sfc.rajasthan.gov.in · 2015-06-30 · i need assessment study of urban local bodies and panchayati...

i

Need Assessment Study of Urban Local Bodies and Panchayati Raj

Institutions, Rajasthan conducted by Shiv Charan Mathur

Social Policy Research Institute, Jaipur

Dear Sir/Madam

The Fourth State Finance Commission entrusted the

responsibility of conducting a study on “Need Assessment of Urban Local

Bodies and Panchayati Raj Institutions” to the SCM Social Policy Research

Institute for taking up an assessment of the core functions identified by the

Commission. The objective of the study is to ensure that devolution is made in

accordance with the ground realities and the funds so devolved are efficiently

utilized by the Local Bodies for core functions in their respective area.

The Fourth State Finance Commission is expected to present it’s

final report to Her Excellency, the Governor of Rajasthan latest by30th

September, 2013. Before finalization of the report, Commission invites your

valuable views/suggestions on the recommendations/findings contained in the

Study Report.

The Study Report is as follows:

ii

Need Assessment of U LBs & Panchayati Raj Institutions

Contents

Foreword iii

Preface & Acknowledgements iv

List of Acronyms v-vi

1.

Introduction

1-26

2. Research Methodology 27-35

3. The Status of Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) 36-65

4. The Status of Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) 66-112

5. Norms for the Core Functions for the PRIs 113-136

6. Norms for the Core Functions for the Urban Local Bodies 137-157

7. Human Resource and Staffing in Urban Local Bodies 158-171

8. Success Stories 172-189

9. Summary & Suggestions 190-204

Annexures 205-263

1. Tools for PRIs 205-229

2. Tools for ULBs

230-263

iii


Foreword

Under the 73rd and 74th amendments of the Constitution, a mandatory provision was

made for constituting a Finance Commission by the State Government to review the

financial position of the Local Bodies - both urban and rural. It is praiseworthy that

the Fourth State Finance Commission of Rajasthan under the Chairmanship of Dr.

B.D. Kalla, took the initiative of conducting an in-depth enquiry into the physical and

financial needs of the local bodies in major sectors and the funds required for each

sector thereof. The Commission delegated the study on the Need Assessment of

Urban Local Bodies and Panchayati Raj Institutions to the SCM Social Policy

Research Institute for taking up an assessment of the core functions identified by the

Commission. This included assessment of the financial needs, examination of the

efficacy and gaps in implementation of the core functions and suggesting physical

and financial norms for these functions.

The present report is the first of its kind in the State of Rajasthan and I am sure that

this would immensely help the Finance Commission in evolving a formula for

equitable distribution of the grants to be given to the third tier of governance.

Further, the report also comes up with suggestions to enhance the efficiency of the

local bodies so that the benefits really accrue to the common people as desired by the

Constitution of India.

(Dr. Sudhir Varma) Director, SCM SPRI

iv


Preface & Acknowledgments

Needs assessment is practically ubiquitous today among planners and designers, often identified as the first step in any planning or design process. The discrepancy between the present condition and desired condition is measured to appropriately identify the need. The need assessment is a process undertaken with an aim to enhance the efficiency of a system. The Fourth State Finance Commission entrusted the responsibility of Need Assessment of Urban Local Bodies and Panchayati Raj Institutions to the SCM Social Policy Research Institute for taking up an assessment of the core functions identified by the Commission. The aim is to evolve formulae for an equitable allocation of grants to these decentralized development units - panchayats and urban local bodies. The task was a huge challenge keeping in view the large scope as well as a number of sectors that needed to be consulted during the process of the study. Keeping in view, the objectives and research questions, detailed tools were designed, field tested and adopted to the local settings. A two day intensive training programme was conducted at the Institute for the investigators. The investigators were then put on observed field work. Data was collected according to the prescribed methodology for the study. Data thus collected, were carefully entered, cleaned and analyzed. The findings have been tabulated and suitably documented. We believe the findings would be useful for the State Finance Commission for ensuring that the devolution is made in accordance with the ground realities and assure that they are efficiently utilized. On behalf of the institute, I express our deep sense of gratitude to Hon‘ble Dr BD Kalla, Chairperson, Fourth State Finance Commission for trusting our abilities and supporting us throughout the study. The support of the SFC Members, Shri Raj Pal Singh Shekhawat and Dr JP Chandelia are gratefully acknowledged. A special mention of Dr PL Agarwal, Member-Secretary, SFC whose interest and involvement in the Study was a source of inspiration for us. Thanks are also due to Shri SS Rajawat and SL Jain for their valuable support. The study would not have been competed without the support of the elected representatives at all levels, CEOs, BDOs, EOs and officials of the PRIs and ULBs who continuously supported us by providing the required information despite their busy and demanding schedules. At the Institute, we are indebted to Shri Pradeep Mathur, Chairman for his support. Wirds fail me to express the gratitude to Dr. Sudhir Varma, Director, SCM SPRI for his constant guidance, supervision and contribution in writing the report. Thanks are due to the team membersespecially Ms Sonu Pareek, Ms. Neha,Shri Pradeep Sharma, Shri Yogeshwar Singh, Shri Ranveer Singh, Shri Yogesh Chhipa, Shri Ramakant and Shri Vinod Kewalramani.

(Manish Tiwari) Joint-Director, SCM SPRI

v


List of Acronyms

BOT Build Operate and Transfer

BPL Below Poverty Line

BSR Basic Scheduled Rate

CC Road Cement Concrete Road

CEO Chief Executive Officer

CFC Central Finance Commission

CFL Compact Fluorescent Lamp

DDP Desert Development Programme

DLB Department of Local Bodies

DPAP Drought Prone Area Program

DRDA District Rural Development Authority

EFC Eleventh Finance Commission

EO Executive Officer

FGD Focus Group Discussion

GOI Government of India

GOR Government of Rajasthan

GPF General Provident Fund

JDA Jaipur Development Authority

JMC Jaipur Municipal Corporation

LED Light Emitting Diode

MNRE Ministry of New and Renewable Energy

MNREGS Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme

NIUA National Institute for Urban Affairs

NTR Net Tax Revenue

O&M Operations and Maintenance

PHED Public Health and Engineering Department

PPP Public-Private Partnership

PRI Panchayati Raj Institutions

PSP Single Phase Pump

vi


PWD Public Works Department

RIICO Rajasthan State Industrial Development and Investment Corporation

RIUA Rajasthan Institute for Urban Development

RUIDP Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development Project

RLB Rural Local Bodies

RPSC Rajasthan Public Service Commission

RSEB Rajasthan State Electricity Board

RVVNL Rajya Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited

SFC State Finance Commission

SGSY Swarn Jayanti Gramin Swarozgar Yojana

SHG Self Help Group

SPV Solar Photovoltaic

SWM Solid Waste Management

TAD Tribal Area Development

TFC Thirteenth Finance Commission

UDT Urban Development Tax

UIT Urban Improvement Trust

ULB Urban Local Bodies

7


Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) and Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) have

acquired Constitutional status after the enactment of the Constitution (Seventy-third

and Seventy Fourth) Amendment Act. The Amendment Act' 92 in Part IX and IXA

has made mandatory provisions in Article 243-I for constituting a Finance

Commission by the Government of the State to review the financial position of the

panchayats and to make recommendations to the Governor. The principles which

should govern the review are as follows:

A (i) Distribution between the State and the panchayats of the net

proceeds of the taxes, duties, tolls and fees leviable by the State which

may be divided between them under this Part and the allocation

between the panchayats at all levels of their respective shares of such

proceeds

(ii) Determination of the taxes, duties, tolls and fees which may be

assigned to, or appropriated by, the panchayats.

(iii) Grants-in-aid to the panchayats from the Consolidated Fund of the

State.

B Suggest measures needed to improve the financial

position of panchayats.

C Any other matter referred to the Finance Commission by the Governor in the

interests of sound finance of the panchayats.

Introduction

8


Article 243 (y) also makes similar provisions analogous to Article 243-I for

constituting a Finance Commission to review the financial position of the

municipalities and to make recommendations to the Governor as in the case of

panchayats.

The present Fourth State Finance Commission under the esteemed leadership

of Hon‘ble Dr. BD Kalla has desired to conduct a scientific inquiry into the present

minimum physical and financial needs of these bodies, funds required and the

financial gaps that need to be filled with the support of the grants by the

Commission. The aim is to evolve formulae for an equitable allocation of grants to

these decentralized development units- panchayats and urban local bodies.

The Commission had asked the Shiv Charan Mathur Social Policy Research

Institute, Jaipur vide their letter dated 29th February 2012 to take up a Need

Assessment Study of core functions of both the Urban Local Bodies as well as

Panchayati Raj Institutions. The following are the functions to be studied:-

(i) To take up a need assessment study of the core functions of the urban

local bodies and the panchayati raj institutions of the State. The core

functions, which the Institute has been asked to study, are the

following:-

(a) Cleaning of waste water drainage in public places (including public

conveniences).

(b) Disposal of solid waste

(c) Public lighting

(d) Sewerage

(e) Maintenance of roads, public properties, public parks and

community centres.

(f) Maintenance of cremation and burial grounds

(g) Providing drinking water

(h) Public health and sanitation

9


The Institute was expected to

i. Make an in-depth assessment of financial needs for

implementing these core functions

ii. Examine the efficacy and gaps in the implementation of these

functions &identify the problems faced by the PRIs and ULBs

iii. Suggest physical and financial norms for fulfilling the core

functions

iv. Suggest norms for allocation of funds by the State Finance

Commission

v. Suggest a staffing pattern for the ULBs and thePRIs to enable

them to perform the core functions regularly and effectively.

The present chapter details the present scenario of socio-economic

development of the State with a focus on the identified core issues, a general

summary of the recommendations of the earlier state commissions and a review of

literature.

About the State

Rajasthan, the largest State in the country in terms of geographical area, is

located in the north-western part of the country. It has a geographical area of

3,42,239 sq.km, which constitutes 10.41 per cent area of the country and 5.67 per cent

of national population (Census, 2011 : Provisional Population

Tables).Physiographically, the State can be divided into major four regions, namely

the western desert; and sandy plains, the Aravalli hills: running south-west to north-

east starting from Gujarat and ending in Delhi, the eastern plains: with rich alluvial

soils and the south-eastern plateau. Mahi, Chambal and Banas are the three major

rivers of the State. The State has varied climatic conditions ranging from the semi-

arid to the arid. It is administratively divided into 7 divisions and 33 districts.

10


State Profile

Rajasthan has 33 districts that are divided into 244 tehsils, 248 panchayat

samities, 9,177 village panchayats and 184 municipalities (Statistical Abstract, 2011

DES, GoR). The salient features of the State vis-a-vis India are given in the table

below:

Table 1.1

Indicator Source Rajasthan India

Total population Census 2011 6,86,21,012 1,21,01,93,422

Density (Per Sq. Km.) Census 2011 201 382

Decadal Growth (%) Rate Census 2011 21.44 17.64

Rural Decadal Growth Rate Census 2011 19.05 12.18

Urban Decadal Growth Rate Census 2011 29.26 31.80

Crude Birth Rate SRS 2011 26.7 22.1

Crude Death Rate SRS 2011 6.7 7.2

Total Fertility Rate SRS 2011 3.1 2.5

Infant Mortality Rate SRS 2011 55 Rural 61 Urban 31

47 Rural 51 Urban 31

Maternal Mortality Ratio SRS 2007 – 09 388 212

Sex Ratio Census 2011 926 940

Child Sex Ratio (0-6 Years) Census 2011 883 914

BPL Population (%) BPL Census-02 22.66 % NA

Scheduled Caste population Census 2001 9.69 million 166.64 million

Scheduled Tribe population Census 2001 7.10 million 84.33 million

Literacy Rate Census 2011 67.06 74.04

Female Literacy Rate Census 2011 52.7 65.5

Rural Female Literacy Rate Census 2011 46.3 58.8

The above table reveals that the socio-econmic indicators of the State

still lag behind thenational averages. Sex ratio of Rajasthan has shown an

increasing trend from 921 in 2001 to 926 in 2011. Yet it is significantly less

than the sex ratio of India i.e. 940 in 2001. The Child sex rate is worse at

883. The rural women the literacy rate is any which becoming a major

hurdle in conveying health information. The state has a literacy rate of

61.03 in 2001, which is also lower than national average of 65.38 recorded

11


in 2001. The literacy rate for females is only 52.7 for rural women the

literacy rate is only 46.3 which is becoming a major hurdle in conveying

health information.

Three primary demographic indicators elicited in recent nationwide

survey have revealed maternal mortality ratio of 388 per lakh live births,

(SRS 2004-06) infant mortality rate of 55 per thousand live births, and a

total Fertility Rate of 3.1 (SRS 2011).

Growing Needs of the Urban Population

As per details from the Census 2011, Rajasthan has a population of 6.86

crores, an increase from 5.65 crores in 2001. The population growth in this decade

was 21.44 percent while in the previous decade it was 28.33 percent. The pace of

growth has slowed down, but isstill higher than the all India level. The population of

Rajasthan formed 5.67 percent of the Indian population in 2011. In 2001, the figure

was 5.49 percent. Out of a total population of Rajasthan, 24.89% people live in urban

towns, population of which, in the last 10 years has increased by 29.26 percent. The

rural population growth rate recorded for the decade (2001-2011) was 19.05%. The

rate of growth in the urban area (29.3) is far more than the rural area.

Districts having the highest urban growth rates in 2011 are Kota (60.30),

Jaipur (52.51), Ajmer (40.09), Jodhpur (34.30), Bikaner (33.95), Churu (28.24) and

Ganganagar (27.20). The districts which experienced the largest migration from rural

areas to urban were Kota, Baran, Alwar, Jaipur, Sikar and Rajsamand. Looking to

the fast growing minimum needs of the urban areas in the core sectors these fast

growing districts may need special provision from the State Finance Commission.

Panchayati Raj Institutions

Though the Panchayati Raj Institutions have been in existence in India since

times immemorial, they have not yet achieved the dignity of empowered bodies at

the village level owing to several reasons. Perhaps they were more powerful before

12


the formal Panchayati Raj system came into existence on 2nd October, 1959 which

was followed by the 73rd Constitutional amendment in 1992. The period between

1959 and 1992 was merely symbolic with the idea of community development at its

peak – may be to fulfill Mahatma Gandhi‘s dream of village governance. The so

called elected bodies during this period suffered from prolonged supersessions

resulting in irregular elections as the Parliament and the Legislative Assemblies

feared erosion of their own political and administrative powers. The elected

Panchayati Raj bodies had extremely insufficient representation of weaker sections

like scheduled castes and scheduled tribes and women. Women perhaps were

present only as ornaments and were co-opted because hardly any was ever given a

ticket to fight elections. There was inadequate devolution of powers and almost no

financial resources. This was totally contrary to the Directive Principles of State

Policy which stated that the State shall take steps to organize village panchayats and

shall endow them with such powers and authority as may be necessary to enable

them to function as units of self-governance.

Keeping in view the historical blunders committed in the earlier experiments

and the the growing demand for decentralized governance system in a globalised

era, the Central Government in 1992 introduced the 73rd and 74th Amendments to

the Constitution. Many provisions were incorporated under the Amendments with

the intention of making panchayats and urban local bodies as self-governing

institutions.

However, we would like to emphasize that self-governance in the spirit of the

Constitution is missing even after 20 years of the amendments. The only feature

distinguish is regular elections to these bodies. The State Finance Commissions have

also come into existence and are devolving funds to the third tier every five years.

Another important reason for the Constitutional amendments was the

reservation for women in the third tier of local governance. This was a provision

brought about specially for bringing women as major policy planners at that level

so that they may benefit directly from the development process. It meant that a

13


proportionate grant from the State Finance Commissions should be spent for

improving their status.

It has been proved that the concept of core functions for women is different

from that of men. It may be pointed out that rural women might give the topmost

priority to drinking water followed by naalis flowing through the internal village

roads and men to public lighting and improving internal roads on which they ply

their animal or motor driven vehicles. Similarly, the urban women may prioritise

solid waste management and sanitation compared to men again preferring road

lights followed by public parks.

The funds flowing from the state or central level, not linked with any

programme or scheme, are very meagre and lack any devolution design. The

transfers are made at the convenience and mercy of State governments, sometimes as

when a financial year is ending.

A look at the financial position of Panchayati Raj districts in Rajasthan

The following tales indicate the financial status of PRIs in

Rajasthan and the poor efforts made to generate sources of own income. However,

we cannot blame only the PRIs for poor local tax efforts. They hardly have any fiscal

autonomy.

Table 1.2 Receipts from the State Government/DRDA

S.No. Year Zila Parishad Panchayat Samiti

Receipts from the State

Own Revenue Receipts from the

State

Own Revenue

1 2005-06 28222.00 166.81 50078.23 995.24

2 2006-07 30515.83 229.47 52627.28 996.57

3 2007-08 41406.97 234.19 45016.24 846.76

4 2008-09 57219.91 389.24 46095.24 992.01

14


(` in lakh)

Source:Memorandum for IVth SFC, on the basis of information from 32 Zilla Parishad & 22 Panchayat samities

The above table proves the near total depending on the State Government for

funds. The own revenue of the Zila Parishad was mere 0.5 percent of the total

Receipts from the State while it was about 2 percent at the panchayat samiti level.

