Latest news with #AkhilKumar
Indian Express
27-05-2025
- Business
- Indian Express
NITI Aayog's role in fostering spirit of strong states, strong nation
— Akhil Kumar During the 10th NITI Aayog Governing Council meeting, Prime Minister Narendra Modi reiterated the goal of Viksit Bharat and urged state governments to focus on sectors like manufacturing and services, tourism, and to find ways to leverage the Free Trade Agreements India is signing with several countries. 'We should focus on one goal — to make Bharat Viksit by 2047. We should have the aim of making each state Viksit, each city Viksit, each Nagar Palika Viksit and each village Viksit. If we work on these lines, we will not have to wait till 2047 to become Viksit Bharat,' the Prime Minister said during the meeting held on May 25 in Delhi. NITI Aayog drives this vision forward by actively supporting states through various initiatives and mechanisms, premised on the belief that strong States make a strong nation. But how does this premier policy think tank of the Government of India advance this vision? In what ways does it foster cooperative and competitive federalism? What are the significant initiatives it has launched since its inception? With the twin mandate of promoting cooperative and competitive federalism, NITI Aayog (National Institution for Transforming India) was constituted in January 2015 replacing the 65-year-old Planning Commission as a public policy think tank. Outlining the body's objectives, a press statement issued by the government of India on January 1, 2015, stated, 'An important evolutionary change from the past will be replacing a centre-to-state one-way flow of policy by a genuine and continuing partnership with the states.' The two fundamental pillars of the body are a collaboration between the Central and State governments and promoting healthy competition among States through various sectors such as agriculture, health, education, infrastructure, and irrigation. Unlike the erstwhile Planning Commission, which worked as a centralised body through the five-year plans by pursuing top-down approach in allocating the funds to the States, NITI Aayog was envisaged to adopt a bottom-up model with no financial powers vested upon it. In doing so, it delinked fund allocation from policy planning and redefined the role of the States in the developmental paradigm and policy-making process. In terms of its composition, the Governing Council of NITI Aayog comprises the Prime Minister of India, Chief Ministers of all the States and Union Territories with Legislature, and Lt Governors of other Union Territories. The body also includes a Vice Chairman and other members appointed by the Centre. The Governing Council presents a platform 'to discuss inter-sectoral, inter-departmental and federal issues to accelerate the implementation of the national development agenda'. Building on this structure, NITI Aayog undertakes a wide range of activities. The activities of the think tank can be classified into four broad areas: policy and programme framework, cooperative federalism, monitoring and evaluation, and think tank and knowledge and innovation hub. To promote cooperative federalism, it constitutes various task forces and sub-groups related to various flagship programmes introduced by the Centre. It has adopted a multifaceted governance model by forging partnerships with various stakeholders such as State governments, civil society representatives, the private sector, and technocrats to accelerate India's development journey. The body has introduced several ideas in policy innovation and data. Additionally, NITI Aayog played an important role in tracking India's performance on the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by August 2030 as it introduced the SDG index to promote competition among States. The SDG India Index 2023-24 report, released by NITI Aayog, shows India's composite score stood at 71 in 2023-24 compared to 66 in 2020-21. The report underlined significant progress made in eliminating poverty, providing decent work, economic growth, climate action and life on earth. Specifically, India marked improvements in several key SDGs including 1 (No Poverty), 3 (Good Health and Well-being), 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy), 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure) and 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities). Other significant initiatives by the premier policy think tank included: — Performance in Health Outcomes Index to review health performance. — Composite Water Management Index to address India's growing water crisis. — School Education Quality Index to improve education outcomes. These measures played a key role in getting real time data on various indices, encouraging informed policy-making and fostering competition among various States. In 2018, NITI Aayog also introduced the 'Aspirational Districts Programme' to study the underdevelopment and enhance the performance of human development indicators (such as health, education, agriculture and others) in 112 districts across 26 States and one Union Territory. The basic tenets of this ADP strategy were the three C's which include: collaboration, convergence, and competition. Examples of the success stories from districts include: — Jamui, Bihar: Technological intervention to reduce mortality rate in high risk pregnancies. — Malkangiri, Odisha:-Transformation of the Anganwadi system. — Viziangaram, Andhra Pradesh: Construction of hostels for tribal pregnant women. — Nandurbar, Maharashtra: Centralised kitchens for better nutrition to tackle malnutrition. The best performing districts were also rewarded on the rankings based on incremental progress made across 49 key performance indicators (KPIs) under five socio-economic themes – health and nutrition, education, agriculture and water resources, financial inclusion, skill development and infrastructure. The best practices pursued in governance in these aspirational districts were emulated