[se-decn] QUERY: Amendments in the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj and Gram Swaraj Act. Advice Reply by 18 September 2017
Amitabh and Leena Singh
Moderator’s Note: Dear members, we are posting a new query from Amitabh and Leena Singh of Debate, Bhopal. The Madhya Pradesh Panchayati Raj and Gram Swaraj Act is being reviewed to take a fresh look at changes required in light of the challenges in planning, implementation and monitoring by local governments and their working vis a vis the state government departments and parallel bodies, among others. Members are requested to share their suggestions and advice based on your experiences which may be useful in the review of the Madhya Pradesh Act. We look forward to a vibrant discussion! Regards, Tina Mathur
Dear members,
Debate has been working in the field of Panchayat Raj for the last 16 years. Madhya Pradesh was the first state to pass the new legislation on Panchayat Raj after seventy-third amendment to the Constitution of India. Madhya Pradesh was also the first state to incorporate the provisions of Panchayat (Extension to the Scheduled Areas) Act 1996 in the state Act. The state has been amending the Act and rules to address various issues faced in implementing the provisions of the Madhya Panchayat Raj and Gram Swaraj Act 1993. The current Act has passed through many significant milestones in last 24 years. Important amongst them are:
- Bringing Gram Panchayat under the control of Gram Sabha (1994)
- Amending the provisions related to no confidence to safeguard the provisions of reservation for SC, ST, OBC and women;
- Incorporating provisions of the Central Act namely, Provision for Panchayats (Extension to the Scheduled Areas) Act 1996, in the state act (1997);
- Amending State act to give similar powers to the Gram Sabha and Gram Panchayats, of entire state, as per the provisions of “Provision for Panchayats (Extension to the Scheduled Areas) Act 1996”
However, there are several challenges being faced in the state with respect to size of Gram Panchayats, management of staff, issues of devolution, complaints of line departments vis-à-vis inability of Panchayat Raj system to implement the schemes and programmes in their respective areas. This has resulted in the mushrooming of parastatals constituted by almost all the departments at village level and block and district level bypassing the institutions of Panchayats. Given the challenges, it was felt that that Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj and Gram Swaraj Act 1993 needs a fresh look to address the issues of planning, implementation and monitoring so that various arms of the state work with Panchayats rather than creating parallel institutional set-up for implementation of their schemes and programmes. The Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department appointed a committee to suggest amendments in the state Act. The recommendations of the committee were shared in the month of November 2016 with a select group of officers and members from Civil Society. The recommendations were related to minor changes in the Act whereas the group felt that there is a comprehensive need to make fundamental changes in the Act. Now the State government is preparing a draft for the new Act on Panchayats addressing various issues related to it.
In this context, we invite the suggestions of members of the Decentralization Community, based on your experiences from various states, on the following:
- What should be an optimum size for a Gram Panchayat?
- What should be the role of Standing Committees vis-à-vis Centrally Sponsored Schemes
- What are your inputs on any challenges with respect to, and changes required in the planning cycle of Panchayats
- In your opinion, should there be a separate Act for district planning or that should be part of state Panchayat Act;
- What should be the role and status of Zila Panchayat in districts where fifth Scheduled areas exist
Your inputs to our query will help us frame and enrich the suggestions to be given to the state government of Madhya Pradesh for drafting a better State Act on Panchayats.
Regards,
Leena and Amitabh
Debate, Bhopal
Ramit Basu
Dear Amitabh and Leena,
This is quite a pertinent subject. It is always worth visiting these areas in an effort to influence policy or at least try doing so.
Even if a State Act is modified as per the need of the hour, how effective will it be to bring parastatals and parallel bodies under the ambit of Panchayats is a million dollar question as all these years the Central Government has spent billions and trillions in rural development and other services with many of the programmes bypassing State Acts and the Constitutional provisions. It was not that the Centre was not aware about provisions in State Acts and that the 2nd ARC report was not read which advocated for centrality of Panchayats in planning, implementation and monitoring of CSSs and a plethora of committees, institutions as high as the office of the Cabinet Secretary, Planning Commission, PMO - all recommending revisiting of the guidelines to centralize the role of Panchayats.
