The evolution of Delhi’s governance structure - Hindustan Times
close_game
close_game

The evolution of Delhi’s governance structure

ByShakti Sinha
Mar 20, 2021 06:17 PM IST

A recent amendment will dilute the powers of the elected government. But there is a long history, and global context, of the challenges of governance of a capital city

By introducing an amendment bill to the Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi Act, 1991, the Centre has clearly indicated that it wants to assert its authority over the Delhi government in its day-to-day functioning. Once the bill is passed and becomes law, the Delhi government will have to seek the concurrence of the Lieutenant-Governor (L-G) for all its executive actions. This will also redefine the powers of Delhi’s legislative assembly.

Delhi’s confusing organisational structure does lead to lack of a unified, coherent planning and execution process, quite visible to the plain eye. Cities, as engines of economic growth, need clearer lines of command and accountability (HTPHOTO)
Delhi’s confusing organisational structure does lead to lack of a unified, coherent planning and execution process, quite visible to the plain eye. Cities, as engines of economic growth, need clearer lines of command and accountability (HTPHOTO)

Expectedly, Delhi’s chief minister (CM), Arvind Kejriwal, and the Congress have strongly criticised this move, with former finance (and home) minister, P Chidambaram, saying that the city government will be reduced to the level of a municipality. There is no doubt that the autonomy the Kejriwal government enjoyed since the Supreme Court (SC) judgment of July 4, 2018, will be curbed if the bill is passed. The SC, then, effectively reduced the powers of L-G to that of state governors, who act on the advice of the elected government — except on three reserved subjects of police, public order and land, where L-G has discretion. It was because of this limited discretion that SC was careful to say L-G was not the governor, but “an Administrator in a limited sense”. The court further ruled that L-G should not routinely sit in judgment on decisions taken by the elected government.

Hindustan Times - your fastest source for breaking news! Read now.

Those arguing for greater political accountability in the running of the city will be upset by the bill as, in this case, the elected component is being shortchanged. There is, no doubt, politics behind the decision, but that alone does not explain the move. It is useful to see how the system functioned since elected governments came into play with the 1993 assembly elections. Till Kejriwal decided not to seek L-G’s approval, all governments sought L-G’s approval on specific policies and important decisions. This was because, while Article 239AA of the Constitution said that L-G shall act on “aid and advice” of the elected government, it also allowed for L-G to refer to the president any matter where there was a difference of opinion with a minister.

Under the rules of business of the Government of India, the minister concerned exercises the power of the president; in this case, it is the home minister. Pending a decision, if the matter was urgent, L-G could go ahead and take action. This provision was taken to mean that L-G must be aware of the actions of the elected government before their execution, and, therefore, L-G’s prior approval was taken. Kejriwal successfully challenged this logic in SC after being rebuffed by the Delhi High Court.

Chidambaram’s criticism has validity but as home minister, with a Congress CM in Delhi, he did rule on matters when L-G and CM had differences, most famously in case of the flyover on Outer Ring Road at Vasant Vihar. My own limited experience of working in the Delhi government has been that L-G routinely went along with the government’s decisions, unless these were egregious, or there were strong personal reasons.

Going beyond the immediate, there are two key issues.

One, large countries, especially those with a federal/quasi-federal polity, have great difficulty in allowing their capital cities to function as regular provinces. Washington DC’s residents got the right to vote in presidential elections only in 1961. Their only representative in the House of Representatives is a delegate-at-large who has no voting rights. They have no representation in the Senate. And remember, this is a country which was founded on the concept of “No Taxation without Representation”. The city has an elected mayor and a 13-member elected council, but while they can propose the city’s budget, the Congress approves it.

There is occasionally a desultory demand to convert DC into a state but this has never been seriously considered. Canberra is another federally-run capital, with an elected legislative assembly and a CM, such as Delhi. However, they essentially deal with health, education and the environment. The assembly is competent to make laws, but these can be superseded by the national parliament.

According to the official website, the mayor of London “has a duty to set out plans and policies for London covering transport, planning and development, housing, economic development and regeneration, culture health inequalities and a range of environmental issues including climate change and air quality”. However, the mayor does prepare the budget for these activities as well as for the police and fire brigade. The 25-member elected Greater London Assembly can only overturn the mayor’s budget by a two-third majority. It also scrutinises the mayor’s proposal and has a monthly question hour at which the mayor, transport and police commissioner explain their actions.

Right from the time Delhi was created as a Chief Commissioner’s Province by the British, the Centre has controlled the police, land and law and order. In independent India, Delhi went from a part C State to a Union Territory, with a Metropolitan Council (1967) and later an assembly (1993), but it has been the chief commissioner (later L-G) who has been its administrator under the Constitution, with only the 2018 SC decision that allowed the elected government to function autonomously on all but three subjects. The present amendment restores the older position. Even Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s government tried twice, but failed to give Delhi statehood, or even additional powers, though it was a key party promise. Non-Bharatiya Janata Party ministers vehemently opposed the idea as they said it would be incongruous for a national government to function in a territory where it did not have control.

The second question is how to better manage our cities. Most state capitals and major cities have state government-run development authorities that have taken over considerable municipal functions. Sometimes, there are separate bodies for water supply and sewage directly under the state government. Unlike London, no Indian municipality has any authority over the police. Most importantly, it is the state government-appointed municipal commissioners who are the chief executives of municipal bodies, with the mayors basically performing the role of speaker of the elected bodies.

Delhi’s position is more complicated, with four municipal corporations functioning under the home ministry, with some role for the housing and urban affairs ministry and the Delhi government. The Cantonment Board functions under the defence ministry. Both the Delhi government and the municipal bodies have similar responsibilities — running schools, hospitals, giving old age pensions and so on. The central government-controlled Delhi Development Authority manages all land matters, including land use. This confusing organisational structure does lead to lack of a unified, coherent planning and execution process, quite visible to the plain eye. Cities, as engines of economic growth, need clearer lines of command and accountability.

To close with Chidambaram, he chose to go with the CM Sheila Dikshit, overruling L-G Tejinder Khanna on the elevated road issue. The road, once completed, caused more havoc than before, as L-G predicted. Much later, a parallel elevated road had to be constructed at considerably extra cost. Every car needs a brake, but it must be applied wisely.

Shakti Sinha is a retired Indian Administrative Service Officer who served in the Delhi government, and is the author of Vajpayee: The Years that Changed India

The views expressed are personal

Unveiling 'Elections 2024: The Big Picture', a fresh segment in HT's talk show 'The Interview with Kumkum Chadha', where leaders across the political spectrum discuss the upcoming general elections. Watch Now!
SHARE THIS ARTICLE ON
Share this article
SHARE
Story Saved
Live Score
OPEN APP
Saved Articles
Following
My Reads
Sign out
New Delhi 0C
Thursday, March 28, 2024
Start 14 Days Free Trial Subscribe Now
Follow Us On