Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
The 73rd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1992 aimed to institutionalize Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) as units of self-governance, envisioning genuine devolution of powers and resources to the grassroots level. This amendment sought to empower local bodies to function as effective instruments of local development and participatory democracy. However, the extent to which this vision has been realized in practice remains a subject of debate. While PRIs have been established across the country, the actual transfer of power and financial autonomy has been uneven and often limited, raising questions about the true extent of devolution.
Understanding Devolution in the Context of PRIs
Devolution, in the context of PRIs, refers to the transfer of three key elements: functions (responsibility for specific subjects like water supply, sanitation, agriculture), funds (financial resources to carry out these functions), and functionaries (staff and personnel to implement programs). Genuine devolution implies that PRIs have substantial autonomy in decision-making and resource allocation, rather than merely being implementing agencies for state government schemes.
The Legal Framework for Devolution
The 73rd Amendment provided a constitutional mandate for establishing PRIs, outlining their composition, election procedures, and reservation of seats. Article 243G specifically empowers State Legislatures to endow PRIs with such powers and authority as may be necessary to enable them to function as institutions of self-government. Subsequent State Panchayati Raj Acts were enacted to give effect to this constitutional provision. However, the degree of devolution varies significantly across states.
Powers: A Mixed Picture
- Functions devolved: While PRIs have been assigned functions related to 29 subjects listed in the Eleventh Schedule (e.g., agriculture, health, education, social welfare), the actual transfer of administrative control is often limited. Many crucial functions remain with state departments.
- Administrative Control: State governments often retain significant control over PRI personnel, particularly Block Development Officers (BDOs) who often wield considerable influence.
- Planning & Implementation: PRIs are involved in planning at the local level, but their plans are often subject to approval and modification by higher authorities. Implementation is frequently carried out by state government departments.
Resources: The Critical Constraint
Financial devolution is arguably the biggest challenge facing PRIs.
| Source of Funds | Percentage of Total PRI Funds (Approximate - 2022-23) |
|---|---|
| State Finance Commission Grants | 25-30% |
| Central Finance Commission Grants | 15-20% |
| State Government Grants | 30-40% |
| Own Revenue (taxes, fees) | 5-10% |
The reliance on state government grants makes PRIs financially dependent and vulnerable to political interference. The recommendations of State Finance Commissions, intended to ensure adequate resource devolution, are often not fully implemented. Furthermore, PRIs often lack the capacity to generate sufficient own revenue.
Examples & Case Studies
- Kerala: Kerala has been a frontrunner in devolution, with significant transfer of funds and functions to local bodies, particularly in areas like health and education.
- Madhya Pradesh: Madhya Pradesh implemented a system of direct funding to PRIs, bypassing intermediate levels of bureaucracy, but faced challenges in ensuring effective utilization of funds.
- Rajasthan: The state has experimented with innovative models of participatory planning, but resource constraints remain a significant hurdle.
Challenges to Genuine Devolution
- Political Will: Lack of strong political will at the state level to genuinely empower PRIs.
- Bureaucratic Resistance: Resistance from state government officials who are reluctant to relinquish control.
- Capacity Constraints: Limited administrative and technical capacity within PRIs.
- Social Inequalities: Existing social inequalities can hinder effective participation and equitable distribution of benefits.
Conclusion
While the 73rd Amendment has undoubtedly created a framework for local self-governance, the functioning of PRIs in practice often falls short of genuine devolution of powers and resources. Significant progress has been made in establishing PRIs and assigning them functions, but financial dependence and bureaucratic control continue to be major impediments. Strengthening State Finance Commissions, enhancing the capacity of PRIs, and fostering a political climate conducive to decentralization are crucial steps towards realizing the full potential of Panchayati Raj and achieving truly empowered local governance.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.