Dr Shabana
LE Modesittce Jr. an American science fiction author once said , “Never mistake law for justice; justice is an ideal, and law is a tool” and this quote spurned me on to analyse recent developments with respect to providing access to justice through alternative dispute resolution methods.Every word has variety of senses and connotations i.e. the same word can convey different meaning depending on the surrounding context.Thus, the word decentralisation also has different meaning in different contexts. In general terms, decentralisation means dispersion or distribution of functions and powers. The antithesis of centralisation of power is decentralisation. As per OECD, “decentralisation is among the most critical reforms in last five decades and this involves transfer of powers, responsibilities and resources for public functions with some degree of autonomy from the central government to sub-national governments including localised actors like local governments etc.”The decentralisation can be classified by the nature of power being decentralised i.e. there are many ways by which central government can transfer the powers ,responsibilities and resources to sub-national level. Thus decentralisation can be political, administrative or fiscal Further, decentralising government is considered favourable for good governance and in order to make democracy more effective, decentralised governance started being adopted in mid-1980s by the developing countries. Several factors drove Indian government to go for political decentralisation to manage stresses and strains induced by over centralisation. The objectives were to provide benefits of Government schemes to the beneficiaries at the grassroots level i.e. rural communities, incorporate local information into the policy-making i.e. bottom -up approach, enhance transparency and accountability and to promote participative democracy at the grassroots level. In ancient times village councils used to deal with local issues effectively and it was realised that these councils must be established. This realisation as regards the importanceof village councils led to opinion building for setting up of local self- government institutions as close to the people as could be through political decentralization, e.g. Panchayats in India. These institutions will make sure optimum utilisation of every penny meant for rural development. Hence, the Constitution (Seventy-third Amendment) Act, 1992 was passed with constitutional status to Panchayati Raj Institutions and made devolution mandatory. Devolution is subset of decentralisation which involves transfer of powers from the central government to lower-level autonomous governmentsi.e. local self-governments which are legally constituted as separate levels of government.
But the Panchayati Raj institutions were to be established for development of villages and not for settlement of disputes although in some states Gram Panchayat itself was given the power to take care of all the judicial functions.In many states there were Nyaya Panchayats for settlement of disputes, e.g. in Jammu and Kashmir Panchayati Raj Act,1989, there are provisions for Panchayat Adalats as separate bodies to settle petty disputes at village level though they have not been constituted so far even though Gram Panchayats/Halqa Panchayats were established. Panchayat Adalats functioned at a few places in Jammu & Kashmir decades ago but not since 2001 when the Panchayat elections were held after a span of 23 years. The main purpose behind establishment of Nyaya Panchayat / Gram /Panchayat Adalat/Gram Katchahry was to provide alternative forum for resolution of disputes at the grassroots level with people’s participationi.e. participatory grassroots justice by methods like mediation, conciliation and compromise to hammer out sustainable and voluntary resolution outside the formal judicial system .These village courts were indigenous justice instrumentalities/agencies manned by local people who knew the parties at dispute , subject matter as well as the way in which dispute sprang up and other related facts which made them effective bodies to render speedy ,inexpensive ,non-formal and substantial justice on the spot or at the door step of parties in earlier times and this continued till late 1970s but thereafter there was a decline in attention towards this low cost indigenous justice system . In late 1980s when the Law commission submitted its report, India had 10.5 judges per million population and total judicial strength was 7675 which was grossly inadequate and along with that daunting case backlog. This judicial case backlog paved the way for the establishment alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. Furthermore,the Law Commission of India in its One hundred and Fourteenth report submitted in 1986 recommended decentralisation of system of administration of justice by establishing or strengthening in rural areas the institutions of Nyaya Panchayat or other mechanisms for resolving disputes and they would also de-clog the courts.
From 1986-2008 several attempts were made to revive and revitalise rural justice system but nothing significant happened till 2008 when Gram Nyayalayas Act was passed which provided decentralized dispute redressal system. Even after seventeen years, this dream to get justice at the doorstep remains unrealised, so much so that the Apex Court directed the chief secretaries and Registrar Generals of the states and High courts respectively to file status report on Gram Nyayalayas as Supreme Court was informed that there is requirement of 6000 Gram Nyayalayas but only 481 have been set up and among them only 309 among them are functional.
Moreover, despite of implementation of many reforms, gaps in justice delivery persist.As per, India Justice Report, 2025, there are around 21,000 judges (15 per million population though Law Commission recommended 50 in 1987)and around 5.2 crore cases are pending in various courts across India.In addition to this, the Supreme Court has questioned the feasibility of setting up Gram Nyayalayas as the regular courts are facing myriad of problems and in this insufficient funds scenario, bringing about additional Gram Nyayalayas may not be realisable and these Gram Nyayalayas also took the shape of formal courts and were not able to achieve the intended purpose wherever they were operational and drifted away from the objective of decongestion of courts, cheap and timely justice.
And, in Feb 2025 Ministry of Women and Child Development has come up with new institution named NariAdalat to be established at Gram Panchayat level and they would be a platform providing women with an alternative Grievance Redressal Mechanism for resolving petty issues faced by women at Gram Panchayat level through negotiation, mediation, and reconciliation with mutual consent for speedy, accessible, and affordable justice. The said ministry has written to all states to share proposals for setting up these Adalats. The Ministry has also issued the Standard Operating Procedure of these Adalat and as per this SOP the members or Nyaya Sakhis of these Adalats will be nominated / selected by the Gram Panchayat. Surprisingly,the last Panchayat elections in J&K were held in 2018, and Panchayat bodies completed their tenure in 2023. They must have been reconstituted before the completion of their tenure as they are body corporates but that did not happen.In the absence of Gram Panchayats ,how would Nari Adalats would be constituted as SOP states that each such Adalat would consist of 07-11 members, known as Nyaya Sakhis and the identification / selection / nomination of the members of the Nari Adalat (among the committed and socially respected women) would be done by Gram Panchayat in a meeting chaired by Panchayat President / Sarpanch. If these Nari Adalats get constituted across the country in the future,will Gram Panchayat/Panchayat Adalats /Gram Katchahry continue to be alternative Grievance Redressal Mechanism for resolving petty issues faced by women at Gram Panchayat level or their powers shall be transferred to Nari Adalats. This is unclear and confusing.
Last but not least, President of India at the launch of the Mediation Association of India during the First National Mediation Conference on 3rd May, 2025 stated that ” the Dispute resolution mechanism under the Mediation Act should be effectively extended to rural areas so that the Panchayats are legally empowered to mediate and resolve the conflicts in villages. This statement makes it clear that there must be concrete and meaningful attempt to return to erstwhile village court system with some modification keeping in view the changed circumstances. The multiplicity of laws and institutions create confusion and widens the gap between intended outcomes and aspirations. The laws are tools to achieve the ideal of justice and mere enactment of multiple laws is not sufficient without robust implementation.
(The author is from Jamia Millia Islamia.)
Follow our WhatsApp channel
