Local government in India

Local government in India refers to governmental jurisdictions below the level of the state. India is a federal republic with three spheres of government: central, state and local. The 73rd and 74th constitutional amendments give recognition and protection to local governments and in addition each state has its own local government legislation.[1] Since 1992, local government in India (bala)takes place in two very distinct forms. Urban localities, covered in the 74th amendment to the Constitution,[2] have Nagar Palika but derive their powers from the individual state governments, while the powers of rural localities have been formalized under the panchayati raj system, under the 73rd amendment to the Constitution.[3] For the history of traditional local government in India and South Asia, see panchayati raj.

India
This article is part of a series on the politics and government of India
Federal government Constitution of India Law Human rights Indian Penal Code Law enforcement
Legislature Parliament of India Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla (BJP) House Leader Narendra Modi (BJP) Opposition Leader Vacant Rajya Sabha Chairman Venkaiah Naidu (BJP) House Leader Thawar Chand Gehlot (BJP) Opposition Leader Ghulam Nabi Azad (INC)
Executive President of India Ram Nath Kovind (BJP) Vice President of India Venkaiah Naidu (BJP) Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi (BJP) Union Council of Ministers Cabinet secretary
Judiciary Supreme Court of India Chief Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde Justices (List) District Courts Other tribunals
Elections General elections 2009 2014 2019 State elections 2017 2018 2019
Political parties National coalitions National Democratic Alliance (NDA) United Progressive Alliance (UPA) National parties State parties
Federalism State Government Governors Legislatures (List) High Courts Local government
India portal Other countries

As of 2017, there are a total of 267,428 local government bodies, of which 262,771 are rural and 4,657 urban. Of the rural local governments, 632 are zila parishads at the district level, 6,672 are panchayat samitis at the block level, and 255,466 are gram panchayats at the village level. Following the 2013 local election, 37.1% of councillors were women, and in 2015/16 local government expenditure was 16.3% of total government expenditure.[1]

The panchayati raj system is a three-tier system with elected bodies at the village, taluk and district levels. The modern system is based in part on traditional {Panchayati raj. Panchayat governance}, in part on the vision of (Mahatma Gandhi) and in part by the work of various committees to harmonize the highly centralized Indian governmental administration with a degree of local autonomy.[4] The result was intended to create greater participation in local government by people and more effective implementation of rural development programs. Although, as of 2015, implementation in all of India is not complete,the intention is for there to be a gram panchayat for each village or group of villages, a tehsil level council, and a zilla panchayat at the district level.

Rural local governments (or panchayat raj institutions):[5]

• Zilla panchayats
• Mandal or taluka panchayats
• Gram panchayats (rahulz)

In 1957, a committee led by 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.[6] The suggestions were for as follows:[7]

• 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, the 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:[8]

• the district is a viable administrative unit for which planning, coordination, 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.