Table 1.3 Grant Received by the PRIs during 2005-06 to 2009-10

(` in lakh)

2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 Total

Salary and Allowances 13495.92 13064.32 17462.58 24089.00 29950.08 98061.90

SFC - III 15757.00 18000.04 18010.00 18010.00 49079.00 118856.04

TFC 24600.00 22293.75 14606.25 36900.00 24600.00 123000.00

Other Schemes 78300.23 83143.11 86423.21 103315.15 123491.31 474673.01

Octroi Reimbursement 476.00 476.00 476.00 476.00 476.00 2380.00

Total 132629.00 136977.22 136978.04 182790.15 227596.39 816970.95

Source:Memorandum for IVth SFC, on the basis of information from 32 Zilla Parishad & 22 Panchayat samities

The above table reveals that the grants received by the PRIs show an

increasing trend from 2005-06 to 2009-10. The major heads include scheme grants

(58.1%), SFC and TFC Grant (29.6%) and salary component (12%). It indicates that

the capacity of the PRIs must be enhanced to effectively utilize increasing funds

being allotted to the PRIs. The Finanace Commission Grants are also an important

source of of grants to the PRIs and it must be ensured that they are untilized

efficiently so as to become a source of development in the rural areas.

It is also a worry that the expenditure incurred by these bodies is far less than

the meagre funds provided. The following statement for the years 2005-06 to 2009-10

reflects it:-

5 2009-10 79012.90 205.35 44478.41 1233.98

Total 236377.61 1225.06 238295.40 5064.56

15


Table 1.4 Income-Expenditure statement in Panchayati Raj Institution in Rajasthan

(` in lakh)

SN Head Zila Parishads

Panchayat Samitis

1. Income in Last Five Years

1. Tax Revenue 467.06 939.91

2. Non Tax Revenue 758.00 4124.65

Total (A) 1225.06 5064.56

2. Receipts from the State Government/DRDA (B) 236377.61 238295.40

Total Receipts (A+B) 237602.67 243359.96

3. Expenditure in Last Five Years

1. Salary and Allowances 13043.36 75459.56

2. Expenditure Development Works 144960.35 150821.47

3. Expenditure on Maintenance 709.14 2676.19

Total 158712.85 228957.22

Source: Department of Rural Development & Panchayati Raj, GoR

It is, obviously, a reflection in the efficiencies in execution of

projects by these bodies. It is indicated that a review of the capacity of the staff

available to these bodies needs to be carried out.

Urban Local Bodies

The Local self- government institutions have always existed in India in one

form or another. The present form of urban local government owes its genesis to the

British rule. The first such body called a Municipal Corporation was set up in

Madras in 1688 and was followed by the establishment of similar corporations in

Bombay and Calcutta in 1762. The tradition of local service delivery being the

16


explicit mandate for local government began with Samuel Laing, member of the

Viceroy‘s Council, in the Budget Speech (1861-62) proposing that local services

should be based on local resources. Lord Mayo‘s Resolution of 1870 introduced the

concept of elected representatives in the municipalities. Lord Ripon is considered to

be the founding father of urban local government as he devised the concept of

municipal authorities as units of self-government. His resolution of 18 May 1882 on

local self-government dealt with the constitution of local bodies, their functions,

finances and powers and laid the foundation of local self-government in modern

India. Since then the structure of municipal bodies has remained by and large the

same even though the number of urban areas has increased and their problems have

become more and more complex.

After independence, the Constitution of India was framed on federal

principles. Indian Constitution divided the government functions in three lists:

centre, state and concurrent. Local government bodies are covered in the State List.

Initially the extent of a municipality‘s power as well as the extent of government

control over a municipality/ municipal council depended on the statute enacted for

its creation. Presently, the statutes confer wider regulatory and supervisory powers

on the state government. This is due to two reasons: firstly, the Constitution does not

demarcate the power and the duties of the municipal authorities and secondly in the

absence of any clear-cut demarcation, it is obvious that state governments will tend

to control municipal authorities.

The Rural-Urban Relationship Committee set up by the Government of India

in 1963, pointed out that the local governments should not merely remain

instruments of political education and civic conscience but should play a role in the

promotion of social and economic development of local communities as well as be

an integral part of the Central Government. Entry 5 of the State list in the Seventh

Schedule of the Constitution of India gives legislative powers to the State with

regards to municipal laws, establishments, constitution, and powers of local

governments.

17


The functions of municipalities even during the British raj included public

work, maintenance of roads, provision of lighting, medical facilities and education,

etc. Today, sanitation is the biggest core function of urban local bodies. In Rajasthan,

health, education and drinking water are not in their domain.

As mentioned above, the financial position of local bodies has been very poor

in relation to the services and duties required of them ever since they came into

existence during the British Raj. In the opinion of the Simon Commission the main

causes of failure of local self government were lack of trained staff, inadequate

efforts of elected representatives in tapping resources through local taxes, and lack

of consistency between amount of grant-in-aid and financial responsibilities. All

these drawbacks still persist. With growing urbanisation, the concerns for

governance in the urban areas have assumed greater importance. Rajasthan ranks

twenty first in India in terms of urbanization. Rapid urbanisation has led to an

alarming deterioration in the quality of life of urban dwellers, who have to cope with

poor sanitation and disposal of solid waste, water shortage, pollution, poor transport

system, frequent epidemics, inadequate health facilities etc. Sewerage, sanitation,

waste water disposal and management of solid waste in the cities are dismal.

Table 1.5 Municipalities in Rajasthan

SN Level Numbers

1. Municipal Corporations 5

2. Municipal Councils 30

3. Municipal Board Grade II 19

4. Municipal Board Grade III 58

5. Municipal Board Grade IV 72

Total 184

Source:Annual Report, LSG Department, Government of Rajasthan, 2012

Presently, there are five Corporations, namely; Jaipur, Jodhpur, Kota, Ajmer

and Bikaner. The other categories are: - First class Municipal Councils (30) having a

population between one and five lakh. In his budget speech 2012 the Hon‘ble CM

announced all the Municipalities of District Headquarters were to be treated as

Municipal Councils thus raising the number of Municipal Council from 13 to 30.

Municipal Boards having a population below one lakh are further sub-divided into

18


(a) Second category (19) with population between 50000 to 99999 or Municipalities at

the District Headquarters (b) Third category (58) with population between 25000 and

49999 (c) Fourth category (72) with less than 25000 people.

Financial Condition of Urban Local Bodies

While the expenditure responsibilities of municipalities are increasing day by

day, their own efforts for revenue generation have more or less remained stagnant.

There is a complete mismatch between the expenditure responsibilities of urban

local bodies and their revenue augmentation efforts. Even after the 74th

Constitutional Amendment, the financial position of the municipal institutions in

Rajasthan has not improved commensurate with their functions and responsibilities.

Further, the position of the smaller municipalities is much worse, and at

times, they find it difficult to even meet their establishment costs. Their performance

has been dismal with regard to augmentation of resources to carry out these

functions. Even the statutory avenues of raising resources remained either

unexploited or under exploited, due to complete apathy of the public representatives

to resort to revenue augmentation measures. The ULBs with inadequate taxation

efforts, coupled with inefficient financial management, render the municipal services

far from a satisfactory level. One major hurdle faced by the ULBs is that they do not

have anything worth to tell the people on the quality of services provided by them to

ask for fresh user charges.

In spite of this indifferent attitude of the local bodies, the government is

continuously pouring money into the ULBs without suitable returns from them in

areas like sanitation, collection and disposal of waste, street lighting, sewerage

disposal, maintenance of municipal roads, etc. The poor performance of the ULBs is

in clear violation of the 74th Amendment which had required suitable action on all

19


these functions. SFC may like to decide to uphold the Constitutional obligation and

link its grants to a certain level of satisfactory work done by the recipients.

Today, with constantly bickering elected members in local bodies, it has

become extremely difficult to achieve even the minimum level of satisfaction in the

urban areas like manual scavenging, municipal roads, sanitation, sewerage, street

lighting, parking and public conveniences. In-fighting among the elected

representatives has led to most of the funds allocated remaining unutilized as may

be seen from figures below:

Table 1.6

(` in lakh)

SN Type of Body Income (2011-12)

Expenditure (2011-12)

% Utilisation

1 Municipal Councils 14811.93 7773.37 52.48

2 Municipality Grade II 4907.38 4681.76 95.4

3 Municipality Grade III 2006.45 1273.65 63.5

4 Municipality Grade IV 1108.06 930.31 83.9 Source: Department ofUrban Local Bodies, GoR

Efforts to generate own income have also been pathetic. The following figures

show it:

Table 1.7 Position of own Income in total Budget of the ULBs in Rajasthan

(` in crore)

Year Budgeted Amount

Actual Amount including Tax Advances

Own income Percentage

2008-09 2908.11 1730.35 93.14 5.38

2009-10 3497.72 1751.22 112.00 6.4

2010-11 3334.73 1990.00 317.00 1.6

Source: Department ofUrban Local Bodies, GoR

The Earlier State Finance Commissions

The Zakaria Committee report identified the essential function to be

discharged by ULBs and the requirement of financial resources for discharging these

20


functions. Since these estimates related to the year 1956-57, the National Institute of

Urban Affairs, in their report on Urban Development Strategy for the State of

Gujarat Volume-I, revised the cost of these core functions to 1990-91 prices. This

report also provided the low and high norms of thePlanning Commission These are

as under:-

Table 1.8 Norms of the Earlier State Finance Commissions

S.No. Core Services Norms of Zakaria Committee as per

Class of ULBs

Rs. /Capita Planning Commission Norms

Low High

1 Sewerage

A 556 464 696

B 642

C 385

D 291

E 240

2 Storm Water Drains

A 249 114 232

B 223

C 189

D 171

E 146

3 Solid Waste Disposal NA 58 93

4 Roads

A 600 464 696

B 351

C 249

D 180

E 137

5 Street Lighting

A 214 139 139

B 189

C 171

D 163

E 124 Source: Urban Development strategy for the state of Gujarat Vol.I, NIUA, 1995

A. Cities with population of 5 to 20 lakh. B. Cities with the population of 1 to 5 lakh C. Towns with the population of 50000 to 1 lakh D. Towns with the population of 20000 to 50000 E. Towns with the population below 20,000

21


The First State Finance Commission

The First State Finance Commission adopted the norms of the Zakaria

Committee as indexed in the report of Urban Development Strategy for Gujarat

except for Solid Waste Management where higher norms of the Planning

Commission were adopted.

The First State Finance Commission worked out a total resource requirement

for all kinds of ULB‘s (treating Jaipur in B Class) at Rs.2874 (per capita) and after

deducting the income, reached the resource gap of Rs.1706.01 as follows:

Table 1.9 Resource Requirement as per the First SFC

Type of ULB Roads Street Lighting

Solid Waste

Disposal

Drains Total in `

Corporations 351 189 93 223 856

Councils 249 171 98 189 667

Class II 180 163 58 171 572

Class III 137 124 58 146 465

Class IV 104 87 58 125 374

Source: First State Finance Commission, Govt. of Rajasthan, Jaipur

The Commission recommended that these bodies should exploit their own

resource base and fixed targets for additional resource mobilization also and worked

out a per capita total deficit of Rs.995/-. Based on the gap assessment, a total deficit

of 349.18 crores was calculated for the first year.

The First State Finance Commission also recommended a 2.18% share in the

net tax proceeds of the state taxes to be devolved on the PRIs and ULBs. The amount

so devolved was to constitute a divisible pool from where distribution between PRIs

and ULBs was to be made as per their population ratio 3.4:1. In all, an amount of

Rs.305.60 crores to PRIs and Rs.89.890 crores to ULBs were recommended to be

devolved over the period from 1995-96 to 1999-2000.

Basic objective underlying funding pattern:

22


(i) To incentivize acceleration of local efforts in mobilizing resources.

(ii) Judicious employment of funds to bring about balanced growth.

(iii) To recognize good work done by some ULBs to promote excellence.

The First State Finance Commission further recommended some incentive

grant by way of cash awards for Best Performance at State and Divisional levels for

ULBs. At the State Level one award for Corporations of Rs five lakh and three for

Councils (Rs.five lakh, three lakh and one lakh) were proposed. Similarly at the

Divisional Level for Class II Municipalities six awards (one in each division) of Rs.

Five lakh, 12 for Class III First and Second in each division for Rs. five lakh and

second for Rs. three lakh, and Class IV Awards (3 in each division), first of Rs.5 lakh,

second for Rs.3lakh and third for Rs. two lakh were proposed. This was not an

additional grant but was from the divisible pool for the ULBs. The cash award was

to be utilized for development works only. It was to be performance linked in

revenue earnings and services rendered to the people in terms of quality and

quantity.

The criteria for assessment of performance were –

(i) The ULB to achieve targets fixed for additional resource mobilization.

(ii) Establishment expenditure not to exceed 10% of total expenditure in

case of corporations, 15%, in case of councils and 20% in case of

Boards.

(iii) Norms in respect of sanitation, street lighting and urban roads were to

be fixed for earning the award.

(iv) The state was to issue strict instructions to ensure utilization of the

amount of cash awards only on development works.

The Second Finance Commission

The Second State Finance Commission fixed norms and worked out

requirement of funds of PRIs as under:

23


Table 1.10 Second SFC Norms for Gram Panchayat

(` in crore)

SN Name of Activity Norms / Criteria Adopted Funds required for one year

For five years

1. Street Lighting No. of electrified villages 36677. 10 poles per village. 40 watt bulb per pole. 10 hours lighting per night.

18.78 93.90

Rs.3.30 Unit Cost 146 Units consumption per pole per year Rs.3.30 x 146 = Rs.482 per pole x 10x36677 =17.68 crore per year + life of a bulb 4 months, 3 bulbs per pole per year.Cost of bulb Rs.10/-. Total requirement Rs.1.10 crore.

2. Sanitation Two labour per day @ Rs. 60/- per day per panchayat for 300 days in a year + 120 for material = Rs.37200/- per g.p.

37200x9189 = 34.18

170.90

3. Maintenance of Roads 11500 km @ Rs24000 perkm 27.60 138

4. Local Maintenance and Office Administration charges

Rs.30,000/- per g.p. annually 9180x30,000=27.57

137.85

5. Maintenance of Public properties, Burial, Cremation grounds, Maintenance of

Rs.50,000/- per g.p. 9189x50,0= 45.95

329.75

24


schoolsetc.

6. Infrastructure provision for construction of public utilities – toilets, bus sheds, water huts

Rs.2.20 lac one time 9189x2.20 2.216

7. Maintenance of accounts as per EFC

Rs.4000/- per g.p. per annum 9189 x 400 = 3.68

18.40

8. Data base development as per EFC

7.35

Total 998.31

Table 1.11 Second SFC Norms for Panchayat Samitis

(` in crore)


For five years

1. Maintenance of Assets - Buildings and other Assets

Rs.5000/- per panchayat samiti 1.19 5.95

2. Data base development as per EFC

0.16

3. Maintenance of Accounts as per CFC

Rs.4000/- per p.s. per annum 0.09 0.45

4. Establishment 65.00

Total 71.56

Table 1.12 Second SFC Norms for Zila Parishads

(` in crore)


For five years

1. Maintenance of Assets - Zila Parishad Buildings

Rs.50,000/- per z.p. per annum

0.16 0.80

2. Data base Development (EFC)

0.03

25


3. Training of Public Representatives

Rs.50,000/- per panchayat samiti per annum

1.19 5.93

4. Incentive to g.p. for Training

12.57

5. POL Rs.1 lac per z.p. per annum 0.32 1.60

Total Zila Parishad 29.25

Grand total of all PRIs 1099.12

Less Grant recommended by EFC 490.95

Net requirement 608.17

The norms determined for PRI institutional for various services were based

on estimates which were fairly old and need to be re-determined keeping the present

cost for labour etc., Maintenance cost for buildings has to be determined as per

norms of maintenance fixed by PWD.Norms for street lighting would vary as per

size of the village and population.

For Urban Local Bodies

The Second State Finance Commission also worked out the requirement of

funds for core civic services as per norms set up by Zakaria Committee and the

Planning Commission.The requirement of funds so worked out were reduced by the

own income of ULB‘s.The gap in resources was worked out accordingly. It was

Rs.406.08 crores for the year 1999-2000.

The Second Finance Commission did not recommend the entire gap to be

bridged through devolution from State net tax revenue. It observed that since the

requirement of funds for discharging core civic services is quite large, it ought to be

met from plan funds including centrally sponsored and externally funded projects.

The devolution recommended was 2.25% of net tax revenue.

I & II SFC’s

26


For distribution of divisible funds among districts PRIs, the first SFC

recommended the criteria of incidence of poverty of the district, total rural

population and population in non-DDP /non DPAP/non TAD blocks for

distribution of development grant and for other grants, the criteria was mainly

population.

The second SFC enlarged the scope and recommended the following

parameters and their weights for distribution of entire additional transfers of funds

to PRI institutional at all the three tiers.

Table 1.13 Parameters for Devolution by the Second SFC

S.No. Parameters Weight

1. Population 80%

2. Geographical area 10%

3. Poverty – number of BPL families 5%

4. Level of Literacy 5%

Source: First & Second State Finance Commission, Govt. of Rajasthan, Jaipur

The Third State Finance Commission

The Third State Finance Commission adopted the following parameters for

district-wise distribution of funds for onward devolution to PRIs:

Table 1.14 Parameters for Devolution by the Third SFC

S.No. Parameters Weight

1. Population 60%

2. Geographical Area 20%

3. Poverty represented by number of BPL families 5%

4. Level of literacy 5%

5. SC Population 5%

6. ST Population 5%

27


Source:Third State Finance Commission, Govt. of Rajasthan, Jaipur

Further distribution amongst the three tiers (gram panchayats., panchayat

samitis and zila parishads was recommended to be made as 85% to gram

panchayats, 12% to panchayat samities and 3% to zila parishads.

