Answer

Local bodies form the backbone of decentralised governance in India, empowered by the 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments, which introduced Articles 243 to 243Z. These amendments have transformed local bodies into key drivers of development and governance. Recently, in 2022, the Supreme Court emphasised the importance of strengthening local bodies by mandating timely elections in states like Maharashtra.

Role of Local Bodies in Providing Good Governance at the Local Level

• Decentralised Decision-Making: Local bodies enable autonomous decision-making that caters to the unique needs of their communities, in line with Article 243G of the Constitution, which empowers Panchayats to plan and implement economic development.
  For example: Gram Panchayats in Maharashtra managed Jalyukt Shivar Abhiyan, a water conservation initiative, improving water availability in drought-prone areas.
• Enhanced Community Engagement: As mandated by Article 243A, Gram Sabhas enable citizens to participate in governance decisions.
  For example: Ward Committees in Bengaluru and Gram Sabhas in Kerala empower citizens to participate in local budgeting, fostering greater transparency.
• Accountability and Transparency Improvements: Regular monitoring of government programs increases accountability, as encouraged by the RTI Act (2005), which promotes transparency.
  For example: Social audits in MGNREGA, as mandated by Section 17 of the MGNREGA Act, helped expose fund mismanagement in Andhra Pradesh.
• Local Economic Initiatives: Local bodies promote economic development under Article 243W, which empowers municipalities to execute economic programs in urban areas.
  For example: Under the NULM , municipalities in Gujarat have promoted micro-enterprises, providing loans and training to urban poor women.
• Inclusion of Marginalised Sections: Local bodies reserve seats for women and SC/STs as per Article 243D, ensuring political participation from marginalised sections.
  For example: Elected women representatives constitute 6 percent of total Panchayati Raj Institution (PRI) representatives in India in 2024, as per a RBI report.
• Resource Management Effectiveness: Local management of natural resources is enabled under Article 243G, empowering Panchayats to handle resource management.
  For example: Local bodies in Rajasthan’s Alwar district have successfully managed water resources through community-led conservation efforts, improving groundwater levels.
• Service Delivery Localization: Municipalities, as per Article 243W, are responsible for delivering essential services like health and education at the local level.
  For example: Kerala’s local self-government departments manage primary health centres, significantly contributing to the state’s exemplary health outcomes.

Pros of Merging Rural Local Bodies with Urban Local Bodies

• Integrated Development Strategy: Merging rural and urban local bodies promotes unified planning, which helps balance infrastructure development and harmonise growth across regions, ensuring cohesive regional progress.
• Administrative Cost Reduction: Consolidating local bodies eliminates redundant administrative functions, reducing overhead costs and improving the efficiency by streamlining decision-making and resource management.
• Resource Allocation Equity: Merging rural and urban governance ensures equitable distribution of resources, preventing disproportionate development in urban centres and ensuring rural areas receive adequate funding for essential services.
• Disparity Reduction: Merging helps extend essential urban services, such as sanitation and water supply, into rural areas, reducing the infrastructure gap and improving quality of life.
• Governance Simplification: A unified governance structure reduces bureaucratic hurdles, making it easier for citizens to access services and simplifying administrative processes for projects like real estate development and regional planning.
  For example: The introduction of single-window clearance systems in Gurgaon facilitated governance across both urban and rural regions, improving the ease of doing business.
• Service Efficiency Enhancement: By pooling resources and expertise, merged bodies can deliver services more efficiently, ensuring that both rural and urban populations benefit from improved access to public utilities and transportation.

Cons of Merging Rural Local Bodies with Urban Local Bodies

• Local Needs Overlook: Urban-centric policies may marginalise rural-specific issues, especially in agriculture, as the merged body might prioritise urban infrastructure over rural economic needs, such as farming and irrigation.
• Management Complexity Increase: Merging local bodies creates larger and more diverse jurisdictions, making it difficult to address the distinct needs of urban and rural populations, which vary significantly in socio-economic challenges.
• Political Representation Issues: Merging rural and urban bodies could dilute rural political representation, with urban areas receiving more attention.
• Skewed Resource Distribution: Urban areas might receive a larger share of development funds, leaving rural regions underfunded, which may further perpetuate inequality.
• Identity and Heritage Erosion: The cultural identity of rural areas may be eroded as urbanisation pressures increase, leading to a loss of traditional practices and local heritage.
• Implementation Difficulties: Aligning the regulatory frameworks of rural and urban areas, particularly in terms of land use and zoning laws, can be legally complex and slow down the governance process.

The local body is the lowest tier of governance, but by no means the least. Merging the rural and urban local bodies could streamline governance and foster uniform development, but this must be done with careful consideration of local needs, cultural nuances, and equitable resource allocation to ensure sustainable development.

DOWNLOAD PDF