in various other districts to alleviate regional disparities and improve the outcomes. Building on the successful implementation of this programme, 'The Aspirational Blocks Programme' was launched in 2023 to develop 500 underdeveloped blocks in India, aiming to improve living standards in remote areas lacking basic amenities. NITI Aayog also seeks to train local officials and create a robust tracking system to ensure centrally sponsored schemes are reached effectively to the intended beneficiaries without any hindrance. Examples of success stories from this programme include: — Mandia, Assam in improving access to clean tap water to households through 'Jal Mitras' — Dumri, Jharkhand for tackling malnutrition in children — Maddikera, Andhra Pradesh for improving education infrastructure In its role as a knowledge and innovation hub, NITI Aayog launched the Atal Innovation Mission (AIM) in 2016 to nurture the innovation ecosystem across the country. Through this programme, 1.1 crore students were engaged in 10,000 Atal Tinkering Labs (ATLs), nearly 32,000 jobs were created through 72 Atal Incubation Centres (AICs), 7,100 ATLs were sanctioned in 110 aspirational districts in India. This programme played a significant role in bringing the best talent among young minds and fostering a culture of creativity, promoting entrepreneurial skills across various educational institutions. Several startups such as Agnikul (space tech) benefitted from the AIM. In November 2024, the Union Cabinet approved the continuation of the AIM programme until March 31, 2028, with an allocated budget of Rs. 2,750 crores. Unlike AIM 1.0, AIM 2.0 will expand the innovation and entrepreneurship ecosystems in 22 recognised languages. The mission also aims to create an innovation ecosystem in Jammu and Kashmir, Ladakh, North East, Aspirational Districts, and Blocks where 15 per cent of citizens reside. To sum up, as an ideas platform, NITI Aayog fundamentally altered the landscape of planning in India by adopting a facilitating and participatory model, decentralising the development journey, and working closely with the States through new partnerships. The more frequent consultation with the States would help bridge gaps in policy implementation and address future challenges. How does NITI Aayog reflect the principle of 'Strong States, Strong Nation' in its functioning? What are the four broad areas under which NITI Aayog's activities are classified? Name some initiatives or programmes launched by it to improve delivery of centrally sponsored schemes. In what ways does NITI Aayog promote federal cooperation while maintaining competitive development among states? Evaluate the impact of the SDG India Index in encouraging state-level performance on sustainable development. Discuss how NITI Aayog's initiatives like AIM contribute to long-term national innovation capacity. (Dr. Akhil Kumar is a PhD in Political Science from University of Hyderabad.) Share your thoughts and ideas on UPSC Special articles with Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter and stay updated with the news cues from the past week. Stay updated with the latest UPSC articles by joining our Telegram channel – IndianExpress UPSC Hub, and follow us on Instagram and X.
Indian Express
05-05-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Governor vs. State: Supreme Court draws the line
(The Indian Express has launched a new series of articles for UPSC aspirants written by seasoned writers and scholars on issues and concepts spanning History, Polity, International Relations, Art, Culture and Heritage, Environment, Geography, Science and Technology, and so on. Read and reflect with subject experts and boost your chance of cracking the much-coveted UPSC CSE. In the following article, Dr. Akhil Kumar delves into the role and power of the Governor in light of the recent ruling by the Supreme Court.) Recently, the Supreme Court, for the first time, ruled that the President should take a decision on the Bills reserved for consideration by the Governor within three months from the date on which such reference is received. Under Article 201 of the Constitution, the Governor has the power to reserve a Bill – passed by both Houses of the State Legislature – for the consideration of the President. The apex court invoked its special power under Article 142 and called for a decision within three months and added, 'in case of any delay beyond this period, appropriate reasons would have to be recorded and conveyed' to the state concerned. The April 8 ruling came in response to Tamil Nadu Governor R.N. Ravi's prolonged inaction over 10 crucial State Bills, withholding of consent on them and the subsequent reservation of the re-passed Bills to President Droupadi Murmu for her consideration in November 2023. Tension between the States and Governors often emerges due to the proviso to Article 200, which states that the Governor 'may, as soon as possible' grant assent to the Bills without specifying any definitive timeline. Therefore, the apex court's ruling calls for a closer examination of the Constitutional provisions dealing with the role of Governors and their relations with the state, specifically in view of the fact that the Constitution has set no timeframe for a Presidential decision on a Bill reserved for consideration by the Governor. First, let's look into the appointment and role of a Governor. Appointment and qualifications of Governor The Constitution has laid provisions for the appointment of a Governor. Article 153 states, 'There shall be a Governor for each State.' Article 155 says that the 'Governor of a State shall be appointed by the President by warrant under his hand and seal'. Under Article 156, 'the Governor shall hold office during the pleasure of the President', but his normal term of office will be five years. If the President withdraws her pleasure before the completion of five years, the Governor has to step down. Since the President acts on the aid and advice of the Prime