Local government is the tier of government administration which is closest to the people as compared to the other tiers – national, state and regional /district level. It is a system under which the people of a locality possess certain responsibilities of public local affairs, and generating money to meet their expenses. The evolution of local self government is divided into four periods.
(A) Ancient : paura, nigama, pauga, and gana .
- Paura was a form of urban self-government that existed in the Mauryan Empire. It was a municipal corporation that was responsible for the administration of cities and towns. The Paura was headed by a Mayor who was elected by the citizens of the city. The Paura had various departments, such as the Department of Revenue, Department of Public Works, and Department of Law and Order.
- Nigama was another form of urban self-government that existed in ancient India. It was similar to Paura but was more focused on trade and commerce. Nigama was also headed by a Mayor and had various departments for the administration of the city.
- Pauga was a rural self-government system that existed in ancient India. It was a village republic that was governed by a council of elders. The council was responsible for the administration of the village and the resolution of disputes. The Pauga system was based on the principles of democracy, with all members of the community having an equal say in the decision-making process.
- Gana was another form of self-government that existed in ancient India. It was a confederacy of villages that was governed by a council of representatives from each village. The council was responsible for the administration of the confederacy, including the resolution of disputes between villages.
These ancient forms of local self-government in India played an important role in the development of Indian society and culture. They provided a platform for people to participate in the decision-making process and promote community welfare. These systems also served as a source of inspiration for modern-day local self-government in India.
Kautilya says Nagaraka or Puramukhya was responsible for city administration with the assistance of Gopa or Athanika.
(B) Medieval :
The Kotwal was a medieval officer who served as the chief of police in a city or town. The term ‘Kotwal’ is derived from the Persian word ‘Kotwali,’ which means a police station. The Kotwal was responsible for maintaining law and order in the city, collecting taxes, and supervising the marketplaces.
The Kotwal was appointed by the ruler or the local administrator of the city. The appointment was usually made after consulting the local council or the merchants’ guild. The Kotwal was assisted by a team of constables, who were responsible for patrolling the city and enforcing the law.
The Kotwal had a significant role to play in the administration of the city. He was responsible for maintaining peace and order, protecting the city from external threats, and resolving disputes between the citizens. The Kotwal also had the power to punish offenders, collect taxes, and regulate the markets.
(C) British :
Madras was the first city to have a local government established under a charter, dated December 30, 1687, issued by the Company .The Municipal Corporation, which came into existence on September 29, 1688, was to consist of a Mayor, 12 Alderman and 60 to 120 Burgesses. The company declared in the charter that it wanted to encourage people of all nations and all sects of religion residing within the
limits of the corporation and that the Alderman should be form among the heads and chiefs of all respective castes. The Burgesses were also to be both from Europeans and Indians. The Mayor ship was confined to the Englishmen. The Madras Corporation was given powers to raise money by taxing the inhabitants.
The Act of 1842 was the first formal measure for organizing municipal institutions, but initially it was confined to Bengal Presidency. Under the Act any town could constitute a committee
Lord Ripon’s resolution 1882 : provision for various matters such as at least two-third members of the municipalities be non-officials, system of election, government control in respect to sanctioning powers, advice and ultimate suspension (if nothing worked), non-officials as chairman, local revenue resources, etc. Several taxes such as octoroi, house tax and professional tax were introduced and primary functions of construction, upkeep and lighting of roads, public health and education were fixed.
The resolution was aimed at introducing a number of administrative reforms in India, particularly with regards to local self-government. It was based on the principle of decentralization of power and sought to transfer some of the administrative powers from the colonial government to the local bodies.
The resolution proposed the establishment of local self-government institutions, such as municipal councils, district boards, and village panchayats, which would be responsible for the administration of local areas. These bodies would be empowered to levy and collect taxes, and to use the funds collected for local development.
The resolution also proposed the establishment of an elected majority in the local bodies, with the participation of non-official members. This was a significant departure from the existing system, which was dominated by British officials.
The resolution was welcomed by the Indian National Congress, which saw it as a step towards self-government and freedom. However, it was opposed by many British officials and the conservative sections of the Indian society, who saw it as a threat to the colonial rule.
Despite the opposition, Lord Ripon’s resolution of 1882 paved the way for the establishment of local self-government institutions in India. It laid the foundation for the subsequent reforms, including the Decentralisation Commission (1909) recommended the elimination of official control over municipal bodies , Montagu-Chelmsford Report (1918) which laid stress on the educative principle, and extended franchise and popular control in local bodies. Government of India Act of 1919 and the Government of India Act of 1935, which further strengthened the local self-government system in India.
(D) Post-Independence period.
The advent of Independence opened a new chapter in the socio-economic reforms embodied in the Directive Principles of States Policy mentioned in Part IV of the Constitution
National Commission on Urbanisation was set up in 1985. The Commission gave detailed recommendations about the measures required for strengthening the management and administration of urban local government institutions in the country.
The 73th and 74th Constitution Amendment Act 1992 : The Act provides for mandatory as well as discretionary provisions which were to be adopted compulsorily throughout the country. The Act facilities the democratic decentralization, and stability to urban local government units is aimed to accomplish the objective of being administration closer to the people .The important aspects of the seventy-fourth Amendment are:
- regular conduct of elections and limited period of supersession,
- political representation and reservation of seats for the weaker sections,
- Proportionate seat reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
- Reservation of not less than 33% seats for women.
- proposed devolution of functions,
- arrangements for adequacy of finance through fiscal review, assignment of revenue authorities, and fiscal transfers.
for more detail see Evolution of URBAN LOCAL BODIES in INDIA
Register & Download PDF for Educational Purposes Only
Urban Development Management Study notes for M. plan Sem-III
Evolution of URBAN LOCAL BODIES in INDIA.pdf
Register as member and login to download attachment [pdf] by right-click the pdf link and Select “Save link as” use for Educational Purposes Only
Disclaimer
Information on this site is purely for education purpose. The materials used and displayed on the Sites, including text, photographs, graphics, illustrations and artwork, video, music and sound, and names, logos, IS Codes, are copyrighted items of respective owners. Front Desk is not responsible and liable for information shared above.