Representative image
Credit: iStock Photo
June 1, 1993, marked the passage of the 74th Constitutional Amendment Act (74th CAA), whose essence was to give “power to the people.” But
32 years after its passage, this goal remains vague and largely unfulfilled. The 74th CAA mandated the institutionalising of people’s participation through ward committees, and later, ‘Area Sabhas’ were introduced to give every voter a role in governance.
In Karnataka, ward committees have existed in Bengaluru—albeit sporadically—since 1999 due to sustained pressure from citizens. But the first ward committees outside Bengaluru were constituted in Mangaluru only in 2021, 28 years after the passage of the 74th CAA. This was due to a High Court order in a public interest litigation filed by the Mangaluru Civic Group (MCG), led by Nigel Albuquerque. The first and only Area Sabha in the state was also notified in Mangaluru as a result of the same HC order.
For councillors of the Mangaluru City Corporation (MCC), being held accountable and questioned by the public during ward committee meetings was a new and uncomfortable experience. They complained of being treated disrespectfully by citizens and alleged that chaos prevailed at these meetings. The MCG pointed out that this was due to the absence of by-laws governing the functioning of ward committees and Area Sabhas, despite the HC order mandating their formulation.
The draft by-laws of MCC, along with the suggestions from MCG, have
now been submitted to the Urban Development Department (UDD), which is considering framing model by-laws for all municipal corporations based on these drafts.
It is worth recalling that when the Mysuru municipal commissioner wrote to the UDD seeking guidelines on selecting ward committee members, the department failed to respond. Nevertheless, the Mangaluru commissioner, along with several others, voluntarily implemented a democratic and transparent process for nominating members. This involved inviting applications from politically unaffiliated citizens and following an objective selection process. The MCG has recommended that this process be formally incorporated into the bye-laws.
The primary function of the ward committee is to prepare and submit a Ward Development Scheme to the corporation, incorporating the Area Sabha plans. There is insufficient detailing in the MCC bye-laws on how plans have to be prepared by ward committees and Area Sabhas. In Bengaluru, ad hoc measures and random citizen suggestions are often used to draw up ward plans. These fall short of the standards of a comprehensive, evidence-based planning exercise.
To address this gap, MCG has proposed the formation of an Information and Statistics Committee to create a single citizens’ database at the ward level. This would be linked to the family ID (from the Kutumba scheme) and the Unique Address ID, serving as a common database accessible to all departments. Continuous updating of this database—based on births, deaths, and mandatory tracking of in- and out-migration—should be mandatory. The database would help identify beneficiaries of all government schemes (ration cards, pensions, etc.), list of children of compulsory school age, and list eligible voters for the electoral roll.
To facilitate this data collection, MCG has suggested that the UDD incorporate into the bye-laws for planning the Ward Development Scheme the “Mission Antyodaya” methodology prescribed by the Union Ministry of Panchayat Raj (MoPR) for rural areas on Gram Panchayat Development Planning (GPDP). Mission Antyodaya requires an annual survey to be conducted in GPs to enable evidence-based, participatory planning for meeting the critical needs of the marginalised; assess the gaps in human development, social infrastructure, and environmental status against prescribed standards; and localise the achievement of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
The second important function of ward committees listed under Section 13-I (1) of the KMC (Amdt) Act 2011 is to “ensure proper utilisation of the funds allotted.” But this section has not given any actual powers and guidance to ward committees to be able to carry out these functions. MCG has suggested that all details regarding proposed works in the ward should be made available to ward committees without members having to ask for them. Should not the bye-laws also spell out that “ensuring proper utilisation of funds” requires ward committees to certify the bills for the works done in the ward, or the bills for garbage lifted, etc.? This will lead to true decentralisation and accountability, which cannot be achieved by merely splitting and increasing the number of corporations, as the recent Greater Bengaluru Act is trying to do.
UDD’s attention was also drawn to the pending PIL in the HC (WP 17766/2021), filed by MCG and CIVIC-Bangalore, questioning the ‘inequality before law’ being created between citizens of metros, municipal corporations, and smaller cities by having different laws, especially regarding citizen participation. The prayer in this PIL is for a common law for all ULSGs with supplementary provisions for metros and big cities where necessary. UDD was asked to set up an expert committee to prepare the common law along with the model bye-laws with civil society participation. Hopefully, this will lead to genuine “Power to the People.”
(The writer is the executive trustee of CIVIC-Bangalore)