The Third State Finance Commission found the criteria of distribution based

on geographical area, BPL families and literacy rate not feasible in respect of urban

local bodies. It, therefore, recommended distribution of 80% amount from the share

in tax revenue among all the urban local bodies based on population. In order to

help financially poor local bodies namely Municipalities Class –II, III and IV to

perform their basic civil functions effectively, it recommended an additional amount

from out of the balance 20%, to be distributed to such II, III & IV class municipalities.

The entire devolved amount was to be passed on as untied funds.

The First State Finance Commission recommended 2.18% of the net proceeds

of State taxes to be devolved on the local bodies, whereas the Second State Finance

Commission recommended 2.25% share of Net Tax Returns of the State. It

recommended only a marginal increase of 0.7% over the recommendation of the First

Commission. The Third State Finance Commission recommended a total devolution

of 3.50% of the net tax revenue of the State which is 1.25% higher than the one

recommended by the Second State Finance Commission. It further recommended

that out of the total devolved amount of 3.50%, 0.50% should be earmarked for

incentivizing the performing local bodies who levy additional or new taxes or

augment their revenue thereby earning are equal amount of their additional revenue

by way of an incentive.

The comparative position of the amounts devolved by all the three State

Finance Commissions is given below:-

Table 1.5 Statement of the amounts devolved by the three SFCs

Name of Commission

Percentage of Devolution

Amount Devolved

Further Distribution PRIs Urban Bodies

First State Finance Commission

2.18% of Net Tax Revenue

Rs. 55.40 crores for 95 Total 1995-2000 Rs. 395.49 crore

Rs. 42.81 crore for 1995-96 Total 1995-2000 Rs. 305.60 crore

Rs. 12.59 crore for 1995 Total 1995-2000 Rs. 89.89 crore

28


Second State Finance Commission

2.25% of Net Tax Revenue

Rs. 738.60 crores excluding entertainment tax & 1% royalty on minerals

Rs. 553.20 crore + Rs. 12.57(0.05% Incentive) Total Rs. 565.77 crore

Rs. 168.99 crore + Rs. 3.84 crore (0.05%) Incentive Total Rs. 172.83 crore.

Third State Finance Commission (population figures of 2004-05)

3.50% of net tax revenue (State Net Tax revenue) 61438.43 crore (2150 crore)

Rs. 2230.97 crores Inclusive of entertain tax of Rs. 34.40 crore and royalty from minerals Rs. 46.22 crores (2005-2010)

75.7% Rs. 1395.27 crore (3%) + Rs. 232.55 (.50%) Total Rs. 1627.82

24.3% Rs. 447.88 crore 3% share + Rs. 74.65 crore from 0.50 Total Rs. 522.53

Basis & Formula for Sharing the Assigned Taxes

The following table shows the criteria being followed by the various SFCs for

devolution of funds to the PRIs and ULBs:

Table 1.16 Norms for Devolution by other States

State Norms for Devolution

Kerala Efficiency in own revenue collection

Punjab Stamp duty Derivative principles between PRIs and ULBs

MVT on the basis of road length

Electricity duty on the basis of collection

Entertainment Tax 80% for ULBs and 20% for PRI‘s

West Bengal Population, level of non-literacy, % of SC, ST population and population density.

Tamil Nadu Population (45%), SC, ST Population (20%), Per capita own revenue (15%), Per capita expenditure on core services (20%)

Karnataka Population (33.3%), Area (33.33%), Illiteracy (11.11%), Hospital Bed per Persons in per (11.11%), Road length per km. (11.12%)

Uttar Pradesh Population (80%), Area 20%

Madhya Pradesh

Urban population (40%), Sales Tax Contribution (35 %), backward and SC/ST population (15%), level of infrastructure (10%)

Maharashtra On the basis of city size determined by population

Delhi Population (70%), Area (30%)

29


Source:Reports of various third SFCs

The Central Finance Commissions

It is also pertinent to briefly review the main recommendations of various

Central Commissions for the devolution of funds. These are:

The Tenth Finance Commission:

(i) Though the NIUA indicated an estimated gap between revenue and

expenditure for Operation & Maintenance of core municipal services at

Rs5987 crore in 1995 which was likely to go upto Rs12980 crore in 2000; the

Tenth Finance Commission passed on the onus for the estimation of the gap

and the measures that the State and the ULBs can adopt to bridge the gap to

the State Finance Commission.

(ii) Rs. 1000/- crores recommended for 5 years period (1995-2000) enabling the

ULBs to meet their primary obligations.

(iii) The inter State distribution of this sum was based on the inter-State ratio of

the slum population derived from the slum population figures as per 1971

census.

(iv) These grants were additionality over and above the grants flowing to the local

bodies from the State Governments.

(v) Local bodies were asked to provide at least matching contribution. Grant

were not to be spent on salaries and wages.

The Eleventh Finance Commission :

(i) With a view to augmenting the Consolidated Fund of the State for

supplementing the resources of local bodies, the Commission recommended

assignment of Land Tax, Profession Tax and surcharge/ cess on State taxes to

Local bodies for improving the basic civic services.

(ii) Reforms in respect of property tax/ house tax and user charges.

30


(iii) These grants were purpose specific and were to be utilized for maintenance of

accounts, development of data base and maintenance of core civic services.

(iv) The recommended grants were untied except that these were not to be used

for payment of salaries and wages.

(v) Inter-se share of states in the grants provided for municipalities was based on

the following formula –

Urban population of the State - 40%.

Index of decentralization - 20%

Distance from the highest per capita income - 20%

Revenue effort of the local bodies - 10%

Geographical area - 10%

The Twelfth Finance Commission

The Twelfth Finance Commission‘s main emphasis was on Solid Waste

Management. It observed that about 42 million tons of municipal Solid Waste was

produced in urban India with a per capita income generation varying between 0.2 to

0.6 kg. per day. This waste generation was expected to grow at the rate of 5% per

annum. Presently ULB‘s spent on an average 60%-70% of their budget on this

function.

(i) A sum of Rs.2000 crore was recommended for the panchayats and

Rs.5000crore for Municipalities as grant –in-aid for the period 2005-2010.

(ii) Inter-se share of the states in the grants provided for the municipalities was

based on the following formula –

Population of the State - 40%

Geographical area - 10%

Distance from the highest per capita income municipality - 20%

Index of deprivation - 10%

Revenue effort - 20%

31


While the 11th Finance Commission earmarked 10% grant –in-aid for revenue

efforts, the 12th Finance Commission increased it to 20%. Instead of Index of

decentralization adopted as one of the norms for devolution by the 11th Finance

Commission, the 12th Finance Commission also adopted Index of deprivation as a

norm for devolution with a 10% weightage.

(i) At least 50% of the grants- in-aid provided to each state for the ULB‘s had to

be earmarked for the scheme of solid waste management through P.P.P.

Municipalities were required to concentrate on collection, segregation and

transportation of solid waste. The cost of these activities whether carried out

in house or outsourced was also permitted to be spent out of this grant-in-aid.

(ii) States were required to earmark funds for building database and maintenance

of accounts of local bodies.

(iii) Apart from these grants the T.F.C. had recommended separate grants for

maintenance of roads and bridges. Rs.1,50,000 crore had been recommended

for maintenance of roads and bridges and Rs.5000 crore for maintenance of

public buildings.

Determining the adequacy of the level of expenditure holds the key to

reviewing the finances of municipalities. It is a common knowledge that spending

levels are far below the norms considered necessary for delivering services at

acceptable levels. Assessing the level of under spending or deficit on municipal

services should be arrived at after comparing actual municipal expenditures with

expenditure norms or standards.Which norms should be used is a critical factor in

estimating the financial requirements of municipalities. Options in respect of

expenditure norms were :-

Zakaria Committee norms (Indexed to 2012)

Task forces on Housing and Urban Development (Planning Commission Norms).

Average expenditure of better off municipalities

Average expenditure of municipalities.

State – specific norms, if any.

32


While assessing the resource potential, the composition, coverage and nature

of the municipal tax base e.g. the relevance, elasticity and buoyancy of taxes

assigned to municipalities, limits imposed on their use by placing limits on tax rates

or taxing down tax exemption policies should be taken into consideration. The poor

quality of services rendered by the ULBs is due to not only the constraint of

resources but also due to poor staffing -lack of required skill- and poor quality of

management especially financial management. The Zakaria Committee norms are, in

the present context, considered to be excessive and unaffordable. A recent county

wide survey showed that only ten out of the 249 municipalities met the expenditure

norms established by the Zakaria Committee. The basis of norms suggested by other

committees and their country wide relevance and application has been questioned

on other grounds.

We find that most of the National and State Finance Commissions have

groped to find an ultimate solution to fulfill the objectives of the Constitutional

amendments. They have juggled with percent based devolution and suggested

different permutations and combinations to meet the requirement of various core

functions of the third tier of governance. However, our state wide surveys have

clearly brought out the fact that the population is not yearning for more but is still

looking for a minimum standard of living. We do not want to suggest a formula or a

set of formulae to the Fourth State Finance Commission for devolution for providing

a minimum standard of living to the people as mathematical jugglery in allocating

funds has failed miserably in the past but feel that by the end of five years, the

people should reach closer to it. The present ills are primarily because of bad

governance and an indifferent attitude of elected representatives. As nothing much

can be done for the latter, the emphasis needs to be on improving governance. With

ample funds available through various Central and State government schemes,

improved governance may lead to better utilization of funds which is a sore point at

the moment. The State Finance Commission may like to fix a minimum level of

achievement in various core sectors – both rural and urban – and devise a set of

formulae accordingly. With women having reservation, yet not having a voice in

decision-making, their needs for safe and easily accessible drinking water and

33


sanitation, which will help in improving mortality rates need an over-riding priority

in rural areas whereas solid waste management which has made life unbearable in

urban areas- all kinds of ULBs included, need to be over-emphasized. Corruption

has become a cancer in ULBs. It is, therefore, suggested that enough funds should be

devolved for replacing human beings with machines, both for carrying out core

functions as well as keeping an eye on employees. We do not believe in divisions

like urban and rural population because it is an aggregate of individual human

beings and a human being should be the only target. No doubt, it is a difficult task !

34


Under the 73rd and 74th Amendments of the Constitution the State Finance

Commissions have been set up for devising norms for grants to the PRIs and ULBs.

Most of the earlier grants were based on population and had failed to ensure that

they were channeled into fulfilling the basic needs of villages and the smallest unit

of ULBs.

The Fourth State Finance Commission felt an urgent need to look into the

present needs, available funds and the gaps that need to be filled during the course

of next five years. The basic premise is to evolve formulae for an equitable allocation

of the grants to be distributed to the local bodies.

The present study has been designed to identify the needs in terms of

physical and financial norms, for each tier, especially in crucial areas of drinking

water, sanitation, sewerage, cleanliness of inner roads in the villages or small urban

local bodies, street lighting, etc..

Objectives

Within the broad framework of research, this study attempts to conduct an in

depth analysis on the following concerns associated with physical and financial

needs of the PRIs and ULBs:

Conduct an in-depth assessment of the financial needs for implementing the

core functions of the PRIs and ULBs, hitherto under-funded and whether the

PRIs and ULBs need strengthening physically and financially to achieve them.

Research Methodology

35


Examine the efficacy and gaps in implementation and implications of these

functions as well as record the perceptions and problems faced by them in

fulfilling these functions. The physical and financial norms prevalent in these

bodies presently were to be examined and suggestions were to be made to

fulfill the gaps, if any.

Design standard norms of distribution of funds by the Finance Commission to

these bodies on the basis of the analysis and findings of the core functions.

Suggest suitable measures for simplification and empowering the devolved

structures, if any.

Methodology and Strategy

The initial stages of the research project dealt with collection of relevant data,

which included information from secondary sources and key informants to develop

an insight into the present situation. This was used to identify research questions

and preparation of tools for collection of the primary data. These prioritised

issues/questions were taken up for an in-depth study during the collection of

primary data. Primary data was collected in accordance with the proposed

methodology. The data collected was analysed using qualitative and quantitative

techniques.

Need and Source of Data

Secondary Data

For macro level investigations, secondary level information/data was

collected from all the available sources. Broadly these included; official records, and

research reports of various governmental and non-governmental agencies of the

State. This included data on the activities taken up by the PRIs and ULBs to meet the

basic requirements of a model gram panchayat or an urban local body and the

budgetary provisions along with the requirement for these activities. This facilitated

the identification of gaps as well as the physical and financial norms for these

36


activities. This information helped in assessing the scenario. The data collected was

essential to sampling for collection of primary data.

Primary Data

Data was collected from secondary sources to select gram panchayats and

ULBs. The districts were selected on the basis of a composite index prepared on the

basis of area, location and Human Development Index. Similarly, the blocks were

identified on the basis of an index on area, SC, ST, OBC population and location.

Each development unit was visited to collect data on their present funds, functions

and to identify their needs, priorities and unit cost for each function.

Primary Data was collected through schedules. Purposive Quota Stratified

sampling was used for this purpose. The gram panchayats were chosen on the

following basis

Table 2.1

Districts Blocks Gram Panchayats

One district from each of the seven administrative divisions

From each of the sampled district, two blocks were chosen (three in Barmer due to special conditions)

Four gram panchayats were chosen from each block

Criteria : Composite Index Indicator

Area

Location

HDI


Area

SC/ST/OBC population

Location


Area

Sarpanch (m/f)

Population

Number of households (their present status)

Total 7 Total 7*2+1=15 Total 7*8=56

A total of 56 gram panchayats were selected in the seven districts (eight in

each district). In the selected blocks Gram Panchayat were chosen basis of area

population number of household and the gender of the Sarpanchas. Interview

method was chosen for in-depth analysis and was suitably supplemented with the

37


findings of informal and expert interviews. Sample villages under the samplegram

panchayats were also visited as a part of the study.

For The urban local bodiesalso, the Purposive Quota Stratified sampling was

used. The ULBs from each category were chosen on thebasis a composite index

developed on indicators viz. area, population and human development index. In all

15 ULBs were chosen for collecting primary level information.

Table 2.2

S.No. Category of Municipal Bodies Number of ULBs in Rajasthan

Sample ULBs

1 Municipal Corporation 05 02

2 Municipal Council 13 02

3 Municipality Class two 36 03

4 Municipality Class Three 58 03

5 Municipality Class Four 72 05

Total 184 15

Interviews during the Field Visits

A schedule was developed for the presiding officers of the development units

and the data for last three years was collected along with the other information and

their views were recorded. This exercisewas expected to indicate the gaps and the

physical and financial norms.

For the data collection work, teams of research officers were trained. An

intensive training was imparted to the field teams on the issues being addressed in

the study, methods of data collection, interview procedures, etc. Duration of training

was three days. It also involved field training. One data collection team consisted of

two ROs supervised by one Project Officer. Strict monitoring of fieldwork was

ensured. The information thus collected through intense fieldwork was evaluated

using data analysis techniques and suitable software packages. This has been

documented in the form of a report card.

38


The sample districts, blocks and villages for the PRIs and Corporation,

Councils and Municipal Boards for the ULBs were selected in consultation with the

State Finance Commission. The following are the lists:

Table 2.3 List of Sample Districts and Blocks

Jodhpur Region

Barmer Second Largest Area Strategic Location (Refinery) Poor HDI

Barmer Chohtan Baytu

Strategic Location Refinery High SC/ST Population Large Area

Bharatpur Region

Karauli Largest Area Largest SC&ST Population

Hindaun Sapotra

Highest SC Population Largest Area Highest ST Population

Jaipur Region

Jaipur Largest Population High HDI

Phagi Jamwaramgarh

Best Indicators Economic Prosperity Highest ST Population

Udaipur Region

Dungarpur Largest Area High HDI

Sagwara Aspur

Largest SC&ST Population Largest Area Strategic Location (State Border)

Bikaner Region

Ganganagar Highest HDI Largest Area

Raisinghnagar Suratgarh

Highest SC&ST population Largest Area Large SC&ST Population

Ajmer Region

Bhilwara Strategic Location (Mining Area) Lowest HDI

Shahpura Jahajpur

Largest Area Highest ST Population Strategic Location (Mining)

Kota Region

Kota Best HDI Growing Urban Area

Ladpura RamganjMandi

Largest Area Highest ST Population Large Area Large SC&ST Population

39


Table 2.4 List of Sample Blocks and Gram Panchayats

District Block Original Sampled GP

Reason for selection Gram Panchayats Visited

Reason for Change, ifany

Ganganagar

Raisingh Nagar

22PS Rural

Large area & minimum population

22PS Rural

-

5-NP Large area population and highest no. of households

1MK-B (Udsar) Post of Secretary vacant

15PTDA (Sameja)

Lowest area and high population

15PTDA (Sameja) -

17-TK Comparative high population

12 NRD Post of Secretary vacant

Suratgarh

Thukrana

Maximum area household

Thukrana -

Kardoo

Highest population Dei das pura

Kardoo is not Grampanchayat

15-LKS (Dhaba jhalar)

Large area.

15-LKS(Dhaba jhalar)

Rayanawali Smallest area but large population and no. of households.

Peprein Rayanawali is not Grampanchayat

Barmer Barmer

Mahabar Largest area. Mahabar -

Barmer (Rural) Largest population and households

Barmer (Agor)

-

Bayetu

Utarlai Less area but households and population are comparatively high.

