CHENNAI: Tamil Nadu is all set to elect people’s representatives for urban local bodies as mandated by the 73rd and 74th amendments of the Constitution.
But the state, which has vociferously supported federalism and State autonomy and championed devolution of powers from the Centre to states, is found wanting on sharing its powers with rural and urban local bodies.
Talking to TNIE on this issue, four experts who are researchers as well as engaged in works on strengthening the local self-governance shared their views comprehensively.
“The state government is hesitating to give powers to local bodies because if they start functioning independently, MLAs and MPs might lose their grip over local bodies,” says D S Sivasamy (82), former additional director of the State Municipal Administration Department and current president of Confederation of Organisations of Urban Development.
As per Article 243 (A) of the Constitution, the Grama Sabha has the authority equal to the State Legislative Assembly as far as the village is concerned. But what kind of powers were given to the Grama Sabhas by the state government? They are being allowed to convene only three times a year and that too has been cancelled for various reasons.
As per Schedule 12 of Article 243 (W), urban local bodies have 18 responsibilities. Of these, they now just have a semblance of authority over eight issues. In the past, corporation commissioners in TN had powers to sanction building plans but now it has been given to the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority.
“So, the CMDA has become a superior authority above the Corporation. But as per the Constitution, it should be the other way around - entities like CMDA and Metrowater should have been under the control of the Corporation. The CMDA, Metrowater etc., are not constitutional bodies, whereas panchayats, municipalities, and corporations have Constitutional status,” he pointed out.
The municipal corporations should have a planning committee. After a stricture from Madras High Court, the state government formed a planning committee in 2020. That is there for the name-sake. Two-thirds of elected panchayat members, municipalities and corporations should be part of this planning committee. However, for various reasons, the government do not want to give powers to the planning committee.
Article 243G Schedule 11 states that rural local bodies have 29 responsibilities. The Constitution says: “Powers, authority and responsibilities of panchayats subject to the provisions of this Constitution the Legislature of a state may, by law, endow the panchayats with such powers and authority as may be necessary to enable them to function as institutions of self-government”. But the state government failed to enact laws to give these powers to panchayats. Local bodies are now just recommendatory bodies for government departments.
As far as devolution of funds is concerned, Tamil Nadu gives 10 per cent of state-owned tax revenue (SOTR) to local bodies. Of this 10 per cent, 56 per cent goes to rural local bodies and 44 per cent to urban local bodies. Though successive state finance commissions recommended a higher percentage of funds to local bodies, it was not accepted. While Kerala devolves 24 per cent of SOTR to local bodies, Karnataka allocates 30 per cent. Uttar Pradesh and Maharashtra, too, devolve more funds than Tamil Nadu.
Dr Kalpana Sathish, founder, Roots, a resource organisation for transformative studies, said that after the constitutional amendments of local self-governance in 1996-2001, the then chief minister M Karunanidhi took interest in devolving more powers and funds to local bodies. His government constituted LC Jain Committee in 1997 to entrust powers and functions to the three tiers of panchayats. After the change of guard in 2001, reforms relating to local bodies were put on the backburner.
“As per my study done for Tata Institute of Social Studies (TISS) and Panchayat Raj Department of Government of India, Tamil Nadu stood third in the devolution of finance, but was 13th in devolving powers,” she said.
Later, the Central government started snatching the powers of the state governments and in turn, many state governments stopped devolving powers to the local bodies. “In 1994, with the 73rd and 74th amendments to the Constitution, the decentralisation of powers started. But after 2006, it turned otherwise - centralisation of powers by the Union Government has started and one by one, the powers of the state government were sucked by the Centre. “As a result, the momentum gained in the devolution of powers to the local bodies was lost. It is also reflected in the state - the powers of urban local bodies were taken over by the state government,” Dr Kalpana Sathish observed.
In 1997, the then Chief Minister M Karunanidhi promised the State Assembly that powers would be devolved to the local bodies in a phased manner. The present government should fulfil his father’s promise and they should announce the powers to be delegated to the local bodies in the budget session of the State Assembly.
G Palanithurai, retired professor, Gandhigram Rural Institute and a researcher on the functioning of the local bodies for many decades, is of the view that to make local bodies vibrant, awareness about the powers given to these self-governance bodies should be made clear to the leaders of the local bodies.
“While legislations regarding local bodies direct the state governments to decentralise powers to the local bodies, the Union Government has started centralising the powers. So, the state governments are in a dilemma since they have been reduced to the level of municipal corporations by the Central government. As such, they do not want to forego their own powers to the local bodies,” he added.
Nandakumar Siva, general secretary, Thannatchi, a movement working for local governance, said, “In Tamil Nadu, only legislative changes took place and no effort was made to involve people in the administration of local bodies. Though many activists worked at the grassroots level to strengthen self-governing institutions, government officials have not been sensitised to the need to strengthen local body administration.”
Chief Minister’s special cell is receiving a huge number of petitions from the public. It is not a good sign. Instead, the issues should be resolved at the local body level and recently, Chief Secretary V Irai Anbu had pointed out this fact to the district level officials. When the 1958 legislation was enacted, Anna pointed out the lacunae in that and demanded that more powers should be delegated to the local bodies. So, the present DMK government should work for fulfilling the vision of its leaders Anna and Karunanidhi. During the period 2001-2006, all doors for decentralisation of powers to local bodies were shut.
In Kerala, a People’s Planning Campaign was carried out in 1994. The then state government in Kerala said the funds would be provided from the headquarters whereas the planning for spending that money would be devised at the local bodies level.