My quick responses are as follows -
- Regarding size of Gram Panchayats, an overall response would be that Gram Panchayats should have a population size which makes it economically feasible to be managed with funds and functionaries. Many argue that a population size of 5000 would be appropriate, some say between 3000 - 5000 but not less than 3000. Consolidating smaller Panchayats to form larger ones to fit the criteria is purely a political decision but further disintegration of Panchayats into smaller units can be declared as a disincentive in the long run. This can be somewhere built into the Act. For eg: Maharashtra GP Act does specify a minimum size of GP. I really doubt how much can it be addressed when in MP the Act puts GP under Gram Sabha. So somewhere we have to understand that like in PESA areas, if multiple habitations (separated over large distances) having their own Gram Sabhas try to exercise control over the GP with scarce resources, how feasible would that be. Alternatively, if Gram Panchayats especially in PESA areas having habitations with sparse population need to cater to individual Gram Sabhas, the criteria of geographical area would override that of population. Having said this, there also need to be a population criteria in case of PESA areas OR the cluster approach need to be brought in the Act. Maharashtra has gone for devolution of 5% of the total annual TSP budget to PESA GPs as untied funds and MP might be interested to study the impact of such a measure which may be useful in its case as well. The fund gets transferred directly to a separate Gram Kosh at the Gram Sabha level.
- Standing committees - a simple formulae would be to have standing committees as per the subjects devolved to the GP (in the Act). That does not mean 20 or 25 or 29 standing committees but committees which are able to handle functions under broad heads. It might require some restructuring of the standing committees but without them being empowered and properly institutionalized, it is almost impossible for the GP to be expected to function as an Institution of local governance. Also the Act should be flexible enough to allow local level resource persons to play an active role in keeping the standing committee moving. Again there is the issue of parallel committees like SDMC which surprisingly assumes more importance than the Village Education Committee. So what should happen is a mandatory and a synergistic linkage between the VEC and the SDMC. Similarly, the Child Protection Committee can either be linked to the VEC or be a statutory committee of the GP itself. It might be essential to revisit the number of standing committees that the Gram Sabha has as per the Act. What I mean is a Gram Sabha with a population size of 40 or 50 in a PESA area and having 5 or 6 standing committees - how effective will it be in decision making and what kind of decisions will they make regarding CSSs or any service delivery if the coverage of the programme or the institution is much bigger than that Gram Sabha jurisdiction. So in any case, if the Gram Sabha comprising of villagers electing their representatives to be a part of the Gram Panchayat, then the Gram Panchayat itself should be held accountable for administering the entire region with equal emphasis and the State Govt. might make special provisions to empower GPs in such areas. At the same time set up necessary checks and balances to ensure that access to resources and services are uniform and need based and does not favour a particular constituency. So GP statutory (and non statutory) standing committees can be representative of members from all the wards so as to ensure equitable access to services and resources.
- Planning cycle - I was surprised to see three different Panchayat level plans (Decentralized Planning, GPDP, IPPE) being prepared at the GP level in MP with little or no convergence between them. It is of utmost urgency to converge different planning exercises and every GP to have a single master plan and every agency, programme, institution (Govt. and Non-Govt.) to honour and respect that plan. The Constitution also mandates that every Gram Panchayat on being elected should, in its first Gram Sabha meeting prepare a socio-economic development plan and hence the same should be built into the State Act. It is for the State and Central Govt. to adjust and allocate resources as per the plan and not the other way round. However there can be differing views about the planning cycle but what I would like to emphasise is a SINGLE plan prepared by the GP irrespective of any number of programmes, initiatives etc. Once that happens, different agencies / departments can take their bit from such a comprehensive plan. The GP and the Gram Sabha should not and must not be made to respond to the whims and fancies of planning by individual agencies / departments / schemes / NGOs/ Development Agencies which is a mockery of the very spirit of decentralization. I am hopeful the state of MP will rectify this and set the stage for other states to follow.
- The DPC Act does require amendments too as the DPC Act of MP is quite dated. However it can stay as a separate Act as DPC also caters to urban areas but should have a very clear link to the State PR Act.
- Zilla Panchayats in districts with PESA areas should be more pro-active in ensuring the rights of the tribal population and should effectively act as a watch dog. Since Governors of states with PESA areas are responsible directly in ensuring the welfare and protecting the rights of the tribal population (as per PESA), I would advocate for regular meetings between the Governor's office and the Zilla Panchayat members of districts with PESA areas. This should be built into the Act. The Act should empower ZP members and if required to override decisions of the Minister incharge of the district in matters which goes against the interest of tribals and PESA in general. The ZP members, as they are part of various standing committees of the ZP, should keep a constant watch over the quality and regularity of service delivery by line department institutions in the PESA areas and should coordinate with the Janpad Panchayat in this respect.
I hope the above is useful.
