Govt panel opposes election to Chairman, Vice-Chairman of Distt Planning Board

Mohinder Verma
JAMMU, Mar 17: A committee constituted by the Government to recommend measures to empower the Panchayati Raj Institutions in the State after going through the recommendations from various stakeholders and provisions of 73rd Constitutional Amendments has opposed election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman of District Planning and Development Boards. However, it has endorsed reservation in all the three tiers of Panchayati Raj System and sitting fees to the members of Panchayati Adalat and Vice-Chairman of Block Development Council.
The committee comprising Commissioner Secretary, Department of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj, Secretary, Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, Special Secretary and Additional Secretary, Department of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj and Directors of Rural Development, Kashmir and Jammu recently submitted its report to the Minister for Rural Development and Panchayati Raj and the same will be placed before State Cabinet shortly.
According to the report of the committee, the copy of which is available with EXCELSIOR, there were suggestions from various quarters regarding election of Chairman of the District Planning and Development Board (DPDB) by and from amongst the members of the Board while as Congress party had suggested that except Members of Parliament the election should be from members of DPDB.
Though the committee has stated that election of the Chairman of DPDB will be a welcome step but it has given an opinion that this suggestion cannot be considered before the next elections to Halqa Panchayats. In this way, the committee has opposed the 73rd Amendment provision which states that a Panchayat at the intermediate and district level shall be elected by and from amongst the elected members.
The panel while supporting the Government stand that Chairman of the Board should be nominated from amongst its members, has also rejected the suggestions from various quarters that Sarpanchs should also be included in the electoral college for election of Chairman DPDB.
“The District Development and Planning Board has a representative character with all BDC Chairpersons, MP of the area, MLAs representing the district, Chairman of Town Area Committees at the district and the president of the Municipal Council as its members”, the panel said, adding “including the Sarpanchs also will not be contributory in any sense”. While suggesting some amendments in the Panchayati Raj Act of the State, the committee has recommended that Chairman of the DPDB should preferably be from that district.
The panel has also opposed election of Vice-Chairman of DPDB from amongst the members representing the Panchayats and Urbal Local Bodies only. “The constitution of DPDB is representative in nature and care has been taken that it has members from every representation in the district therefore by giving the powers to elect its Vice Chairman to a group of selected members only will be against the democratic spirit”, the committee said.
About the Chairperson of the Block Development Council, the committee has recommended that Chairman should be elected from amongst Panchs and Sarpanchs of the block as per the provisions of 73rd Amendment. However, there should not be election of the Secretary, which as per the State Act is the Block Development Officer.
“There is no requirement of the election of the Secretary as the officer will be in a better position to work as Secretary than any other elected person as he is in picture regarding the fund allocations, new schemes, guidelines and other official information required for the smooth running of the BDC”, the panel said.
Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 29 which state that the term of the office of the Chairman of the BDC should be five years from the date he is declared elected, the committee has recommended that term of the BDC and DPDB should be co-terminus with that of the Halqa Panchayat. “It would be a peculiar situation where there is a BDC but there are no Halqa Panchayats to be governed by them”, the committee said.
Observing that 73rd Amendment of Indian Constitution recommends reservation for only SCs, STs and women, the committee said, “the State is empowered to make reservations for OBCs also as such the reservation may be extended to the seats for all three tiers of Panchayat”.
About the recommendations from various quarters that for removal of Sarpanch a provision shall be kept for requirement of confirmation of the Government by a Cabinet decision, the Committee said, “the present method of removal is independent of Government interference and empowers the Panchayats to take their own decisions as such the same should not be infringed”.
Similarly, the committee has opposed the suggestions that supersession of Halqa Panchayat should not take place through Panchayat Advisory Council and instead there should be a Cabinet decision for the same.
“There has already been enough Government presence in the Advisory Council, which comprises of Financial Commissioner (Revenue), Deputy Commissioner of the concerned district, Registrar Cooperative Society and Deputy Commissioner (Central) with the Financial Commissioner Revenue. Moreover, PAC is advisory in nature and will further recommend the proposal to the Department of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj”, the committee said, adding “deleting PAC and going in for a Cabinet decision will further complicate the possible issue”.
The committee has also recommended that members of Panchayati Adalat and Vice-Chairman of BDC may be given sitting fees while Chairman BDC and Chairman DPDB shall be entitled to monthly honorarium as prescribed by the Government.
It has given nod to the audit of Panchayat by CAG along with Director Local Fund and Pensions, which have been entrusted with the function instead of Chartered Accountant as per one of the mandatory conditions for receiving the Performance Grant under 13th Finance Commission. The committee has recommended issuance of notification in this regard.
The committee has recommended increase in the financial powers to various levels of Panchayats, separate Ombudsman for Panchayats and assigning of registration of educated unemployed youth in the villages and registration of labour/job cards under MGNREGA to the Panchayats. However, it has opposed constitution of separate Finance Commission for PRIs on the ground that this would amount to putting additional burden on the State exchequer.

Follow our WhatsApp channel