Minister and the Union Council of Ministers, in effect, the Governor is appointed and removed by the central government. Articles 157 and 158 enunciate the qualifications of the Governor and the conditions of his office: (i) the Governor must be a citizen of India and has attained the age of 35 years; (ii) the Governor should not be a member of Parliament or a state legislature, and must not hold any other office of profit. Roles of the Governor The Constitution also specifies that the Governor must act on the advice of the Council of Ministers of the state. Article 163 states: 'There shall be a Council of Ministers with the Chief Minister at the head to aid and advise the Governor in the exercise of his functions, except in so far as he is by or under this Constitution required to exercise his functions or any of them in his discretion.' The Constitution also empowers the Governor to summon, prorogue, or dissolve the State Assembly. However, the Governor can exercise this power only after due consultation with the Council of Ministers. As the executive head of the state, the Governor is entrusted with powers such as the appointment of the Chief Minister, Council of Ministers, Advocate General, State Election Commissioner, State Universities officials, Chairman and members of the State Public Service Commission and others. What recent judgement by the top court says The Governor enjoys certain powers under the Constitution such as giving or withholding assent to a Bill passed by both Houses of the State Legislature. Under Article 200 of the Constitution, the Governor has several options: — To grant assent to the bill, — To withhold assent, — To return the bill (if it is not a money bill) for consideration by the State Legislature, and — To reserve the bill for the President's consideration. However, proviso to Article 200 also states that the executive head of the State must return the bill 'as soon as possible' but it does not mention any stipulated time, which has sometimes resulted in long delays in gubernatorial action. In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court addressed this issue and laid down time-bound guidelines for the Governors to act upon a Bill: — Granting assent within one month, — Not withholding assent contrary to the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, — Return a Bill within three months, — Expressing reservations on the bill within three months, and — If the Bill is reconsidered and passed again by the Legislature, the Governor must grant assent within one month. Don't Miss | The world this week | India, Pak ties hit another low after Pahalgam terror attack, New Delhi, Ottawa to reset strained ties, US threatens sanctions against Iranian oil buyers Committees and judgements on the Governor's role In various instances, the role of the Governor, along with the scope of their powers and functions, has been a recurring subject, which was scrutinized by various committees appointed by the Centre and the Supreme Court of India. From the Administrative Reforms Commission in 1969 to the Punchhi Commission in 2007, several panels constituted by various governments recommended wide-ranging reforms regarding the Governor's selection process, powers, functions, tenure, impeachment and other matters. The Sarkaria Commission (1988) examined the centre-state relations and suggested reforms regarding the Governor's power under Articles 200 and 201 of the Constitution. The National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (2001), chaired by M.N. Venkatachaliah and initiated by the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government, observed that Governors, as representatives of the Centre, often act as its agents, and decisions taken by them often evoke controversy. The Punchhi Commission (2007) reviewed the existing arrangements between the centre and the States and recommended that the Governor must be appointed with the consultation of the Chief Minister of the concerned state and there must be a timely decision by the Governor on the bills passed by the Legislature. To ensure impartial functioning, the office of the Governor did come under judicial scrutiny on several occasions, with the Supreme Court of India delivering key observations to rein in the Governor's power in several landmark judgments. These rulings served as points of reference in subsequent cases and shaped the functioning of this constitutional office. Some of them are: In Shamsher Singh vs State of Punjab (1974), the court declared that the Governor must act only on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers. In 1979, in Raghukul Tilak's case, the court held that Governors are not mere employees of the Centre but hold a high constitutional office in their respective states they are appointed. The S R Bommai vs Union of India (1994) can be considered a landmark judgement over the Governor's decision on the President's rule (Article 356) as it laid down clear guidelines that the floor test is final to prove the majority and the Governor's actions are subject to judicial scrutiny. In 2006, in Rameshwar Prasad vs Union of India with reference to the dissolution of Bihar state legislative assembly, the court firmly made it clear that the Governor's individual opinion cannot be a valid reason for the imposition of President's rule in any State. Post Read Questions What are the broader constitutional implications of the Supreme Court's ruling in Tamil Nadu Governor R.N. Ravi's prolonged inaction over 10 crucial State Bills on Governor-State relations? What does the ruling imply about the evolving role of the judiciary in interpreting executive powers at the state level? Why is the absence of a definitive timeline in Article 200 seen as problematic in Centre-State relations? How do constitutional provisions aim to balance the Governor's formal authority with the democratic functioning of the elected state government? (Dr. Akhil Kumar is a PhD in Political Science from University of Hyderabad.)
