why are local self rule organizations called training schools and laboratory of constitutional improvement in a democracy
Answers
Explanation:
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.
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
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]