Regards,
Ramit Basu
New Delhi
Original Query:
Rahul Banerjee
Dear members,
The most important provision in the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act in accordance with the provisions of the PESA Act 1996 is that of the formation of smaller gram sabhas in accordance
with the Adivasi hamlets. Once these gram sabhas are formed and recognised then the funds allotted to the panchayats under various schemes and especially the Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS) can directly be apportioned to these gram sabhas and then they can
decide on their use through direct democracy without the need for any standing committees. In a small hamlet people can gather immediately unlike in the unwieldy gram panchayats which currently have two or more villages with many hamlets. However, when the
Khedut Mazdoor Chetna Sangath, a trade union of Bhil Adivasis, formed these hamlet gram sabhas in Alirajpur district and tried to get them registered it came up against stonewalling by the district administration and so till date even after more than 5 years
not a single hamlet gram sabha has been registered. Instead of amending the Act, at the risk of government continuously side tracking the gram panchayats even after the Act is amended, it would be better to facilitate the formation of hamlet based gram sabhas
and transfer all the development funds that are due to them. The people are quite capable of using these funds appropriately and there will in fact be no need for the panchayat bureaucracy or any other bureaucracy.
Regards,
Rahul Banerjee
Indore
Original Query:
From: Amitabh and Leena Singh [mailto:debat...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, September 8, 2017 10:34 AM
To: Decentralization Community <se-...@solutionexchange-un.net.in>
Subject: [se-decn] QUERY: Amendments in the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj and Gram Swaraj Act. Advice Reply by 18 September 2017
Moderator’s Note: Dear members, we are posting a new query from Amitabh and Leena Singh of Debate, Bhopal. The Madhya Pradesh Panchayati Raj and Gram Swaraj Act is being reviewed to take a fresh look at changes required in light of the challenges in planning, implementation and monitoring by local governments and their working vis a vis the state government departments and parallel bodies, among others. Members are requested to share their suggestions and advice based on your experiences which may be useful in the review of the Madhya Pradesh Act. We look forward to a vibrant discussion! Regards, Tina Mathur
V.Y Ghorpade
Dear members,
I was a member of the committee set up by government of Karnataka in 2013 to recommend amendments to the Karnataka Panchayath Raj Act , 1993. We made close to 85 recommendations, which was in general accepted and the new "Karnataka Gram Swaraj & Panchayat Raj Act" 1993 (as amended in 2015) came into effect on 25-2-2016.
I am giving below the salient features of this new amended Act for your ready reference. Trust, this presentation will be helpful while proposing changes to Madhya Pradesh Act.
|
SALIENT FEATURES OF “THE KARNATAKA GRAM SWARAJ & PANCHAYAT RAJ ACT”, 1993 (as amended in 2015) |
||
|
PANCHAYAT RAJ ACT - 1993 |
AMENDED ACT - 2015 |
REASONS FOR AMENDMENT |
|
DIRECT PARTICIPATION – EMPOWERING OF GRAM SABHAS : |
||
|
· Single Gram Sabha for the entire Gram Panchayat.
|
· A Gram Sabha to be set up in every village.
|
· For more effective direct participation at the village level, as envisaged in the constitution. |
|
· Ward Sabha and Gram Sabha
|
· Habitation Sabhas along with Ward Sabha and Gram Sabha.
|
· For greater participation of inhabitants of neglected hamlets / habitats |
|
· No provision for special Gram Sabha for SC/ST and Women |
· Special Gram Sabha provided for SC/ST; women & children prior to regular Gram Sabha. |
· Empowerment and protection of SC/ST and Women.
|
|
DEVOLUTION: |
||
|
· The three tiers represent a vertical structure, each one supervising the one lower to it. |
· The three tiers of Panchayats are seen as a horizontal structure on par with each other. · All resolutions passed in the Gram Sabha shall be treated by the Gram Panchayat as its own, & implemented in order of priority indicated by the Gram Sabha. |
· To enable each tier to execute functions based on their territorial range independently. · All three tiers are made equally accountable to the Gram Sabhas and bound by it. · To create organic linkage with all the three tiers. |
|
EMPOWERMENT OF PANCHAYATS : |
||
|
· Term of office of Adhyaksha & Upadhyaksha of Gram Panchayat is for thirty months; and twenty months for Taluk and Zilla Panchayat. |
· Term of office to be co-terminus with the term of the Panchayat i.e. five years for all three tiers.
|
· To ensure stability, continuity in development and administration.
|
|
· Reservation and Rotation of seats once in five years (One term) for all tiers.
|
· Reservation and Rotation of seats once in ten years (Two term) for all tiers.