Indian Express
23-04-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Role of Panchayati Raj in strengthening local governance
(The Indian Express has launched a new series of articles for UPSC aspirants written by seasoned writers and scholars on issues and concepts spanning History, Polity, International Relations, Art, Culture and Heritage, Environment, Geography, Science and Technology, and so on. Read and reflect with subject experts and boost your chance of cracking the much-coveted UPSC CSE. In the following article, Dr. Akhil Kumar explores the evolution of the Panchayati Raj Institutions.) Recognising the significant role of panchayats in local governance, the government on April 9 launched the Panchayat Advancement Index (PAI) – 'a key metric for assessing progress at the grassroots level and aiding in the formulation of localised strategies and targets for inclusive rural development'. Additionally, the 2024 index published by the Union Ministry of Panchayati Raj and the effort towards addressing the practice of 'Pradhan Pati' or 'Mukhiya Pati' speaks volumes about the significance attached to the Panchayat Raj Institutions in strengthening an inclusive grassroots governance. But how has this institution evolved from traditional panchayats to constitutional local bodies over time ? Let's explore. Evolution of Panchayati Raj Institutions The Panchayati Raj Institutions play a very important role in the rural hinterland of India in the decentralisation of power and governance to the grassroots level. While these local self-governing bodies were formally institutionalised and strengthened through the 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments in 1992 – conferring the constitutional status upon rural local bodies (panchayats) and urban local bodies (municipalities) – their origins dates back to times immemorial. Traces of early forms of the panchayat raj system can be found in Vedas, Kautilya's Arthashastra, the Mauryan empire and other historical sources. Over the decades, the institutions of the panchayat raj system have undergone significant changes in the pre and post-independence years. During British colonial rule, Lord Mayo's resolution of 1870 ushered in the decentralisation of power and advocated the devolution of finances to develop the villages and towns. Lord Ripon's reforms in 1882 are considered a 'pioneering' framework for local governance in British India, as they recommended that the smallest administrative units must be placed under the auspices of local boards. Later, in 1909, the Royal Commission on Decentralisation, led by Sir Henry William, examined the functioning of these local boards and identified the lack of representation and inadequate powers as major constraints in their effective functioning. The commission made a few recommendations which were later incorporated in the the Government of India Act, 1919. After attaining independence in 1947, India laid greater emphasis on decentralisation of administration to promote local self-governance in its villages. On November 25, 1948, K Santhanam, a Gandhian and a member of the Constituent Assembly, insisted upon the Chairman of the Drafting Committee to insert/include an amendment in support of this vision. As a result, during the framing of the Constitution, a special provision on decentralisation was embedded in the Directive Principles of State Policy under Part IV in Article 40. The article states: 'The State shall take steps to organise village panchayats and endow them with such powers and authority as may be necessary to enable them to function as units of self-government.' Community development programme, precursor to panchayats As a precursor to the Panchayati Raj Institutions, the community development programme was initiated by the government during the First Five-Year Plan (1951-55). After independence, India grappled with several challenges, including food scarcity, poverty, and unemployment. The community development programme was introduced as a remedial measure aimed at involving all communities in rural areas in the process of development. Prior to the inception of this programme, India had undertaken certain community development projects. Some notable initiatives were the Sriniketan Institute of Rural Reconstruction by Rabindranath Tagore in 1921/1922; the Marthandam Experiment by Dr. Spencer Hatch through the Young Men's Christian Association (YMCA) in Kanyakumari, Tamil Nadu; and the Firka Development Scheme by T. Prakasam in 1946 in the Madras presidency, to name a few. Although major activities such as agricultural development (including land development, supply of fertilisers and pesticides), irrigation (such as digging wells), laying roads, prevention of epidemics were taken up under the community development programme, it did not yield the desired results. The programme faced challenges like lack of people's participation, bureaucratic red-tapism, and corruption. A study conducted by the Planning Commission found that