Dhoondha (Kawas) Special Reason -Cairns Energy

(Refinery)

Rawatsar

Large population. Chitar ka par Special Reason - Cairns Energy

(Refinery)

Chohtan

Chohtan

Highest population, area and no. of households

Chohtan

-

Bakhasar Lowest population. Bakhasar -

Konra No. of households is good.

Konra -

Alamsar

Less area but high population and households.

Alamsar

-

40


District Block Gram Panchayats Reasons

Bhilwara Shahpura

Khamor Dheekola Khamnor Phooliyan kalan

Gidriya Dheekola Khamnor Phooliyan kalan

Large population. Higest population and households. Highest area. Minimum area.

Repeat of GP

Jahazpur

Luhari Kalan Pander Ropan Sarsiya

Etunda Pander Ropan Amerwasi

Large area. Largest area. Highest no. of households and population. Less area but population is high.

Post of Secretary vacant -

Post of Secretary vacant

Karauli Hindaun

Dhindhora

Jagar

Mothiyapur

Suroth

Dhindhora

Jagar

Mothiyapur

Suroth

Population is high. Largest area. Large area. Lowest area but population and no. of households is max.

- - - -

Sapotra

Bahadarpur

Narauli

Sapotra Salempur

Bahadarpur

Narauli

Sapotra Salempur

Largest area. Highest households and population. Lowest area but population is large. Large population.

- - - -

Kota Ladpura

Ranpur

Borawas

Rangbari Mandana

Rangpur

Borawas

Kasar Mandana

Large area. Largest area. Minimum area but households and population is maximum. No. of households and population is considerabely good.

GP merge in municipal corporation Kota

- GP merge in municipal

corporation Kota -

Ramganj Mandi

Ghati jagir

Julmi

Khairabad Askali

Modak station

Julmi

Khairabad Sahrwada

Largest area. Area is large . Largest no. of households and population. Lowest area but population is good.

Ghati jagir is not GP. - - -

Askali is not GP

Dungarpur Sagwara Jethana

Obri

Khargada Bheeloora

Jethana

Obri

Khargada Bheeloora

Large area. Large population. Lowest area but highest no. of households and population. Largest area.

- - - -

Aaspur

Punjpur

Munger Sabala Reenchha

Punjpur

Munger Nithauwa Reenchha

Largest area. Largest no. of households and population. Lowest area but no. of households is considerably high. Large area.

- -

Secretory was Not working due to retired

-

41


Jaipur Phagi

Chauru

Phagi Renwal Manji Madhorajpura

Chauru

Phagi Renwal Manji Madhorajpura

Large area. Largest area, no. of households and population. No. of households and population is good. Lowest area but population is large.

- - - -

Jamwa Ramgarh

Dhoola Raoji

Tala

Jamwa Ramgarh Andhi

Dhoola Raoji

Tala

Jamwa Ramgarh Andhi

Largest area. Large population. Lowest area but no. of households and population is maximum. Large no. of households.

- - - -

42


Table 2.5 List of Municipal Bodies

ULBs Sampled ULBs Studied ULBs Reason for

selection

ULBs

replaced if

any,

Municipal corporation Jaipur Jaipur Largest Population High urban area

-

Ajmer Ajmer Weak -

Municipal council Udaipur Udaipur Financially sound Problem town

-

Churu Churu Financially poor Agricultural Area

-

Municipal board grade 2

Chittoregarh Chittoregarh Management Issues

-

Sawaimadhopur Sawaimadhopur -

Deoli Deoli Developing town

-

Municipal board 3 Bandikui Bandikui Prosperous -

Kuchaman Kuchaman -

Suratgarh Peelibanga Suratgarh is already

selected as rural Block

Municipal board 4 Nawan Nawan -

Kapren Kapren Problem town -

Jahajpur Soorajgarh Staff Issues Jahajpur is already

selected as rural Block

Uniara Uniara Philanthropic, Participation

-

Jobner Jobner Weak -

43


In order to assess the needs of the rural local bodies a survey of 56 gram

panchayats was conducted. The panchayats were selected on the basis of the

prescribed methodology. The present chapter deals with the findings of the survey

of the gram panchayats. In each panchayat, the Sarpanch, Gram Secretary and the

community were interviewed with the help of a pre-designed questionnaire. A team

of two investigators visited each panchayat. One of the investigators interviewed the

Gram Secretary and the Sarpanch while the other conducted the community

interview andobservations.

Demographic Profile of the Sample Panchayats

This study covered 56 gram panchayats across the seven divisions of

Rajasthan selecting one district from each division. In each district two blocks were

identified on the basis of composite index, and from each block, four Gram

panchayats have been selected. The total population, according to the census 2001 is

366443.The population for 2011 has been estimated on the basis of the 2011 district

decadel growth rate comes to 436667 with a cumulative calculated decadel growth of

19.16.

The Status of Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs)

44


Table 3.1 Demographic Details of the Sample Gram Panchayats

District Population of selected GP

(Census 2001)

Estimated Population

(2011)**

Decadal Growth

2001-2011

Number of Households*

Number of BPL

families*

Kota 52166 55322 6.05 13400 893

Barmer 67804 90261 33.12 21456 4917

Bhilwara 42984 50777 18.13 11425 5253

Dungarpur 42255 53503 26.62 11160 3041

Ganganagar 47710 51202 7.32 9887 1363

Karauli 54600 65471 19.91 14521 3355

Jaipur 58924 70131 19.02 18900 1351

Total 366443 436667 19.16 100749 20173

* Field Survey (Primary data)

**Extrapolated on the basis of district decadal growth rate 2011

Thus, the average population per GP comes out to be 7797 and the average

number of households in a GP is 1799.These figures have been used for

calculation of norms for each core sector in the later part of the report. The total

area (in bighas) of the 56 gram panchayats is 24302.4. The ratio of the BPL families

to the total population per GP was found to be 20 per cent.

Income and Expenditure

Table 3.2Income and Expenditure of the sample GPs (2010-11 & 2011-12)

SN Source of

income&Expenditure

Income Expenditure Income Expenditure 2010-11 % 2010-11 % Per

capita 2011-12 % 2011-12 % Per

capita

1 SFC 256.44 13.34 193.34 11.77 44.28 407.39 15.17 261.74 12.67 59.94

2 TFC 242.83 12.64 180.67 11.00 41.37 287.53 10.71 240.15 11.62 55.00

3 Untied fund 29.27 1.52 24.33 1.48 5.57 387.45 14.43 111.31 5.39 25.49

4 BRGF 186.15 9.69 179.91 10.95 41.20 183.24 6.82 142.96 6.92 32.74

5 MA LAD 45.32 2.36 38.11 2.32 8.73 68.44 2.55 50.61 2.45 11.59

6 MP LAD 25.69 1.34 19.85 1.21 4.55 37.58 1.40 28.75 1.39 6.58

7 Own Resources 48.73 2.54 33.22 2.02 7.61 39.2 1.46 20.93 1.01 4.79

8 NREGA 1011.2 52.62 915.8 55.74 209.73 1164.78 43.37 1168.2 56.55 267.53

9 BADP 10.51 0.55 0 0.00 0.00 8.45 0.31 0 0.00 0.00

10 Social Justice 0.26 0.01 0.26 0.02 0.06 0.48 0.02 0.06 0.00 0.01

11 PHED 3.88 0.20 4.63 0.28 1.06 1.3 0.05 1.75 0.08 0.40

12 Schemes/Flagship Programme

44.3 2.31 36.32 2.21 8.32 84.87 3.16 39.42 1.91 9.03

13 Other 17.12 0.89 4.52 0.28 1.04 15.02 0.56 0 0.00 0.00

Total 1921.72 100 1643.06 100 376.27 2685.73 100 2065.89 100 473.10

45


Table 3.3Headwise Expenditure of the PRIs (2011-12 & 2012-13)

SFC, 15.17

TFC, 10.71

Untied fund , 14.43

BRGF, 6.82

MA

LA

D ,

2.5

5

MP

LA

D, 1

.4O

wn

Res

ou

rces

, 1

.46

NREGA, 43.37

BADP, 0.31

Social Justice , 0.02PHED, 0.05

Sch

emes

/Fla

gsh

ip P

rogr

amm

e , 3

.16

Other, 0.56

Position of Income of GPs

S N Budget head Expenditure in year 2011-12

% of Total

Expenditure in year 2011-12

Per capita Expenditure year 2011-12

Estimated budget for year 2012-13(as per

annual plan)

Per capita Expenditure year 2012-13

(in Lakh Rs) (in Rs) (in Lakh Rs) (in Rs)

1 Solid waste management

46.41 2.21 10.63 142.5 32.63

2 Waste water drainage

77.05 3.66 17.65 245.63 56.25

3 Street lighting 15.01 0.71 3.44 148.56 34.02

4 Construction of roads/pulia/rapat

701.71 33.36 160.70 1936.205 443.41

5 Burials and burial ground

44.8 2.13 10.26 251.32 57.55

6 Community halls 25.52 1.21 5.84 224.69 51.46

7 Public toilets 0.12 0.01 0.03 57.813 13.24

8 Public health 0 0.00 0.00 5.825 1.33

9 Public parks 13.37 0.64 3.06 89.45 20.48

10 Drinking water 321.68 15.29 73.67 478.68 109.62

11 NREGA/OTHER 858.03 40.79 196.50 0 0.00

Total 2103.7 100.00 481.76 3591.673 822.52

46


Government’s Reluctance in Providing Fiscal Autonomy to PRIs

During this study it was found that the panchayats have very little fiscal

autonomy. For this pathetic condition of PRIs and ULBs, the State Government has

to take the blame. They have done it at their own cost. They are forced to provide

much larger funds to meet the expenditure of these bodies from their own kitty or

through the State Finance Commission grants, which cuts into their own needs for

the state‘s infrastructural and core sector requirements.

An important point on which the 73rd and 74th amendments were based was

the devolution by the State Legislature, powers and responsibilities for the

preparation of plans for economic development of the third tier as well as securing a

sound financial base for it. A fair degree of financial autonomy (in the true spirit of

decentralisation of power) is a sine qua non for local governments to function more

effectively as self-governing institutions. By financial autonomy we mean that they

should have their own taxation and borrowing powers in addition to a share in the

state‘s taxes and duties and grants-in-aid. The local governments should not only

have the power to raise revenues but their own sources of revenues should

constitute a very significant share in the total revenues. Many states have done it. We

would further propose that the state or the SFC should provide only 66%-70% of the

Solid

was

te

man

agem

ent

Was

te w

ater

d

rain

age

Stre

et li

ghti

ng

Co

nst

ruct

ion

of

road

s/p

ulia

/rap

at

Bu

rial

s an

d b

uri

al

gro

un

d

Co

mm

un

ity

hal

ls

Pu

blic

to

ilets

Pu

blic

hea

lth

Pu

blic

par

ks

Dri

nki

ng

wat

er

NR

EGA

/OTH

ER

10.63 17.653.44

160.70

10.26 5.84 0.03 0.00 3.06

73.67

196.50

Per capita Expenditure in GPs year 2011-12 (Rs)

47


total fund requirement of PRIs so that they are motivated to enhance their own

income in order to meet the remaining needs.

Even in the Act this was provided. Areas were specifically prescribed in

which the 3rd tier of governance was to be autonomous. The State Legislature was

also mandated to provide grants to it from the Consolidated Fund of the State and

also assigning of the revenues of designated taxes, duties, tolls and fees. It was

envisaged that with sufficient funds coming from the State Government as well as

the 3rd tier generating its own resources, the dream of Mahatma Gandhi about self-

sufficiency at the grass-root level would be realized. This power of both planning

and acquiring finances to meet the prepared plan was not to be interfered by the 1st

and 2nd tiers of governance. On the other hand, it was to be insisted upon. The

government of India and the State governments were obliged to assist the 3rd tier to

prepare their plans as well as to provide them funds to meet their plan expenditure

either from their own sources or to allow them to generate their own sources of tax

and non-tax revenues. The State government was also expected to assign funds from

taxes, duties, tolls and fees levied and collected by State government. However, it is

found that the general environment of not levying any taxes at the State level on the

baseless fear of losing elections has pervaded to the 3rd tier also, a tendency which

has harmed the third tier much more than the second. The result is that not only

development but establishment requirements are being met, that also only partly, by

the State government. This has led to wide gaps in funds required and available for

even basic infrastructural requirements of panchayats and urban local bodies.

Minimum needs of the people are being put on the back burner. The state

governments have failed to play the role of hand holding of the third tier.

It is understood from the basic objectives of the 73rd and 74th amendments

of the Constitution that it is necessary that the funds from the State Finance

Commission should not only fill the gaps in the required and available levels of

funds for the 3rd tier of Governance for infrastructural development and meeting

their core functions but also should work as a catalyst to improve their capacity

and motivate them to generate their own resources to fulfill their unmet needs. At

the same time, the recipients should also be asked to provide the physical targets

48


they are going to meet with the help of the funds devolved. Otherwise the hard

earned money of the general tax payers will be just like a dole given to

irresponsible beneficiaries.

Waste Water Management

Table 3.4 Physical status of Drainage (Naalis)

Requirement of nali (m.)

Total length of drainage nali (m.)

Proposed nali in next year (m)

Proposed maintenance of nali in

next year (m.)

336988 169733 70045 27505

The sampled 56 Gram Panchayats, under reference presently have facility of

drainage system comprising of merely 169733 mtrs. i.e. 50.36%, whereas the

requirement accounts for 336988 m. It is evident that the available drainage system is

far more less than the actual need. In the year 2012-13 construction of 70045 m. i.e.

20.78% is required and maintenance of 16% existing dilapidated drainage system

have been proposed.

Financial Status of Drainage Nali

Table 3.5 Financial Status of Drainage (Naalis)

Expenditure for nali 2011-12

Expenditure for

maintenance of nali in year

2011-12

Expenditure for nali 2012-13

Expenditure for maintenance of

nali in year 2012-13

Per capita expenditure for

construction and maintenance of nali

in year 2012-13

54.81 22.24 216.9 28.73 56.25

The expenditure of Rs.54.81 lacs for drainage system and Rs.22.24 lacs for

maintenance of the same in the year 2011-12 has been incurred by GPs. An estimated

budget of Rs.216.9 lacs for construction and Rs.28.73 lacs for maintenance of existing

length of drainage system in the year 2012-13 has been proposed by GPS to the

concerned authorities.

49


Solid Waste Management

Table 3.6 Status of Sweepers

Total sweepers

Regular Contractual Coverage population per sweeper

Coverage household

Additional requirement

Planned coverage population per sweeper

Planned Coverage household per sweeper

253 0 253 1726 398 322 759 175

The GPS under reference have shown an untidy, unhealthy situation. It is

quite a serious matter and may be a pointer to a kind of unhygienic surroundings

prevailing in GPs. Most of the GPs (52%) are afflicted with the disease of un-

cleanliness Solid Waste Management is done in 48.1 GPS. At present there are 253

contractual sweepers to render services to 100749 households. It means that 398

households are being served by one sweeper covering a population of 2013 per

sweeper. It is indeed regretful to note that due to paucity of sweepers or else to

collect solid waste, all sampled eight GPs of Ganganagar present a worse situation

with regard to solid waste management. This creates discomfort to inhabitants,

therefore with 322 more required sweepers the population covered by one sweeper

will come down from 1726 to 759 and households from 398 to 175 though it is still

higher than the prescribed norms, yet a slight improvement will be there.

Interval of Cleaning

Table 3.7 Interval of cleaning

Daily Interval of 3-4 days Weekly

2% 18% 80%

There is no denying of the fact that in 80% of GPs the practice of weekly

cleaning is in vogue and it is done at an interval of 3-4 days in 18% GPs. There is

nothing to be satisfied with only 2% GPs, under reference, having daily cleaning

practice. It is significant to quote that Dungarpur, despite being a tribal district and

Kota an industrial hub, present an example in this respect to be followed by others.

50


Status of Assets

Table 3.8

Status of Assets

S. no.

Assets Present status no.

Additional requirement in

next year

Estimate budget require in next

year(in lakh)

1 Tri Cycle 0 2 0.1

2 Push Cart with bin 0 309 9.27

3 Bins 0 1114 41.2

4 other 0 333 2.005

The perennial problem of total absence of cleaning equipment across 56 GPs

remains to be sorted out. Requirement of cleaning assets such as tri cycles, push carts

with Bens, Bins and some other equipments and their estimated budget of Rs.2.005

lakhs has been proposed to the concerned authorities.

Street lighting

Table 3.9 Status of Street Lighting Points Equipment LED CFL

Available in year 2011-12

Estimated no. for

next year

Estimated budget for next year


Estimated no. for

next year

Estimated budget for

next year(in

lakh) Tube light 0 0 0 435 220 2.42

Bulb 0 0 0 950 6515 71.66

Mercury 0 0 0 0 16 0.56

Sodium light 0 0 0 0 163 5.725

High mask light

0 0 0 0 0 0

Gen. bulb 350 0 0 315 0 0

other (Solar) 18* 10* 3.4 20 7** 0

Total point 368 10 3.4 1720 6921 80.365

*solar light considered as CFL, **Solar lights provided by water shade program.

The miniscule i.e. 26.8% of GPs having road light facility evidently manifests

the poor governance at Gram Panchayat level 73.21% GPs across the sample,

regrettably are lacking in street lighting facility.