|
· For more responsibility and development of leadership; and to be in step with the census. |
|
· No conditions for Resignation of Adhyakshas and Upadhyakshas.
|
· Resignation only on proven ill-health or incapacity to be certified by a competent Authority approved by State Election Commission. |
· To prevent use of money power to induce instability in functioning of Adhyakshas and Upadhyakshas.
|
|
· No confidence motion to be moved only after one year in case of Gram Panchayat and after six months in case of Taluk and Zilla Panchayat.
|
· No confidence motion cannot be moved for the first thirty months & thereafter, only on specific allegations of misuse or abuse of power or Authority. |
· - Same as above -
|
|
FINANCIAL DEVOLUTION : |
||
|
· Activity Mapping |
· Responsibility Mapping |
· To delineate functions that shall be discharged at each of the three tiers. · To include functions, powers and duties of Gram Sabhas. · To devolve functionaries by integrating whole institutions to the appropriate tier of Panchayat and also the finances. |
|
· There is no quantification for transfer of funds to Panchayat Raj institutions. |
· Government shall allocate such percentage of grants to the Panchayats as may be determined by State Finance Commission, out of which 20% shall be untied grants. |
· More allocation of funds for better Decentralised Planning. |
|
· Uniform allocation of funds to Panchayats |
· Priority Ranking Matrix to determine quantum of funds for each Panchayat |
· To prioritise allocation based on Panchayat size, backwardness, geographical conditions, etc. |
|
· Predetermined budget for schemes. |
· Total devolution with funds directly deposited into Panchayat accounts |
· To move away from ‘one size fit all; budget for better empowerment and devolution. |
|
ADMINISTRATIVE DEVOLUTION OF FUNCTIONARIES : |
||
|
· Line department staff under State Government control. |
· All functionaries have been devolved to their respective panchayats based on functions required to be discharged by that tier of Panchayat
|
· To integrate all staff from line departments and para-statal bodies to the appropriate Panchayats to ensure complete devolution. |
|
· There is no separate Panchayat Raj Administrative Service. |
· To setup a separate cadre of service to be called “The Karnataka Panchayat Administrative Service’. · To constitute a commissionerrate of Panchayat Raj.
|
· To facilitate effective implementation of the three Fs (Funds, functions & functionaries). · To facilitate smooth functioning of PRIs. The powers, functions and duties and the number, category of posts, method of recruitment and minimum qualification, shall be such as may be prescribed. |
|
PLANNING : |
||
|
· Does not exist |
· The planning process takes a bottom up approach starting at the habitation level using ‘Priority Ranking Matrix’.
|
· To ensure that plans are made based on the needs of every group; & allocation of funds are properly prioritised. |
|
· There is no Planning Committee at the Taluk Level.
|
· To setup at the Taluk Level ‘Taluk Planning & Development Committee’ (TPDC).
|
· For effective consolidation of Draft Plans prepared by the Gram Panchayats, Taluk Panchayat & Urban Local Bodies (ULB) & forward the Plan to District Planning Committee. |
|
· There is no separate Planning Board at the State Level.
|
· To establish a ‘Karnataka State Decentralised Planning & Development Board’. This Board will be chaired by the Chief Minister; four ministers will be Ex-officio Vice Chairmen, namely, Finance, RDPR, Planning & Urban Development; and a Vice Chairman, who is an expert in the field. |
· For the effective integration and implementation of the Draft Plan submitted by the District Planning Committee (DPC) in the State Plan.
|
|
· Does not exist |
· One GP Adhyaksha selected by lot from among the Adhyakshas of all the GPs in the Taluk shall be the Vice-Chairman of the TPDC; and 5 Adhyakshas of GPs (drawn by lot) shall be special invitees). |
· To ensure transparency in bottom of planning starting from the Gram Panchayats. |
|
· Does not exist |
· And in the DPC (District Planning Committee), the GP Adhyaksha who is the Vice-Chairman of the TPDCs shall all be members. |
· To ensure transparency in bottom of planning starting from the Gram Panchayats. |
|
· Does not exist |
· “GP shall prepare a forward looking vision plan for the whole 5 years term of the Panchayat based on development benchmarks established by local, State and Central governments. · For constructing need based annual plans for each year for the next five years of its term. Prioritisation of issues shall be based on priority ranking method as laid down in the responsibility map.” |
· To set targets and develop outcome indicators for measurements using performance management system.” · To facilitate Gram Panchayats to prepare their need based development plans and forward it to TPDC.