artisans were neglected, and that only areas with existing irrigation facilities and large landholdings benefitted. Three-tier system Hence, the government constituted a committee in 1957 under the chairmanship of Balwant Rai Mehta to suggest improvements. In its report, the committee suggested the decentralisation of governance from the village to the district level. It proposed a three-tier structure – at the lowest level, the Village Panchayats, at the intermediary (taluk or block) level, Panchayat Samitis, and at the highest level, the Zilla Parishads. Rajasthan emerged as the first state to implement the proposed model on October 2, 1959, followed by Andhra Pradesh in November 1959. To address the ineffective implementation of the proposed three-tier structure and to identify the lacunae in the functioning of these Panchayati Raj Institutions, a new committee was constituted under the chairmanship of Ashok Mehta in 1977 during the tenure of the first non-Congress government led by the Janata party. The committee recommended replacing the three-tier structure with a two-tier system, with Mandal Panchayats at the bottom and the Zilla Parishads at the top. It also advocated for the reservation of seats for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes based on their population to safeguard their interests. Most importantly, it endorsed the participation of political parties in panchayat raj affairs. However, the implementation of these recommendations remained limited due to factors such as maintaining uniformity in a diverse nation and finances and other constraints. Subsequently, several committees were formed over the years to review the functioning of the Panchayati Raj Institutions from time to time such as Hanumantha Rao Committee (1983), GVK Rao Committee (1985), L M Singhvi Committee (1986), P K Thungan Committee (1989) and Harlal Singh Kharra Committee (1990). Evaluating the Functioning of panchayats From the late 1980s onwards, the government made several attempts to empower Panchayati Raj Institutions by granting them constitutional status, with various amendments introduced in 1989, 1990, and 1991. It was during the tenure of the P V Narasimha Rao government when the goal was finally achieved in December 1992, with both Houses of Parliament passing the amendment which was ratified by 17 state assemblies. Thereafter, two new parts were added to the Constitution: Part IX for 'The Panchayats,' and Part IX A for 'The Municipalities'. According to the Ministry of Panchayati Raj's Annual Report 2024-25, there are 2,55,397 gram panchayats, 6,742 intermediary panchayats, and 665 district panchayats in India. To evaluate the functioning of the Panchayati Raj Institutions, the government devised the Panchayat Devolution Index to assess every state's performance of its local bodies across various dimensions such as finances, accountability, capacity building and others. This index was based on the concept paper presented by V N Alok and Laveesh Bhandari in 2004, which outlined three dimensions: Functions, Finances, and Functionaries (3Fs). Later, three other parameters – Capacity Building, Accountability, and Framework – were added to the index. In the recently released Panchayat Devolution Index, Karnataka secured the top position followed by states such as Kerala, Tamil Nadu and others. The Ministry of Panchayati Raj released this index based on a study conducted by the Indian Institute of Public Administration (IIPA). The index also identified several challenges in the functioning of these institutions such as the lack of financial autonomy, financial constraints, transparency, inadequate human resources, holding elections and updating electoral rolls. The Ministry also introduced the e-Gram Swaraj application to enhance the functioning of Panchayat activities. However, the lack of digital literacy came out as a major constraint, limiting its ability to strengthen the institutions. Such factors hinder the Panchayati Raj Institutions from functioning effectively and executing various socio-economic welfare programmes introduced by the governments to strengthen grassroots governance. Post Read Questions What were the earliest references to local self-governance? How did colonial administrative reforms, such as Lord Mayo's resolution of 1870, shape the early structure of village governance? The 73rd amendment to the Constitution is seen as one of the landmark developments in India's journey as a constitutional republic, establishing the panchayati raj system. Comment. How does the Ministry of Panchayati Raj assess the performance of these institutions across different states? What are the core dimensions of the Panchayat Devolution Index, and how has it evolved since its inception in 2004? How does the e-Gram Swaraj application aim to improve Panchayat functioning? Despite constitutional backing and digital interventions, why do Panchayati Raj Institutions still struggle with financial autonomy and transparency? Suggest the way forward.