51


The total number of street lighting points, available presently comes to 2088

across 56 GPs i.e. 23.15%. An estimated budget proposal for additional 6921 lighting

points for year 2012-13 has been presented to the authorities for acceptance.

Status of Timer

Table 3.10 Status of Timers

Timer Solar Automatic Manual No. of points coverage by each timer

Status in year 2011-12 22 38 27 32

Estimate for year 2012-13 22 478 0 19

At present there are 49 timers to regulate 2088 street lighting points. A need of

500 more automatic timers has been has been stated by GPs for the year 2012-13.

The coverage per lighting point in terms of population comes to 209. A

quantum increase of 6921 lighting points will make total number of points as 9019,

making a favourable impact on coverage of population per point, i.e. 48 per point.

Expenditure for street lighting

Table 3.11 Expenditure for street lighting

Particulars Year 2011-12 (in lakh)

Estimated for next year(in

lakh)

Per capita expenditure

(in Rs)

Expenditure for energy 5.53 39.86 9.13

Expenditure for new purchase 6.2 84.76 19.41

Expenditure for maintenance 3.68 3.78 0.87

Expenditure for vehicle 0 0 0.00

Expenditure for establishment 0 20.16 4.62

Other expenses 0 0 0.00

Total 15.41 148.56 34.02

Citizens of 73% GPs across the sample remain dissatisfied with wherewithal

of street lighting system. An estimate of Rs.148.56 lacs has been presented to the

authorities to improve lighting system, which will make per capita expenditure to Rs

34.02.

52


Road/ Pulia / Rapat

Physical status of roads / pulias / rapats

Table 3.12 Physical and Financial Status of Road/pulia/rapat Construction Total

length of roads

/number in present (in Km)

construction of Road/pulia/ra

pat in year 2010-11 (in

Km)

construction of

Road/pulia/rapat in year 2011-12 (in

Km)

Estimate construction

of Road/pulia/ra

pat in year 2012-13 (in

Km)

Estimate budget for

Road/pulia/rapat in year

2012-13 (in lakh)

Per KM /unit Estimate

budget for Repairing


2012-13 (Lakh)

C.C. Road 149.42 8.2 15.75 48.75 820.77 16.84

Kachchi road 456.5 112.75 102 145 334.82 2.31

Pukki road 172.5 8 7.5 82 0.00

Rapat 51 1 3 22 4.74 0.22

Pulia no. 187 40 28 105 37.55 0.35

Grawal 373.3 60 74.6 91.3 486.54 5.33

Kharanja 7.5 1 1 7.6 58.07 7.64

Total 1742.49

The roads vis-à-vis C.C.

road, kacchi and pakki road, rapat, pulia, kharanja etc. has coverage of 1391.22 km.

at present. The estimated budget proposals of Rs.1742.49 lacs to construct additional

roads of 430.53 km. i.e. .30% length in 2012-13 has been presented to the authorities.

Repairing of Roads

Table 3.13Physical and financial status for Repairing of Road/pulia/rapat

Repairing Repairing of Road/pulia/rapat in year 2010-11

(Km.)

Repairing of Road/pulia/ra

pat in year 2011-12 (Km.)

Estimate Repairing of

Road/pulia/rapat in year 2012-13

(Km.)

Estimate budget for Repairing


(Lakh)

Per KM /unit Estimate budget

for Repairing Road/pulia/rapat in year 2012-13

(Lakh)

C.C. Road 0 2.5 30.05 125.545 5.34

Kachchi road 0 4 16.9 10.81 0.64

Pukki road 0 0 1 0 0.00

Rapat 0 0 1 0.1 0.10

Pulia 0 0 4 0.8 0.2

Grawal 12.1 0 43 54.21 1.26

53


Kharanja 2.25 0

Total 193.715

Table 3.14 Financial status of construction and maintenance of road/pulia/rapat

Expenditure for construction of

road/pulia/rapat in year 2011-12

(in lakh)

Expenditure for maintenance of


(in lakh)

Expenditure for construction and maintenance of


(in lakh)


construction and maintenance of

road/pulia/rapat in year 2011-

12(in Rs.)

Estimate Per capita

expenditure for construction and maintenance of


(in Rs.)

673.89 27.82 701.71 160.7 443.41

Only 6.5 km. of road has been repaired in present year.

An estimation of Rs.193.715 lacs to repair 95.95 km (.068%) of roads has been

proposed for the year 2012-13 construction and maintenance of roads/rapat/pulia.

In 2011-12 Rs.701.71 lacs has been expended on construction and maintenance of

roads. A need is felt to spend Rs.443.41 per capita to construct and maintain the

roads, rapat etc. in 2012-13.

Status of Burials and Burial Ground

Table 3.15

Physical Statusof Burials and Burial

Ground

No .of Burials and burial ground

Area of Burials and burial ground (bigha)

Additional area require for Burials and burial

ground (in bigha) Burials burial

ground Burials burial

ground Burials burial

ground

278 61 620.9 172 70 18

Table 3.16 Financial Statusof Burials and Burial Ground

Expenditure for Burials and burial

ground in year 2011-12

Estimated budget for

Burials and burial ground

Estimated Budget for Maintenance

in next year

Per capita expenditure for Burials and burial

Estimate Per capita

expenditure for Burials

54


(in lakh) in next year

(in lakh) (in lakh) ground in

year 2011-12 (in Rs.)

and burial ground in

year 2012-13 (in Rs)

44.8 212.25 39.07 10.26 57.55

Presently there are 278 cremation grounds and 61 graveyards across 56 GPS

covering 620.9 and 172 bigha area respectively. It is estimated that an additional area

of 70 bigha for cremation ground and 18 bigha for grave yard is required. An

estimated budget of 39.07 Lakh Rsfor maintenance in addition to 212.25 Lakh Rs for

construction of burials and burial ground in 2012-13 has been presented to the

concerned authorities for acceptance.

Status of Public Parks

Table 3.17 Physical Status

Status of Public parks

No. of Public parks

Area of Public parks (Sq. ft)

Additional Public parks

require

Additional area require for Public

parks(Sq. ft)

Public parks run by ULBs

11 196900 20 233600

Public parks run by Agency/committee.

1 27000 0 0

Public parks run by Trust/community

0 0 0 0

Table 3.18 Financial Status

Expenditure for Public parks in year 2011-12

(in lakh)

Per capita expenditure for Public parks in

year 2011-12(in Rs)

Estimated budget for Public parks in next

year(in lakh)

Estimate Per capita expenditure for

Public parks in next year(in Rs)

13.37 3.06 89.45 20.48

There are 12 public parks across 56 GPs with area of 196900 sq. ft. The

need of 20 more public parks is being expressed. The proposal for the earlier

covering an area of 233600 sq. ft. has been submitted. Out of present 12 public parks,

55


11 are run by GPs and one is taken care of by committee. An estimated budget of

Rs.89.45 for public parks in next year has been presented.

Community halls

Table 3.19 Physical status of Community halls Status of Community halls No .of

Community halls

Area of Community halls (sq.ft)

Additional Community halls require

Additional area require

for Community halls (sq.ft)

Community halls run by GP 186 140738 83 112453

Community halls run by Trust/community

2 1500 0 0

Table 3.20 Financial Status

Expenditure for Community halls in year 2011-12(in lakh)


Community halls in year

2011-12(in Rs)

Estimated budget for Community halls in

next year

(in lakh)

Estimate Per capita expenditure

for Community halls in next year

(in Rs)

25.52 5.84 224.69 51.46

56 Gram Panchayats have 188 community halls covering area of 142238 sq. ft.

Two community halls are run by the community and rest are taken care of by GPs

themselves. There is need for 83 more community halls in the next year and an

estimated budget for the same of Rs.224.69 has been submitted.

Drinking water

Presently there are following sources of drinking water across 56 GPs.

–

Table 3.21 Status of drinking water resources

Resources Expenditure in 2011-12 (in lakh)

Per capita

expenditure in 2011-

12(in Rs)


Estimate budget for year 2012-13(in lakh)

Per capita expenditure for year 2012-13(in

Rs.) Recurring Nonrecurring

Janta Jal 13.13 2.58 1 10.66 0 2.44

PPP 0 0.00 0 6.5 0 1.49

56


Hand pump 100.28 19.69 261 0 139.65 31.98

Tube well 14.52 2.85 18 0.2 48.81 11.22

Wells 14.08 2.76 2 0 3.0 0.69

Bawri 0 0.00 0 0 0 0.00

Pond 0 0.00 1 6.0 0 1.37

Tank 74 14.53 193 108.2 24.78

Kund 0.8 0.16 0 0 1.0 0.23

Tape water 0 0.00 0 0 0 0.00

Rain water harvesting

57.34 11.26 15 0 50 11.45

Maintenance of water resources

11.74 2.31 32 40.18 0 9.20

Tanker supply

0.55 0.11 0 0 0 0.00

Pipe line 16.21 3.18 32829 0 42.48 9.73

Other 18.82 3.70 10 0 22 5.04

Total 321.47 63.13 63.54 415.14 109.62

Javata Jal, PPP, Hand Pump, Tube well, Wells, Pond, Tank, Kund, Rain water

harvesting, water pipe lines and tanker supplies. Gram Panchayats have incurred

Rs.321.44 as expenditure on above drinking water resources in 2011-12. Due to

additional requirement of augmentation of above water resources an estimated

budget of Rs.478.68 (63.54 recurring + 415.14 nonrecurring) has been presented to

the concerned authorities. The availability of drinking water in villages was found in

64.28% GPs i.e. in 36 GPs and out of these 36 GPs the availability of water was

adequate in 86% GPs. Proper drinking water was available at the public places in

57% GPs.

Public Health

Table 3.22Physical and financial status of Public health activities

Material Utilize amount in

2011-12

Expenditure 2011-12

Requirement in year 2012-13

Budget require in

year 2012-

13(in lakh)


for year 2012-13(in Rs)

Insecticide/DDT 0 0 10075 kg 1.87 0.43

Equipments 0 0 56 0.56 0.13

Labour 0 0 2519 3.40 0.78

Total 0 0 0 5.83 1.34

It is a matter of dismay and worry that not a single penny has been spent in

2011-12 on crucially important part of public service i.e. public health activities.

57


However, in wake of need to eradicate epidemics and seasonal diseases the Gram

Panchayats have submitted an estimated budget of Rs.5.83 to concerned authorities.

Public Toilets

Status of Public Toilets

Table 3.23 Status of public toilets

Status of toilets No. of public toilets (2011-12)

Expenditure for public toilets in

(2011-12)

Additional requirement of public

toilets in(2012-13)

Budget for public toilets in(2012-13)

(in lakh)

Public toilets 47 2.5 149 47.243

Sulabh toilets 0 0 1 5.0

Urinals 0 0 0 0

*Toilets for women 12 0 87 20.58

Total 0 52.243

*Expenditure on toilets for women included in public toilets. *Figure of women toilets is also included in public toilets.

Table 3.24Assets of toilets cleaning Assets Expenditure in 2011-12 Estimate budget for 2012-

13

Labour charges 0 3.78

Acid/ toilet cleaner 0 0.588

Material require for cleaning toilets(brush,bucket, jhadu) 0 0.56 Total 0 4.928

Table 3.25Status of cleaning of toilets Present

status of sweepers for

toilets

Additional requirement of sweepers for cleaning

of toilets

Expenditure for

maintenance of toilets in year 11-12(in

lakh)


for maintenance of toilets in year 11-12(in

Rs)

Estimated budget of


lakh)

Per capita Estimated budget of


Rs) 4 59 0.12 0.03 4.928 1.13

Presently there are 47 public toilets including a few of toilets for

women. Public toilet facility available at gram Panchayat level was found only 25%

GPs. The availability of separate toilet facility was found in merely 7.1 GPs. The

toilets are cleaned regularly in 3 (21.42) Gram Panchayats (out of 14 GPS). A

miniscule number of sweepers i.e. only 4, is of little help to keep toilets clean.

58


Therefore, a need of 59 sweepers in the year 2012-13 and an estimated budget of

maintenance of toilets have been presented.

An additional requirement of 149 more toilets including toilets for women in

2012-13 and estimated budget of Rs.52.243 has been submitted. An amount of

Rs.4.928 has also been estimated to spend on labour charges and toilet cleaning

assets in 2012-13.

Status of Gram Panchayat Buildings

It is a matter of satisfaction that all the gram panchayats except one in Karauli

had their own buildings.

Table 3.26

Dhindora in Hindaun PS does not have its own building. It uses the local post

office for its activities and does not have to pay any rent. It implies that there is no

need in terms of the building requirement for the panchayats.

Activities Being Undertaken by the Gram Panchayats

According to the Rule 33 of the PR Act, the core functions of a panchayat are

sanitation, street lighting, safe drinking water, drainage, public distribution system,

Own Building of the Gram Panchayat Number (Out of 8) %

Karauli 7 87.5

Jaipur 8 100

Ganganagar 8 100

Dungarpur 8 100

Bhilwara 8 100

Barmer 8 100

Kota 8 100

Total 55 98.21

59


maintenance of village roads and birth and death registration. During the study the

Sarpanchas were enquired about the works being undertaken by the Gram

Panchayat responses were multiple. It was found that the focus at the gram

panchayat level was on water and rural housing. About 80 per cent of the gram

panchayats reported that they were mainly busy with providing drinking water and

constructing rural houses under the Indira Awas Yojana and Chief Minister Awas

Yojana. It was found that most of the panchayats do not appreciate the importance

of other core functions like drainage, sanitation, public lighting and other

community facilities.

Table 3.27 Works being done by Gram Panchayats

Functions Number of Responses (N=56)

(%)

Providing Drinking Water Facility 29 51.78

Indira Awaas Yojana for BPL Families 27 48.21

Construction and Cleaning of the Drains 26 46.43

CM BPL Awaas Yojana 16 28.57

Tanka Nirman/ Johad Khudai 16 28.57

Rajeev Gandhi IT Centre 12 21.43

Kharanja Nirman 7 12.5

Construction of Boundary Walls (BRGF) 7 12.5

Construction of Roads 5 8.93

Organizing Haat Bazaar 3 5.35

Construction of Community Halls 2 3.57

Maintenance of Street lighting 2 3.57

It is obvious from the above responses that construction activities have

overriding priority – for reasons well known and the PRIs do not have their roads

remaining dark at night – something more dangerous for women them men.

Availability of a Drainage System

It was found that about half of the gram panchayats had drainage facilities. It

was pleasant to see that all the PS in the Dungarpur district had drains in all the

60


gram panchayats and they were being maintained regularly. It was found that the

drains were cleaned regularly by the sweepers who were contractual (appointed by

the panchayat) and the community themselves. In Barmer and Ganganagar, people

opined that drains were not required as water was scarce and they even made soak

pits. The people during the Focussed Group Disscussions felt that the drains

available were not sufficient and there was a requirement for drains. It was also

suggested that more budget should be provided to accommodate additional

sweepers for proper cleaning of drainages.

Present Status of Solid Waste Management

A similar proportion as seen in the area of drainage was seen for solid waste

management. Less than 50 per cent of the GPs reported following the solid waste

practices. Dungarpur district was found to be following the waste management in

almost all the sample GPs while the situation was surprisingly unsatisfactory in

Ganganagar where it was reported that in the absence of proper guidelines for

budget utilization and higher market rate than the BSR this was not being done – An

example of poor governance.

Table 3.28 Status of Solid Waste Management in Sample Gram Panchayats

Dungarpur, a tribal district, is an example to be followed by others.

Solid waste management Responses (N=56)

(%)

Karauli 4 50

Jaipur 3 37.5

Ganganagar 0 0

Dungarpur 7 87.5

Bhilwara 5 62.5

Barmer 1 12.5

Kota 7 87.5 Total 27 48.21

61


From the sampled 56 gram panchayats, the system of solid waste

management was working in 27 gram panchayats. Only six out of the total of 56 GPs

reported to have been carrying out monthly cleaning. Solid waste management was

done twice yearly in 29.62 percent of gram panchayats. It has been seen that in

some gram panchayats (22.22 percent) solid waste management is not proper and

done only at the time of festivals or during political gatherings. This is being done

on contractual basis.

As far as the transfer and dumping practices for solid waste management is

concerned the waste is collected at a common place in the gram panchayats and then

dumped out of the village. The panchayats hire tractors for the purpose. 92 percent

people are not satisfied with the solid waste management. It was also found that

there was lack of equipments used for cleaning in one- third of the gram panchayats.

It has also come to our notice that dumping is done but there are no garbage

disposal plants for treatment and commercial utilization. Most of the community

members felt a need for daily cleaning. This shows how people hate garbage but feel

helpless.

Street Lighting

Out of 56 gram panchayats, street lighting was available in only 26.78 percent

gram panchayats. Lighting facilities were seen in Kota and Dungarpur districts

while there was no Panchayat with street lights in Ganganagar. The community

revealed that temporary arrangements were being done by the panchayats during

festivals. A point of ridicule for a prosperous district like Ganganagar. Dungarpur

again shows the path.

Table 3.29 Availability and condition of Street Lighting in the Gram Panchayats

District Availability of street lights (n=56) (%) Lights in Working Condition (%)

Karauli 2 25 100

Jaipur 1 12.5 100

Ganganagar 0 0 0

Dungarpur 4 50 100

62


Out of the 15 gram panchayats where there were street lights, except one GP

in Kota, the street lights were found to be in working condition. They were being

maintained by the gram panchayats themselves in most of the GPs except Pander

(Jahajpur) where a local contractor had been entrusted the responsibility of

maintenance. It was also revealed that there was timely maintenance of the street

lights in all the districts except Karauli. The sarpanch and community, both

expressed a need for covered lights (for protection from theft, breakage and rains)

and a requirement of additional transformers to control fluctuations in the voltage.