|
|
SPECIAL POWERS TO SC/ST & OTHER BACKWARD COMMUNITIES : |
||
|
· Does not exist. |
· Budget for SC/ST in proportion to their population. |
· To protect the rights of the weaker sections and respect theirs needs. |
|
· Does not exist. |
· Special Gram Sabha for SC/ST to decide their budget allocation. |
|
|
· Does not exist. |
· To set up a ‘District Panchayat Tribunal’ in every district. |
· For redressal of grievances and dispute settlement. |
|
ELECTION PROTOCOL : |
||
|
· Authorities for Reservation and Rotation of offices and election by the Government. |
· State Election Commission to reserve the offices, rotation of offices and to conduct election. |
· To avoid political interference (Gerry Mandering)
|
|
· Delimitation of Gram Panchayat membership with multimember constituency for elections. |
· Single Member constituency |
· For greater accountability and transparency with social justice. |
|
GENDER SENSITIVE & WOMEN RELATED ISSUES : |
||
|
· No such provision existed. |
· Provide for separate toilets; and baby care for nursing mothers and crèches in the Panchayats. |
· To pay greater attention to gender sensitive issues.
|
|
· Does not exist |
· To provide private secretaries for all Presidents of all the tiers. |
· To enable illiterate and semi-literate women to function better. |
|
· Does not exist |
· These private secretaries will also undergo training in capacity building. |
· So that they are better equipped to give proper support to the Presidents. |
|
· No separate provision |
· To implement the Sexual Harassment of Women Act, 2014. |
· To give legal protection to women members of the Panchayats from sexual harassment. |
|
· No such provision |
· To set up a co-operative bank for women at the taluk level and nominate three women members of the Taluk Panchayat as Ex-officio Directors of the Bank. |
· To empower women SHGs in the taluk and provide an organic linkage with the Taluk Panchayat for better supervision and transparency. |
Regards,
V Y Ghorpade
Vice-Chairman,
Karnataka State Decentralised Planning & Development Committee
Bangalore
Original Query:
From: Amitabh and Leena Singh [mailto:debat...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, September 8, 2017 10:34 AM
To: Decentralization Community <se-...@solutionexchange-un.net.in>
Subject: [se-decn] QUERY: Amendments in the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj and Gram Swaraj Act. Advice Reply by 18 September 2017
Moderator’s Note: Dear members, we are posting a new query from Amitabh and Leena Singh of Debate, Bhopal. The Madhya Pradesh Panchayati Raj and Gram Swaraj Act is being reviewed to take a fresh look at changes required in light of the challenges in planning, implementation and monitoring by local governments and their working vis a vis the state government departments and parallel bodies, among others. Members are requested to share their suggestions and advice based on your experiences which may be useful in the review of the Madhya Pradesh Act. We look forward to a vibrant discussion! Regards, Tina Mathur
Bhim Raskar
Dear Leenaji and Amitabhji,
Greetings from Mahila Rajsatta Andolan and RSCD! I am giving below my brief suggestions on the questions posed by you:
- What should be an optimum size for a Gram Panchayat?
It should be between 2000 to 4000
- What should be the role of Standing Committees vis-à-vis Centrally Sponsored Schemes
Their role should be to conduct need assessment and mentoring all schemes.
- What are your inputs on any challenges with respect to, and changes required in the planning cycle of Panchayats
In my opinion, the GPDP module and cycle should be followed as it is.
- In your opinion, should there be a separate Act for district planning or that should be part of state Panchayat Act;
There is no need for a separate Act.
- What should be the role and status of Zila Panchayat in districts where fifth Scheduled areas exist
Zilla Parishad in Fifth Schedule areas need not intervene in execution of programmes. But they can audit the constitutional norms and people/ village centred plans and those aimed at benefitting the poor.
Regards,
Bhim Raskar
Resource and Support Centre For Development
Navi Mumbai
Original Query:
From: Amitabh and Leena Singh [mailto:debat...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, September 8, 2017 10:34 AM
To: Decentralization Community <se-...@solutionexchange-un.net.in>
Subject: [se-decn] QUERY: Amendments in the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj and Gram Swaraj Act. Advice Reply by 18 September 2017
Moderator’s Note: Dear members, we are posting a new query from Amitabh and Leena Singh of Debate, Bhopal. The Madhya Pradesh Panchayati Raj and Gram Swaraj Act is being reviewed to take a fresh look at changes required in light of the challenges in planning, implementation and monitoring by local governments and their working vis a vis the state government departments and parallel bodies, among others. Members are requested to share their suggestions and advice based on your experiences which may be useful in the review of the Madhya Pradesh Act. We look forward to a vibrant discussion! Regards, Tina Mathur