments:
Post a Comment