Table 3.30 Distance between the Lighting Points (lights) District Distance (in meters)

Karauli 30

Jaipur 85

Ganganagar 100

Dungarpur 110

Bhilwara 90

Barmer 85

Kota 175

Average distance 96

Source:Primary Data(interview with the Gram Secretary, Sarpanch and field observation)

The above table reveals the distance between the street light points. The ideal

distance is 30 meters(BEE, Ministry of Power) which was seen in case of Karauli district

only while the distance was far more than the norms in the other districts. The

average distance was calculated at 96 meters which indicates the need for more

lighting points in these areas.

During the discussions, the sarpanchs and the community members

expressed the need for more resources (both financial and manpower) for improving

the scenario in the rural areas. A need for introducing solar technology for street

Bhilwara 2 25 100

Barmer 1 12.5 100

Kota 5 62.5 80 Total 15 26.78 93.33

63


lighting and using CFL technology for saving power was also emphatically

expressed.

Internal Roads

The people expressed their satisfaction on the condition of the roads in the

rural areas except the desert and canal area. They suggested that the roads, during

construction should have a built-in component of drainage. The sarpanchs felt that

there was lack of sufficient funds for proper maintenance of the roads. Surprisingly,

Ganganagar has shows its indifference to this core function also.

Cremation and Burial Grounds

The incidences of encroachment on the Cremation and Burial Grounds were

found to be all pervasive. About 80% of the community members expressed their

dissatisfaction on the maintenance of the crematoria and burial grounds. A need for

boundaries, drinking water and shade was felt by them. Surprisingly, only 12% of

the sarpanchs and local community members felt the need for more area for

cremation and burials. This implies that there is a need for only taking up the

maintenance of the existing cremation and burial grounds in the rural areas.

Public Parks

There was a provision of public parks in nine out of the 56 GPs. Most of them

were looked after by the gram panchayats and the rest were taken care by the

committees/agencies. The condition of the public parks in Kota was appreciable

while the others lacked maintenance and were in a bad shape. The main reason

stated was a lack of budgetary provision for their upkeep.

Community Centres

64


The community halls in a gram panchayat are for multipurpose use. There

were community halls in Karauli, Ganganagar and Dungarpur districts while Jaipur

and Bhilwara had minimum number of community centres. The basic facilities like

sanitation, electricity, drinking water and toilets are lacking in most of the

community halls and the maintenance is also unsatisfactory. The community halls

are supposed to be self maintaining with the income that they are supposed to

make by hiring them out. The hurdle is that presently they do not have even basic

facilities like electricity and that would make them lucrative for hiring on important

occasions. For lighting purposes, we would like to emphasise on solar power.

Drinking Water

Rajasthan has 1.16% of surface water and 1.70% of ground water of the total

resources in the country. As the surface water is very inadequate, there is a growing

reliance on ground water with not much effort being made to increase the amount of

surface water to provide drinking water to one of the largest growing human and

animal population in the country. Over extraction of water from deep wells without

any serious effort to re-charge them has led to decreasing potability of water

resulting in serious health situation in the State.

Drinking water supply in rural areas is still far below a satisfaction level. We

are still finding that the access to drinking water for SC/ST people is much lesser

than to the general caste people. It is anybody‘s guess as to when the State will be

able to provide 70 litre of water par capita in the desert region and 40 litres the capita

in the plains. The minimum requirement of water per capita,we are meeting only

10% of the demand as per norms at present.

44.65% of Rajasthan villages have the problem of fluorides, 82.4% have saline

water, 28.6% nitrate compared to the total number of villages in the country. Thus

the need of the day is not only to increase the quantity of water to the growing

population of men and animals, but also to make whatever is available potable for

drinking.

65


From the 12th Plan draft document, it is found that the main thrust of the

government is to somehow increase the surface water availability without making

serious efforts for desalinization and de-fluoridization of the existing quantity of

water so that it is also added to the total amount of drinking water. With a large

number of villages/ habitations with salinity – out of a total number of 24522

villages in India with salinity, Rajasthan has 20211, the government finds it easier to

bring surface water from various parts of Rajasthan for local needs by arguing that

the per liter cost of desalinated water is 35 paisa per litre as compared to 30 paisa per

litre from surface sources. It is not known whether the cost of so many projects for

drinking water like Bisalpur, Jawai Pipe Line Project, Barmer Lift Canal, Bisalpur-

Dudu-Phulera Project, Chambal- Sawai-Madhopur-Balar Water Supply Project,

Ajmer-Bisalpur Project have been included or not for finding the per litre cost.

Similar is the case of de-fluoridization. As has been stated above, out of 23107

villages in India with water containing dangerous levels of fluoride, 10319 are in

Rajasthan only. However, the draft 12th Plan does not take it up as a serious matter

and depends totally on surface water. As per the report of the PHED Department,

the State spent Rs.34.67 crores in 12 districts of Rajasthan in 2643

villages/habitations between March, 2005 to February 2008 for de-fluoridization

projects. In the second phase another 5056 villages/habitations were taken up. The

State Government took the financial support from UNICEF and cooperation from 19

NGOs for the projects.

It is also surprising that the 12th Plan has provided only Rs.9191.81 crores for

rural water supply but 5393.37 for urban water supply. This is disproportionate

looking at the rural urban population divide and the presence of large number of

animals in the rural areas, which are not there in urban areas. That more required

funds were given to urban areas is evident from the expenditure in the 11th Plan

where the rural water supply expenditure exceeded the allocation by nearly Rs.1000

crores whereas in the urban areas, the utilization was less than the outlay by Rs.200

crores.

66


It is also strongly suggested that the use of chlorine and bleaching powder

should be reduced and the PHED should be advised to use the latest technique

which is cheaper also like electro-chlorination. Regarding de- fluoridation, the latest

method which is cheaper and can be used by ordinary, illiterate villagers is the

KRASS de-fluroidation process. It may be reiterated that the upper limit of fluorides

in potable water is only 1.5 m.g. per litre whereas in several districts of Rajasthan,

the villagers are forced to drink water with fluoride concentrations upto 44 mg. per

litre.

KRASS is a new method now under serious field trials and should be looked

into by the State. This process is effective for unlimited amount of fluoride

concentration in the input water. It is easy and requires minimal involvement of

technical personal and is harmless and cost effective. It is supposed to be a practical

approach especially for rural population in Rajasthan. The SFC may like to discuss it

further with the Department of PHED and provide necessary funds for it, if there is a

shortage.

We feel that the earlier we get rid of salinity and fluorides in our drinking

water, not only more potable water would be available but also we may not need

to bring so much of surface water from long distances. This is an area where the

State Finance Commission should provide its support.

We, therefore, suggest that more funds should be provided through the

State Plan with augmentation by the State Finance Commission for rural water

supply. If needed the State Finance Commission should also provide necessary

funds for complete de- fluoridization and de-salinization in all the districts

during the 12th Plan particularly in the desert districts viz Barmer, Jaisalmer,

Nagaur, Jodhpur and Bikaner. The cost of a desalination plant is Rs 12 Lakhs/Unit

with a useful life of 10 years for a population of 1000.

The expenditure out of the total funds provided to the PHED for rural water

supply should be closely monitored by the Gram Panchayats. It is also suggested

that the State Finance Commission may provide funds for repairing of pump motors

for drawing water, if there is need for more than one repair.

67


The table 3.7 reveals that the availability of drinking water in the nearest

habitation was inmere 64.10 percent of the sampled panchayats. The water is mostly

provided to the main village only. This needs for some local arrangements for

supplying it to other parts of the Gram Panchayats. At a few gram panchayats in

Ganganagar, there is no potable water source and they use irrigation water for

drinking purposes.In a place like Barmer, habitation is scattered and it becomes

difficult to provide water by conventional ways. This leaves the onus on either the

gram panchayat or the individual to make thier own arrangements (tankers, rain

water harvesting).

The condition of drinking water availability at public places (markets,

schools, bus stands, hospitals, etc) is even more unsatisfactory. Drinking water is

available at only 57.14 percent of public places. In Kota, the facility was decent

because of the high number of taps under the “pach pahad”.The Ramganj Mandi

Pach Pahad Water Supply Project was envisaged to provid drinking water to 220

villages of Ramganj Mandi, Pach Pahad and Bhainsroadgarh, Tehsil and four towns

of Jhalawar and Chittorgarh. Total sanction cost of the project in Rs.196 crore and it

is being funded NABARD under RIDF. The project has been completed and five

towns and 220 villages are being benefits from the project. It was found that the taps

under this project have been placed at community places and has resulted in

continued water supply at the public places.

It was found that PHED provides water in 91.07 percent of gram panchayats

of the sampled districts. This was being done by the ground level reservoirs,

overhead tanks (with taps) and hand pumps. The maintenance and filtration are

being looked after by the PHED. Mostly, the water is supplied to the main village

and not to the remote villages. Even the onus of maintenance of hand pumps and

electricity for boring is being borne by the panchayats. In addition, it also has the

additional responsibility of maintaining the traditional water sources like tanka,

pokhar and johar.

Table 3.31 Availability of Drinking Water in Habitations District (%)

Karauli 75

68


Jaipur 68

Ganganagar 84.11

Dungarpur 71.65

Bhilwara 59

Barmer 13

Kota 78

Total (Average) 64.10

Table 3.32 Source of Drinking Water

Districts PHED Tankers Hand pumps Rain Water Harvesting

Others

Karauli 7 2 4 0 1

Jaipur 6 4 6 0 1

Ganganagar 8 0 0 0 0

Dungarpur 7 0 7 0 2

Bhilwara 7 1 8 0 1

Barmer 8 2 4 6 0

Kota 8 1 7 1 2

Total 51 10 36 7 7

It is obvious that rainwater harvesting has not been popularized in most of

the districts. Barmer is an exception because rainwater harvesting has been a

tradition for centuries.

The analysis shows that there are wide gaps in the availability of drinking

water – an area of utmost priority for the State Finance Commission.

Health and Sanitation

To control epidemic diseases most of the village secretaries admitted that no

activity was undertaken due to lack of coordination among PHED, health and

Panchayati raj departments. There were suggestions that water storage tanks should

be regularly cleaned and chlorinated. Timely and proper fogging would prevent the

case of epidemics which is not being done. Insecticides should be sprayed regularly

before the onset of rains which is presently not being done timely. They also

suggested that there should be proper coordination between health department and

panchayati raj.

69


There were hardly any public toilet facilities at gram panchayats. The

maximum number of public toilets was in Kota and Ganganagar while there were

hardly any in the other districts. The regular maintenance, cleaning and condition of

the public toilets was dismal. The Sarpanchs opined that they do not promote the

idea of public toilets due to lack of maintenance and cleanliness which eventually

makes them non usable. Separate toilet facility for ladies was also not available

calling for an urgent requirement specifically at community places.

Own Sources of Revenue

Four gram panchayats out of 56 reported to have their own source of revenue.

For the prime reason of losing votes and goodwill, the Sarpanchs were reluctant to

levy any kind of local taxes to augment revenue. Out of these four panchayats one

was from Kota, two from Dungarpur and one from Bhilwara. Two of these

panchayats have levied taxes on haat, one as House tax and the fourth on taxes on

Land Deeds. On being asked whether the Sarpanch was willing to introduce a new

tax to be levied by the Gram Panchayats, two third of them expressed reluctance.

This is a trend which needs to be checked with disincentives.

Table 3.33 Opinion about the acceptability of these taxes by People

Table 3.34 New Taxes which may be introduced

S.No. Item Response

1 Taxes on liquor shops 11

2 Small shops,thadi 9

3 Percentage on registries 4

4 Mobile towers 3

District Responses

Karauli 2

Jaipur 3

Ganganagar 3

Dungarpur 0

Bhilwara 2

Barmer 0

Kota 5

Total 15

70


5 Taxes on mining 2

6 Vehicle tax 1

7 Sanitation tax 1

8 Marriage lawns,places 1

9 Road tax 1

10 Grazing lands(charagah) 1

11 Highway restaurants 1

12 Taxes on factories 1

13 Taxes on agriculture production 1

14 Taxes on fairs 1

During the study, an attempt was made to enquire about the willingness of

the Sarpanchas to levy taxes by the Gram Panchayats. In addition they were also

asked to identify the areas where these taxes may be levied. It was found that

majority of them proposed to levy taxes on liquor shops, small shops, thadis and

mobile towers. Other suggestions included percent on registry amount, mining

tax,tax on marriage lawns etc.

Out of 21 gram panchayats who expressed their willingness to levy taxes in

future, people in 15 gram panchayats expressed their readiness for paying the taxes

whereas people from 6 gram panchayats do not favour the idea of any new taxes. In

Barmer and Dungarpur, people are not ready for new taxes as they are financially

not sound.

Details of Works being done by SFC/TFC Grant

Most of the grants received from the finance commissions are spent on

drinking water, emoluments of the elected representatives, drainage and roads.

Some of the GPs mentioned spending on sanitation, street lighting, solid waste

management and public facilities but it seemed that these activities are not on the

priority list of the GPs.

Formation of Development Committees

71


There are development committees proposed under every scheme to plan,

monitor and supervise them. The Gram Panchayat Secretary was asked about the

formation and functioning committees that have been formed under the Gram

Panchayat. That most of these communities still are just created for formality shake

and are not functional.

The Gram Secretary were aware of the Vitt evam Karadhan Samiti, Shiksha

Samiti, Prashashan evam Stapna Samiti, Jal evam Swachata Samiti, Gramin Vikas evam

Samajik Ankeshen Samiti. It is primarily due to the reason that the concern

development project SSA, NRHM, MNREGS, etc. These committees have been

formed as the funds are chanalized through these committees however. All the GPs

reported to be forming their annual plan but it was found that it was just a routine

exercise which does not reflect the local needs or the community voices.

Table 3.35 Gram Panchayat Committees for Rural Development

S.No. Name of Committee Response (n-56) Functional Committees

1 Shiksha samiti 45 3

2 Vitt and karadhan 42 1

3 Prashashan aur Staphna 40 7

4 Jal aur swachata n health samiti 35 1

5 Gramin vikas samiti 23 2

6 Samajik ankekshan 19 12

7 Arthik and samajik 17

8 Satarkta samiti 10 6

9 Sthai nigrani samiti 8

10 NREGA sthai samiti 5 2

11 Nirman samiti 4

12 Goshala a charagah vikas samiti 4 1

13 Sarvjanik vitran pranali nigrani samiti

4

72


14 Mahila and vikas samiti 1

15 Kalyankari yojna samiti 1

16 Lekha avam vitt samiti 1

It was found out that there was transparency in the matter of funds received

from various sources. The community members also expressed their awareness

about the funds received by the GP. It was found that the expenditure and audit

were transparent and available to the community. The work plan and its

implementation are also communicated to the people of the community by various

sources. According to the secretaries the most important source is Gram Sabha.

Table 3.36 Activities for Women Empowerment

S.No. Activities Response (n-56) Percentage

1 Formation of Self Help Groups 48 85.71

2 Skill Trainings 12 21.42

3 Campaigns for awareness 6 10.73

4 Priority in MNREGA 3 5.35

The activities performed by gram panchayats for the empowerment of

women have been shown in the tableabove. SHGs seem to be the most popular

vehicle for women empowerment particularly in Barmer and Dungarpur. It was

found that 48 gram panchayats do not receive any budget for women empowerment.

The rest of the gram panchayats receive budget from SGSY for training and literacy.

Awards/Rewards Received by the Gram Panchayats

It was found that 15 out of the 56 GPs have earned recognition by the central

and state governments in the form of Nirmal Gram Award, Rs 1 lakh were given as

reward to fulfil the targets for female sterilization, fulfilling targets of family

welfare, etc. All the stakeholders were very positive about the reward system as

they felt it promoted the zeal for development and motivated the representatives

for performance.

73


A Review

Recent years have witnessed an increasing interest in and growing

consciousness of the need and importance of local self-government as a provider of

services to the community as well as an instrument of democratic self-government.

Until recently, urban local government was manifested in municipal corporations,

municipal councils, municipalities and notified area committees. However, the 74th

CAA 1992 proposed to form a uniform structure of Municipal Corporations,

Municipal Councils and Municipalities.

Urban local bodies are supposed to be formed as democratic institutions

based on the principles of self-government and should represent people‘s desires

and strengths. Due to massive urban growth during the past two decades, quality of

urban life has deteriorated, creating an urgent need for vibrant and efficient ULBs

that can deliver adequate services and improve living conditions. Lord governments

are in the best position to improve service delivery as they allow for increasing both

allocative efficiency through better matching of public services to local preference as

well as productive efficiency through increased accountability of local governments

to citizens, fewer levels of bureaucracy and better knowledge of local costs.

The 74th CAA 1992 has acted upon the recommendations of the Rural-Urban

Relationship Committee and seeks to provide more power and authority to urban

local bodies. It is the first serious attempt to ensure stabilization of democratic

The Status of

Urban Local Bodies (ULBs)

74


municipal government through constitutional provisions. The 74th CAA seeks to

introduce fundamental changes in urban local bodies. Its salient feature are :

introduction of the Twelfth Schedule which lists the functions of the urban

local bodies, covering planning, regulation and development aspects (Box

4.1);

establishment of District and Metropolitan planning responsible for the

election of representatives for the preparation of development plans at district

and metropolitan levels;

establishment of ward committees in areas having a population of over

300,000;

specification by law of the powers and responsibilities;entrusted to

municipalities and ward committees;

holding of periodic and timely elections.If a municipality is dissolved for any

reason it should be reconstituted within six months.

