Multiple State Capitals and Governance: RSTV – Big Picture

Rajya Sabha TV programs like ‘The Big Picture’, ‘In Depth’ and ‘India’s World’ are informative programs that are important for UPSC preparation. In this article, you can read about the discussions held in the ‘Big Picture’ episode on “Multiple State Capitals and Governance” for the IAS exam.

Multiple State Capitals and Governance: RSTV – Big Picture:- Download PDF Here

Anchor: Frank Rausan Pereira

Guests: B K Chaturvedi, Former Cabinet Secretary; J Sai Deepak, Advocate, Supreme Court; K V Prasad, Sr Associate Editor, The Tribune; Sushil Chandra Tripathi, Former Principal Secretary, Finance, Uttar Pradesh, GOI.

Context:

The Andhra Pradesh Assembly has passed the Capital Region Development Authority Repeal Bill 2020 and the AP Decentralization and Inclusive Development of all Regions Bill 2020.

Background:

• The new government had set up an expert committee on development strategies for Andhra Pradesh.
• The expert committee had come out with its recommendations. It had suggested the setting up of legislative, executive and judicial capitals in Amaravati, Visakhapatnam and Kurnool respectively.
• The state government had approved the ‘High Power Committee’ report.

Previous experience of Andhra Pradesh:

• Andhra Pradesh was bifurcated in 2014 to give rise to the new state of Telangana. The major contributing factor for the demand of Telangana was the feeling that it was neglected in terms of development as compared to other coastal regions.
• When the state was divided, the issue of Hyderabad became a concern. The fact that the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh had been overly dependent on Hyderabad for financial resources and that the bifurcation had awarded Hyderabad to Telangana had become a major issue for Andhra Pradesh.
• The above two experiences have brought to the forefront the issue of all-round development, and the present proposal seems to be in this direction.

Similar examples:

• In the Indian context, there are examples where the High Court (HC) of the state is not necessarily located in the capital city where the Legislative Assembly is based. Example: In the case of Uttar Pradesh, the HC is at Allahabad while the Legislative Assembly is based in Lucknow. Similar scenarios are observed in the case of Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh also.
• But it is noteworthy that the above examples were mainly based on historical reasons and had nothing to do with administrative decentralization. Also, the examples involved only different locations for the Judiciary and not for the legislative and executive as in the present proposal.

Details:

• The bill approved the proposal to establish the Amaravati Metropolitan Development Authority in the place of AP Capital Regional Development Authority (APCRDA).
• This bill aims for decentralization in terms of administration.
• The government claims that the decentralization will bring inclusive development in Andhra Pradesh.
• Andhra Pradesh has both the Legislative Assembly and the Legislative Council. The opposition in the state Legislative Council has expressed its intent to block the bill in the Legislative Council.
• There are reports that the government may consider the money bill route to ensure that the proposed bill will not need the approval of the Legislative Council and ensure its passage.

Concerns:

Not suitable for the Indian system of governance:

• The Constitution provides for a parliamentary form of government both at the centre and state levels in India.
• The parliamentary system requires close coordination between the legislature and the executive.
• The proposal to have the legislature and executive at different places will lead to an unnecessary drain of resources for the state given that the ministers who perform both executive, as well as, legislative functions will need to constantly move between the two capitals at the expense of the state resources.
• Coordination between ministers and legislative business becomes a big challenge.

Other alternatives available:

• The present proposal claims that it will lead to more inclusive development by decentralizing administration. But there are genuine concerns on how relevant or effective such a proposal would be in ensuring the development of all regions.
• Notably, however, there are several other alternatives available for ensuring a more balanced growth in the state.
  • Decentralization to the grass root levels like the districts and panchayats and granting them more powers would be more effective measures for inclusive growth. Several pieces of research have pointed out that the quality of life is more affected by such decentralization to lower levels.
  • Focusing on industrial development and infrastructure development would be better policy interventions for balanced growth.

Political decision:

• The proposal leads to no administrative convenience but appears to cater to only populist sentiments at the expense of taxpayers’ money.
• The argument that the proposed Amaravati was located far away from the southern regions of the state does not seem agreeable given that there are much bigger states in India with only one capital.
• This might set a precedent for demands in other states as well.
• A political decision regarding the issue of development is indeed a concern.

Costs involved:

• A lot of investment has been made into Amaravati and the current proposal will require similar investments in the other two cities as well. Given the high capital costs they will entail, this would only further burden the fragile financial resources of the state.

Land pooling from farmers:

• The main people at the forefront of the protests against the new proposal are mainly the farmers and people of the villages in and around Amaravati who had given up their lands for the proposed capital at Amaravati.
• Approximately 33000 acres of land was pooled in for the city.
• Unlike the usual approach of exercising the power of eminent domain by the government to pool land, the farmers were made part of the business plan to develop Amaravati.
• The recent repeal of the Capital Region Development Authority Bill would leave the farmers in the lurch.
• It is highly likely that cases would be filed in the courts against the repealing. Given the Judicial delays, it might add to the confusion and uncertainty among the farmers.

Government’s moves:

• In an effort to overcome the opposition’s higher strength in the Legislative Council, the government intends to present the bill in the form of a money bill to ensure that it will not need the Council’s concurrence.
  • This move will certainly be challenged in the courts. In the Aadhar judgment, Justice Chandrachud’s dissent note holds that using the money bill route to overcome dissent in Rajya Sabha is bad. A similar observation can also be applied to the legislative councils in the states.
• There have been some sources that have pointed out the possibility of the government exploring the option of abolishing the Legislative Council to ensure that its bill gets passed and does not get stuck in the Council.
  • There are many advantages offered by legislative councils:
    • It can act as the House of Elders and guide and assist the Legislative Assembly in its legislative business through the wisdom of its members. This would help the government in governance.
    • It helps involve subject matter experts into the administration process, by nominating them to the legislative councils. They would otherwise not be able to manage the day-to-day politics and get into the legislatures through popular votes.
  • There are strong arguments for the abolishing of legislative councils in the states:
    • Not all states in India have legislative councils. They are not mandatory as per the constitutional provisions.
    • Legislative councils have been generally used to accommodate politicians who have lost in the assembly elections and hence are not serving the intended purpose of including experts from various fields.
    • There are concerns regarding the utility of the councils given the low value addition they offer to the legislative process.
    • The legislative councils in some instances have been used by the opposition to delay the government bills.
• Yet, the intention behind the move to abolish the upper house in the case of Andhra Pradesh is not right.

Way forward:

• Given the fact that the present proposal leads to more concerns than benefits, there is a need for reconsideration on the part of the government. All wings of the state involving the legislature, executive and judiciary need to sit together for effectiveness.
• There is the need to evaluate the performance of the legislative councils and suggest suitable corrections in its functioning to make it truly effective. The upper house of the state legislatures may be retained in view of the benefits it offers.
• There is the need to restructure and reorganize the election process to the legislative councils. Provisions must be made for the inclusion of management professionals, engineers, doctors, economists and other subject matter experts in the legislative council.

Multiple State Capitals and Governance: RSTV – Big Picture:- Download PDF Here

Related Links:

Read previous RSTV articles here.