Specifying by law the sources of municipal finances and their periodic review

by a statutorily constituted SFC and by making it obligatory on the part of the

Central Finance Commission to recommend measures needed to augment

state resources to assist the municipal governments;

Restrictions on the power of state governments to do away with

democratically elected municipal governments;

Reservation of one-third of seats for women and weaker sections in municipal

bodies;

75


Box 4.1

Twelfth Schedule of the Constitution of India

1. Urban planning, including town planning.

2. Regulation of land use and construction of buildings.

3. Planning for economic and social development.

4. Roads and bridges.

5. Water supply for domestic, industrial and commercial purposes.

6. Public health, sanitation, conservancy and solid waste management.

7. Fire services.

8. Urban forestry, protection of environment and promotion of

ecological aspects.

9. Safeguarding the interests of weaker sections of society, including

the disabled and mentally retarded.

10. Slum improvement and upgrading.

11. Urban poverty alleviation.

12. Provision of urban amenities and facilities such as parks, gardens,

playgrounds, etc.

13. Promotion of cultural, educational and aesthetic aspects.

14. Cremation and burial grounds with stress on electric cremation.

15. Cattle pounds; prevention of cruelty to animals.

16. Vital statistics, including registration of births and deaths.

17. Public amenities, including street lighting, parking lots, bus stops,

and public conveniences.

18. Regulation of slaughter houses and tanneries.

(This schedule was added by the Constitution (Seventy-fourth Amendment) Act, 1992, sec.4)

76


In order to assess the present field situation a focused survey was done of the

various categories of the Urban Local Bodies by our Institution. In each of the ULBs,

interviews of the EO/CEO, two Councilors (Parshads) and twenty community

members were conducted. In addition, one Focus Group Discussion (FGD) was also

conducted to ascertain the public opinion. The first section of this chapter focuses on

the situation on the basis of the secondary data collected from the ULBs, while the

second focuses on the opinion of the CEO/Councilor/Community on the delivery of

the basic services.

MUNICIPAL BOARDS

The following municipal boards were selected according to the prescribed

methodology (see Chapter 2) for the study:

Table 4.1 – Sample ULBs for the Study

S.N District Name of Municipal Board

GRADE II

1 Chittaurgarh Chittaurgarh

2 Sawai Madhopur Sawai Madhopur

3 Tonk Deoli

GRADE III

4 Hanumangarh Peelibanga

5 Nagaur Kuchaman

6 Dausa Bandikui

GRADE IV

7 Tonk Uniara

8 Bundi Kapren

9 Nagaur Nawan

10 Jhunjhunu Surajgarh

11 Jaipur Jobner

Demographic profile

The population of the municipal boards was in consonance with the

prescribed norms for the categorization. The average number of wards was found to

77


be 18 in G-II, 27 in G-III and 34 in G-IV. The incidence of poverty as reflected in the

number of BPL families at the Grade IV level was found to be high.

Table 4.2 – Population Details of the sample ULBs

Average Population

Census 2011)

Area ULBs (Sq

km)

Average no. of

households

Average Number of BPL

families

Average Number of

wards under ULBs

Municipal Board GRADE II 86496 28.2 21998 3170 34

Municipal Board GRADE III 48160 16.3 8905 1515 27

Municipal Board GRADE IV 18746 7.8 3733 1035 18

Roles and responsibilities of ULBs

An attempt to identify the functions that are being carried out by the ULBs vis

a vis the roles and responsibilities of ULBs given under Schedule-XII by the

Constitution of India. It was found that in Grade IV bodies, only building and of

land use activities, construction of roads, sanitation, solid waste management and

death-birth registration activities were being done. There was a total absence of

investing for social and economic development. Fire management, slum

rehabilitation; regulation of slaughterhouses is completely missing at this level.

Other activities are being carried out only in some of the sample grade IV ULBs. The

same fact were found for Grade III municipalities. In Grade II ULBs, except for the

regulation of slaughter houses, almost all the other activities are being done by the

ULBs. It is found that the focus of the Municipal Boards is on building and

conversion of land use activities and construction of roads. Sanitation, solid waste

management and death-birth registration activities.

78


Income of the Municipal Boards

Table 4.3 Position of Income from govt. grants /schemes/own resources

SN

Income heads Grade-2 Grade-3 Grade-4

Income year

2011-12(in lakh)

% of Total

income

Income year 2011-

12(in lakh)

% of Total

income

Income year 2011-

12(in lakh)

% of Total

income

1 Govt grants 806.41 16.43 163.75 8.16 221.03 19.95

2 Schemes 855.85 17.44 195.51 9.74 61.55 5.55

3 Own Resource 732.19 14.92 343.29 17.11 148.78 13.43

4 Octroi Reimbursement

1537.18 31.32 552.64 27.54 321.77 29.04

79


5 Sell out Of Properties 816.8 16.64 73.74 3.68 47.26 4.27

6 Income from Security 158.95 3.24 18.95 0.94 65.28 5.89

7 Pension Fund 0 0 0 0 41.7 3.76

8 Opening Balance 0 0 658.57 32.82 200.69 18.11

Total 4907.38 100 2006.45 100 1108.06 100

Govt grants,8%

Schemes, 10%

Own Resource, 17%

Octroi Reimbursement

, 27%

4%1%

0%

Opening Balance, 33%

Position of Income for grade-3

Sell out Of Properties Income from Security Pension Fund

80


Table 4.4 Position of Expenditure in year 2011-12

S N

Expenditure head Grade-2 Grade-3 Grade-4 Expenditure in

year 2011-12(lakh)

% of Total Expenditure

Expenditure in year 2011-

12(lakh)


Expenditure in year 2011-

12(lakh)


1 Establishment 1849.19 39.50 644.32 50.59 425.53 45.74

2 Administration 273.4 5.84 38.04 2.99 39.55 4.25

3 Solid waste 123.73 2.64 105.61 8.29 174.92 18.80

4 Street lighting 141.81 3.03 50.99 4.00 28.32 3.04

5 Election &Programmes 82.5 1.76 10.38 0.81 0.19 0.02

6 Other programmes 135 2.88 15 1.18 13.53 1.45

7 Road & Over bridge 870.77 18.60 222.00 17.43 83.27 8.95

8 Drainage 41.04 0.88 101.97 8.01 50.3 5.41

10 Burials and burial ground

18.5 0.40 3.75 0.29 0 0.00

11 Community hall 56.8 1.21 5.00 0.39 5.45 0.59

12 Garaging land 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.5 0.05

13 Garage 16 0.34 0 0.00 0 0.00

Govt grants, 20%

6%

Own Resource, 13%

Octroi Reimbursement

, 29%

4%

6%

4%

Opening Balance, 18%

Position of Income for grade-4

Schemes Sell out Of Properties Income from Security Pension Fund

81


14 Public Health 5.23 0.11 1.5 0.12 0 0.00

15 Public Toilets 5.59 0.12 5.25 0.41 2.97 0.32

16 Park 35.15 0.75 12.86 1.01 2.46 0.26

17 Water 47.09 1.01 10.3 0.81 0.72 0.08

18 Vehicle 40 0.85 39.07 3.07 23.88 2.57

19 Fire Brigade 79.96 1.71 5.11 0.40 5.68 0.61

20 Sewage 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00

21 Other office expenses 860 18.37 2.5 0.20 0 0.00

22 Other 0 0 0 0 73.04 7.85

Total 4681.76 100.00 1273.65 100.00 930.31 100

Establishment & Administration

45%

Solid waste3%

Street lighting3%

Road & Over bridge19%

Public Health &Public Toilets

0%

Others12%

Other office expenses

18%

0%

Expenditure in year 2011-12 Grade-2

Establishment&Administration

54%

Solid waste

8%Street lighting

4%



1%

Others16%


0%


82


Table 4.5Estimated budget for the year 2012-13

SN Budget head Estimate budget for

year 2012-13(` in Lakh)


Per capita Expenditure

(`)

Per Household

Expenditure (`)

1 Establishment 3328.97 39.67 668.87 2988.95

2 Administration 420.48 5.01 84.48 377.53

3 Solid Waste 522.03 6.22 104.89 468.71

4 Street Lighting 274.60 3.27 55.17 246.55

5 Election &Programmes

129.50 1.54 26.02 116.27

6 Other expenses 1602.40 19.09 321.96 1438.73

7 Road &Overbridges

637.07 7.59 128.00 572.00

8 Drainage 462.75 5.51 92.98 415.48

9 Cremation and burial grounds

28.50 0.34 5.73 25.59

10 Community halls 108.90 1.30 21.88 97.78

11 Garages 17.60 0.21 3.54 15.80

12 Public Health 18.73 0.22 3.76 16.82

13 Public Toilets 61.84 0.74 12.43 55.52

14 Parks 76.66 0.91 15.40 68.83

15 Drinking Water 114.10 1.36 22.93 102.45

16 Vehicles 90.18 1.07 18.12 80.97

17 Fire Brigade 204.10 2.43 41.01 183.25

18 Sewage 3.60 0.04 0.72 3.23

19 Others 290.60 3.46 58.39 260.92

Total 8392.61 100.00 1686.28 7535.39

Establishment&Administration

54%

Solid waste

8%Street lighting

4%



1%

Others16%


0%


83


SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

The amount of solid waste for a day in 147.5 tonnes out of which only 137.2

tonnes is collected everyday and the remaining 10.3 tonnes remains uncollected

raising problems of pollution for inhabitantly. In fact, the per capita output of solid

waste is 0.30 kg. It is necessary to improve the process of collecting solid waste.

Across all the sampled boards, presently there are 872 sweepers, out of whom

34.8% are on contract. The requirement is for 980 more sweepers. It means that at

present the number of sweepers (1 sweeper for 570 persons) is not as per laid down

requirements. With the addition of 980 more sweepers the coverage in terms of

persons covered will be with comes down to 268. Though it is still above the

prescribed average, of one sweeper per 250 populations, there will be a quantum

jump from the present status of sweepers in numbers.

Table 4.6 Requirement ofManpower forSolid Waste Management

Municipal Board

Present Proposed Sweepers Jamadars Population

(Per sweeper) Additional requirement of sweepers

Planned coverage

population per sweeper

Total Regular Contractual

Grade II 500 376 124 13 519 500 259 Grade III 188 123 65 2 768 305 293 Grade IV 184 69 115 3 509 175 261

Above table reveals that as the estimated population across sampled Grade-II

ULBs comes to 259489. Presently there are 500 sweepers, out of whom 367 are

regular and 124 are contractual. The additional requirements of 519 more sweepers

will make the coverage of population per sweeper to 259, which at present is 519,

much higher than the prescribed average i.e. one sweeper per 250 populations.

In III grade Municipal Boards, at present there are 188 sweepers out of whom

123 are regular and 65 are contractual. The average population of such boards is

144481. Thus 768 populations are covered by one sweeper.With the quantum

increase of sweepers by 305, the coverage of population will come to 293 by one

sweepers.

84


Grade-IV municipal Boards has the estimated population as 93731 and 184

sweepers at present, of which 115 are regular and 03 are contractual. With additional

requirement of 175 were sweepers, the coverage of population by one sweeper will

come to 261, which presently is 509.

Interval of Cleaning

Though as per prescribed norms, the clearing of garbage and cleaning of

roads and lanes should be done twice a day, the practice of cleaning once a day is in

vogue. There is no need to change it.

Status of Equipment for cleaning and clearing garbage

Various kinds of equipments are used for cleaning and collection of garbage.

There is need to further augment the capacity of these equipments for which a

budget estimate of Rs.202.82 lakhs has been proposed by the respective Municipal

Board. These estimates in physical and financial terms have been taken from the

Annual Plan of the concerned Municipal Boards.

Table 4.7 Status and needs of Equipments for Solid Waste Management in Sample Municipal Board

SN Assets Present status

Additional requirement in next year

Estimate budget required in next year

` in lakh 1 1cubic m. Dustbins 334 48 2.424 2 3 cubic m. Dustbins 212 65 12.58 3 7.5cubic m. Dustbins 5 20 15 4 Tri cycles 4 0 0 5 Rehedi (with dustbins) 55 25 1.25 6 Tractors 31 16 85.62 7 Mini trucks 10 0 0 8 Trucks 0 1 9.8 9 Tippers 1 3 30

10 Compactors 1 0 0 11 Dumper Placers 4 4 21.61 12 Loaders 7 2 19.8 13 Container lifting devices 3 1 1.74 14 Auto placers 0 0 0 15 Others (JCB) 4 0 0 16 Tempo loaders 4 2 3

85


Total 202.824

Solid Waste Production

On the basis of the data obtained from the EOs of the respective ULBs it was

found that average production of solid waste per capita was 300gm per capita per

day. This has been taken as the norm for solid waste production while calculating

the costs in the later chapters.

Table 4.8 Production of solid waste per day Production

of solid waste per

day (in tonnes)

Solid waste pick up per

day

(in tonnes)

Gap in solid waste

(in tonnes)

Production of solid

waste per capita (in kg)

Production of solid waste per

household

(in kg)

Total 147.5 137.2 10 0.30 1.32

Status of Street Lights

In the year 2011-12, there were 31610 street light points. It is proposed to

increase the number to 34216, thus bringing the per capita light points to 15.52 in the

year 2012-13 from 17.35 in the year 2011-12.

It may be stated that the situation in this regard is better in small towns (with

municipal boards) than in cities.On the other hand, however, the small towns have

only 152 timers for regulating the street lights. In fact, there should be 1 timer for 50

lights. Presently,one timer regulates 208 street light points. This situation is liable to

have adverse impact on the functioning of street lights. Danger of the collapse of

street light system is inherent in such situations.

Table 4.9 Status of street lighting points

Equipment

LED CFL Available

in year 2011-12

Estimated no. for next

year

Estimated budget for next

year (`Lakh)


Estimated no. for next year

Estimated budget for next year (` Lakh)

Tube lights 18084 1200 12.21 6266 496 4.376

Bulbs 2131 535 1.87 337 70 0.56

Mercurys 200 0 0 0 0 0

Sodium lights 3980 285 9.975 472 4 0

High mask 26 6 10.8 14 0 0

86


lights

Gen. bulbs 0 0 0 0 10 360

Others 0 0 0 100 0 0 Total Points 24421 2026 34.855 7189 580 364.936

Table 4.10 Status of timers

Status of Timer Solar Automatic Manual Coverage points per

timer

Coverage population per

timer

2011-12 0 139 13 207.96 3274.35

Table 4.11 Status of street light points

Number of points in 2011-12

Coverage population per point



point

Grade II 18920 13.71 19619 13.22

Grade III 8142 17.75 9379 15.40

Grade IV 4548 20.60 5218 17.96

FIRE FIGHTING EQUIPMENT

Table 4.12 Status of equipments

Equipments Status in year 2011-12

Estimated Requirement for

2012-13

Estimated budget for 2012-13 (` inLakh)

Snorkel/hydraulic platform 0 0 0

Water blazers 5 3 28.5

Foam tenders 1 3 37

Water tenders 5 4 32

Jeeps 0 0 0

Others 0 0 0

87


The equipment for fire fighting is not adequately available in the small towns.

There is need to augment the capacity of equipment available for fire fighting. Three

more water blazers, three foam tenders and four water tenders are required for

which an estimated expenditure of 243.3 lakhs is needed in addition to the exsisting

setup.

Waste water drainage

There is need to have drainage outfits for 722 kms.. Presently, the drainage

system accounts for 119.2 km which is much less than the requirement. 54 km of

drainage system have been proposed for the year 2012-13. Repair is needed for 17.3

kms. of the existing length of the drainage system.

Table 4.13 Physical Status of drainage (Nalis)

Requirement of nali (km)

Total length of drainage nali (km)

Proposed nali in next year (km)

Proposed maintenance of nali

in next year(km)

Grade II 81.2. 485 27 10

Grade III 12.5 51.5 10.5 2.6

Grade IV 25.5 66.5 16.5 4.7

Total 119.2 603 54 17.3

In Grade-II Municipal Boards across the sample the present length of

drainage is 485 km. and requirement of 81.2 km. of nail is proposed, out of which 27

km. of nail is required to be constructed in 2012-13 and 10 km. nali‘s maintenance is

proposed in 2012-13.

Grade-III sampled Municipal Boards have 51.5 km. of nail, with the proposal

of requirement of 12.5 km. nail, 10.5 km. will be constructed and 2.6 km. will be

maintained in the year 2012-13.

At present 66.5 of drainage is there in Grade-IV sampled Municipal Boards. It

has been proposed that 25.5 km. of nail is required, out of which 16.5 km. nail is

proposed for construction and 4.7 km. for maintenance in the year 2012-13.

Table 4.14 Financial Status of drainage (Nalis)

88


Expenditure

for nali (2011-12)

Lakh

Expenditure for maintenance of nali (2011-12)

Lakh

Estimate budget for nali(2012-13)

Lakh

Estimate budget for maintenance of nali(2012-13)

Lakh

Grade II 36.82 4.22 86.40 4.6

Grade III 82.97 19.00 184.00 50.0

Grade IV 35.00 15.30 80.00 57.75

Total 154.79 38.52 350.40 112.35

Grade-II sampled Municipal Boards have incurred the expenditure of Rs.36.82

lakh on construction of nail and Rs.4.22 on maintenance of nail in 2011-12. There is a

proposed estimated expenditure of Rs.86.40 lakh for construction of nail and Rs.4.6

lakh for maintenance in the year 2012-13.

In Grade-III sampled Municipal Board the expenditure of Rs.35.00 lakh on

construction of nail and Rs.15.30 lakh on maintenance of the same has been done in

2011-12. Rs. 80.00 lakh for construction of nail and Rs.57.75 lakh for maintenance are

proposed for the year 2012-13.

Across the sampled Municipal Boards of Grade-IV, Rs.182.97 lakh has been

incurred as expenditure on construction of nail and Rs.19.00 lakh on maintenance in

2011-12. The estimated expenditure for 2012-13 of Rs.184.00 lakh on construction and

Rs.50.00 lakh on maintenance is proposed.


Presently, there are 166 public toilets, eight sulabh toilets and six urinals.

There is need to have 86 public toilets and fivesulabh toilets for which proposal has

been made at appropriate level. An estimated budget of Rs.61.7 lakh has been

proposed and submitted for acceptance to the concerned authorities by the

municipalities.


Presently there are 57 cremation grounds and 21 grave yards, with 162.5bigha

and 73.5bigha of land respectively. There is need to have 5bigha more for cremation

grounds.

Table 4.15 Physical status

89


No .of cremation and

burial grounds Area of cremation and

burial grounds (in bighas)

Additional area require for cremation

and burial ground (in bighas)

Cremation Burial grounds


Cremation Burial ground

Grade II 19 8 21.5 13 .0 0 0 Grade III 9 5 42.5 38.5 0 0 Grade IV 29 8 98.5 25 5 - Total 57 21 162.5 73.5 5 0

Public Parks

There are 86 public parks managed by the ULB‘s, covering 1955 sq. meters

each. 16 more public parks are needed for which proposals have been submitted.

Presently, there are 97 gardeners for the maintenance of these parks, which is

satisfactory.

Table 4.16 Physical status of Public Parks


No .of Public parks

Area of Public parks

(sq.meter)


require

Additional area require for

Public parks(sq.meter)


86 168140 16 37442

Table 4.17

Total no. of workers in public parks

Regular Contractual

97 9 88

Community Halls

There are 56 community halls and 39 more have been proposed for the year

2012-13. Presently, there is one community hall for around 9000 people.

Table 4.18 Physical status of Community halls

Status of Community halls

No. of Community

Area of Community

Additional Community

Additional area required for

90


halls halls(in Sq.

ft.) halls

required Community halls(in Sq.ft.)

Community halls run by ULBs

56 24865 39 24075

Roads

The total length of roads etc. in the sampled ULBs comes to 713 kms. It is

proposed to construct 21.6 kms. of roads during the year 2012-13.

Table 4.19

Construction Total length of

roads /number

in present

Construction of

Road/pulia/rapat in

year 2011-12 (KM)

construction of


2012-13 (KM)

Estimate construction

of Road/pulia/

rapat in year 2012-13

(KM)

Estimate budget for Road/pulia/rapat in year 2012-

13 (ìn lakh)

Per Km expenditure

12-13(ìn lakh)

C.C. Roads 262.8 19.63 21.86 13.8 287.23 20.79

Kachchi Roads

39 0 3 1 2 2.0

Pukki Roads 434.3 3 20.6 6.4 96.8 15.12

Rapats 35 10 16 13 91 7.0

Gravel Roads 16 3 2 1.4 10 7.14 Total 487.03

Repair of Roads

Out of 713.1 km of roads, etc. 36.2 kms. of roads need repairs for which proposals

have been submitted with estimated budgetary requirements.

Table 4.20 Physical and financial status for Repairing of Road/pulia/rapat

Repairing Repairing of

Road/pulia/rapat in year 2011-

12

Repairing of Road/pulia/rapat in year 2012-13(KM)

Estimate Repairing of Road/pulia/rapat in year 2012-13(KM)



in Lakh

Per KM expenditure

2012-13 (ìn lakh)


2012-13 (ìn Rs)

C.C. Roads 28.4 13 21.2 97.04 4.58 19.50

91


Kachchi Roads

0 0 0 0 0 0.00

Pukki Roads 2 3.4 0 0 0 0.00

Gravel Roads 25.5 2.3 15 53 3.54 10.65

Rapats 0 0 0 0 0 0.00

Pulias 0 0 0 0 0 0.00

Total 30.15

Public Health System

For material for the maintenance of public health, Rs.9.7 lakhs were spent

during the year 2011-12. It is proposed to spend Rs.18.7 lakhs during the year 2012-13.

Table 4.21 Physical and financial status of Public health activities

Material Utilized amount in

2011-2012(Kg\ltr)

Expenditure 2011-12

(ìn lakh)

Requirement in year 2012-2013(Kg\ltr)

Budget require in

year 2012-13

(ìn lakh)

Per capita

(ìn Rs)

Insecticide/D.D.T. 13800.0 4.2 18600.0 5.4 1.09

Fogging 500.0 0.3 100.0 0.8 0.16

Lime 150.0 0.0 150.0 0.0 0.00

Nuvan 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00

Phenyl 7365.0 4.1 18600.0 11.2 2.24

Crude oil 870.0 0.4 1070.0 0.7 0.14

Acid(Salt) 3600.0 0.4 5000.0 0.5 0.10

Equipments 3.0 0.3 1.0 0.1 0.02

Total 9.7 18.7 3.76

MUNICIPAL COUNCILS

The Municipal Councils, two were selected on the basis of the composite

index. They were Churu and Udaipur.

Municipal Councils were enquired about the activities being undertaken to

ascertain their focus. It was reported that almost all the roles and responsibilities of

92


ULBs given under Schedule-XII of theConstitution of India are being undertaken by

the Municipal Councils.


Status of Sweepers

At present the total number of sweepers is 1884 out of whom 55% are on

contract. The average of population per sweeper comes to 319. There is need to

improve the situation in this regard. It is proposed to have 500 more sweepers in

order to have a better average of population per sweeper. In that situation the

average will be 252 persons per sweeper.

There are 26 Jamadars to supervise the work of 1884 sweepers. It is indeed a

tall order as presently there are 72 sweepers working under one Jamadar. With the

increase in the number of Sweepers, the number of Jamadar should also be

increased. Hence it is proposed to have 69 more Jamadars in order to have 25

sweepers under one Jamadar on an average. This will also be in accordance with

prescribed norms.

Table 4.22 Status of sweepers

Present Proposed

Sweepers Sweepers

Total Regular Contractual Jamadars Coverage population

(Per sweeper)


Planned coverage

population

(per sweeper)

1884 849 1035 26 319 500 252

As per rules, the cleaning of roads and removal of garbage should be done

twice in a day. But presently this is being done only once in a day. There is need to

adhere to the norm and it may be possible with the addition of 500 more sweepers as

proposed above.

Status of Equipments

93


There are 13 kinds of equipment for cleaning and removal of garbage etc.

There is need to augment the equipments with additional inputs. An estimated

budget for this purpose has been prepared amounting to 272.8 lakhs.

Table 4.23 Status of assets

S N Assets Present status

Additional requirement in next year

Estimate budget require in next

year(Lakh)

1 1cubic m. 80 10 0.35450

2 3 cubic m. 35 20 3.0

3 7.5cubic m. 6 - -

4 Tri cycle - - -

5 Rehedi(with dustbins) - - -

6 Tractor 16 4 20.14

7 Mini truck 1 1 10.0

8 Truck 1 3 58.00

9 Tippers 11 1 3.9

10 Compactors 1 3 12.35

11 DumperPlacer macro/mini 10 3 79.9

12 Loader 8 3 35.25

13 Container lifting device 3 1 5.00

14 Auto placer 2 0 0

15 Other (JCB) 2 1 45.00

16 Tempo loader 0 0 0

94


Total 272.8945

Daily output of Solid waste

270 tonnes of garbage (solid waste) in the daily output in the two towns of

Churu and Udaipur. But only 207 tonnes of solid waste is collected everyday. This

leaving streets and lanes littered with garbage. It is stated that the per capita output

of solid waste is 449 grams. It is proposed that there should be improved mechanism

of the management of solid waste. The additional force of sweepers may contribute

in improving the situation.

Table 4.24 Solid Waste

Production of solid waste per day (Tones)

Pick up solid waste per day (Tones)

Gap in solid waste (Tones)

Production of solid waste per capita

Production of solid waste per household

270 207 63 0.449 kg 2.55kg

Table 4.25 Budget for solid waste

Expenditure for solid waste in year 2011-12

Per capita expenditure for solid waste in year 2011-12

Per HH expenditure for solid waste in year 2011-12

Budget for solid waste in year 2012-13

Per capita Budget for solid waste in year 2012-13

Per HH expenditure for solid waste in year 2012-13

2872.36lakh `478 ` 2719.56 ` 3415.09 lakh

` 568 ` 3233

*722.67 with recurring cost ,new purchase+ 2126.68 salary allowances + GPF 23.00 ** 748.00 with recurring cost+

STREET LIGHTING


95


Equipment

LED CFL


Estimated no. for

next year

Estimated budget for next year(in lakh)


Estimated no. for

next year

Estimated budget for next year(in lakh)

Tube light 55 150 1.65 21789 1200 13.20

Bulb 0 0 0 1985 0 0

Mercury 0 0 0 0 0 0

Sodium light

5155 0 0 400 0 0

High mask light

12 5 25.0 0 0 0

Gen. bulb 0 0 0 0 0 0

Other 1 10 3.40 0 0 0

Total 5223 165 30.05 24174 1200 13.20

Table 4.27 Status of maintenance and expansion of points

Particulars Year 2011-12(in lakh)

Estimated for next year(in lakh)

Expenditure for expansion of points 82.75 55.50

Expenditure for transformers 0 0

Expansion of new points 4970 1365

80 % equipments in dead situation in 2011-12

Avg. distance between street lights – 20 mtr.


Timer Solar Automatic Manual Coverage point per

timer

Coverage population per timer

Status in year 2011-12 22 13 0 848 17171

Status of Street Light Points

Presently the total points of street lights are 29697 covering 20.33 persons per

point. IT is proposed to have 31062 more points in order to bring the coverage to

19.35 persons per point.

96


Table 4.29 Status of street light points





point

29697 20.23 31062 19.35

Fire Extinguishers : Status of Equipments

There is only one fire station in each of the sampled towns viz. Churu and

Udaipur. The equipment for extinguishing the fire is inadequate as only 4 Water

Blazers. 2 Foam lenders and 7 water lenders are available for firefighting situations.

The fire stations have only a few trained persons. In fact contract labour is mostly

used and most of contract labours are untrained. It is proposed by the councils to

have 2 hydraulic platforms and 2 more water blazers, for which budget estimates

have been submitted.



Estimated for next year


(in lakh)

Snorkel/hydraulic platform 0 2 22

Water blazer 4 2 28

Foam tender 2 0 0

Water tender 7 0 0

Jeep 1 0 0

Fire station 2 2 27.00

Other 0 1 8.95

Physical status of Drainage system

Drainage outfits of 1255.5 kms length are available in the two towns. It is

proposed that drainage outfits of 710 kms. more should be constructed. Out of this,

the councils propose to construct 56 kms. of length drainage in the year 2012-13. 13

kms. of existing drainage outfits will also be repaired.


97


Presently there are 331 public toilets and 35 sulabh toilets in the two towns. 17

more public toilets are needed for which budget estimates have also been submitted.


Status of toilets

No. of public toilets

(2011-12)

Expenditure for public

toilets in(2011-12)


of public toilets

in(2012-13)

Budget for maintenance

of public toilets

in(2012-13)

Per capita Budget for

public toilets

Public toilets 331 19.05 17 13.8 2.29

Sulabh toilets 35 16.63 - 65.0 10.81

Urinals - - - -

Total 35.68 lakh 78.8 lakh 13.11


There are 30 cremation grounds and 14 grave yards and there is no need to

have more of them. It is, however, necessary to maintain them, and to make them

more suitable to meet the necessary needs of concerned people.

Public Parks

There are 165 public parks managed by Municipal councils and 28 parks

under the supervision of public committees. There is need to have 15 more public

parks under the ULP system. It is however, necessary to have proper maintenance of

these parks. Presently the staff for this purpose is extremely inadequate. There are

only 67 persons to maintain 193 parks, which indeed is a tall order.

Table 4.32 Physical status of Public parks

Status of Public parks No .of Public parks


(in sq.m)


require


Public parks (in sq.m)

Public parks run by ULBs 165 161400 15 11500 Public parks run by 28 22000 0 0

98


Agency/committee. Public parks run by Trust/community

0 0 0 0

Community Halls

67 Community Halls exist in two cities under the sample. Some of them need

repairs. It is proposed to have 15 more community halls to meet the needs and

requirements of growing population.

Table 4.33 Physical status of Community halls


No .of Community

halls

Area of Community

halls

Additional Community halls equire


Community halls Community halls run by ULBs

67 36200 sq.yard.

15 6000 sq.yard.

Public parks run by Trust/community

0 0 0 0

Physical Status of Roads

The road and lane system in the cities has coverage of 1863 kms. in terms of

length. It is proposed to have 37.2 kms. of additional coverage under roads and

lanes. A budget estimate of Rs.604/- lakhs has been proposed.

Table 4.34 Physical and Financial status of Roads


roads /number

in present

Km

Construction of


2011-12

Km

Construction of Road/pulia/rapat

in year 2012-13

Km

Estimate construction of


Km

Estimate budget for


2012-13

Lakh

C.C. Road 1235 11 9.5 16.2 397.0

Kachchi road 0 0 0 0 0

Puckki road 608 20 14 13 187

Gravel road 20 1.5 1 8 20

Total 604

99


Maintenance of Roads

It is proposed to repair 36.5 kms. of roads during the year 2012-13. Rs.395

lakhs have been sanctioned for this purpose.

Table 4.35 Physical and financial status for Repairing of Road/pulia/rapat

Repairing Repairing of Road/pulia/

rapat in year 2011-12

Km

Repairing of Road/pulia/rapat

in year 2012-13

Km



Km



Lakh

C.C. Road 12 15.5 23.5 289

Kachchi road 0 0 0 0

Gravel road 0 0 0 0

Pukki road 16.5 11 13 106

Total 395

Public Health Activities

Different kinds of material are used for maintaining the health of the people.

The Department of Public Health is supposed to use insecticides, DDT, Phenyle,

limeetc for keeping the environment conducive for good health. In the year 2011-12,

4.29 lakhs were spent on public health. It is now proposed to spend Rs.4.79 lakhs on

the maintenance and further improvement of public health system.

Table 4.36 Physical and financial status of public health activities

Material

Utilize amount in

2011-12

Expenditure 2011-12(in

Rs)


Budget require in

year 2012-13(in

Rs)

Per capita expenditure(i

n Rs.)

Insecticide/D.D.T. 750 kg 28125 1050kg 39375 0.066

Pyrathine 215 ltr 186921 250 Lt. 217500 0.362

Fogging - - - - 0.000

Lime 2800 105000 3000kg 112500 0.187

Nuvan 0 0 0 0 0.000

Phenyl 1400 Lt 91104 1400 Lt. 91000 0.151

Crude oil 100 3450 110 lt 3800 0.006

100


Acid(Salt) 2000 lt. 15000 2000 lt. 15000 0.025

Equipments 0 0 0 0 0.000 Total 429600 479175 0.797

INCOME AND EXPENDITURE

Table 4.37 Position of Income from govt. grants /schemes/own resources/taxes


S. No. Expenditure head Expenditure in year 2011-12(lakh)


Per capita(Rs)

Govt grants10.53

Own Resource19.35

Octroi37.45

Income For Security0.2

Opening Balance28.57

Position of Income from govt. grants /schemes /own resources/taxes in councils

S.No. Income heads Counsil Income year 2011-12(lakh) % of Total income

1 Govt grants 1558.96 10.53

2 Schemes 219.02 1.48

3 Own Resource 2865.55 19.35

4 Octroi/ 5547.23 37.45

5 Sell out Of Properties 358.94 2.42

6 Income For Security 30.05 0.20

7 Pension Fund 0 0

8 Opening Balance 4232.18 28.57

Total 14811.93 100

101


1 Establishment 4245.47 54.62 706.40

2 Administration 347.10 4.47 57.75

3 Solid waste 722.67 9.30 120.24

4 street lighting 349.33 4.49 58.12

5 Election &Programmes 4.50 0.06 0.75

6 Other programmes 86.39 1.11 14.37

7 Road & Over bridge 705.95 9.08 117.46

8 Drainage 227.44 2.93 37.84

9 Other Development work 303.38 3.90 50.48

10 Burials and burial ground 15.25 0.20 2.54

11 Community hall 9.21 0.12 1.53

12 Garaging land 30.74 0.40 5.11

13 Garage 43.71 0.56 7.27

14 Public Health 4.29 0.06 0.71

15 Public Toilets 35.68 0.46 5.94

16 Park 194.58 2.50 32.38

17 Water 0 0.00 0.00

18 Vehicle 237.33 3.05 39.49

19 Fire Brigade 195.24 2.51 32.49

20 Sewage 11.92 0.15 1.98

21 Other office expenses 3.19 0.04 0.53

Total 7773.37 100.00 1293.40

Table 4.39 Position of Estimate budget for year 2012-13 S. No.

Budget head Estimate budget for year 2012-


Per capita Expenditure

(Rs)

Per Household Expenditure(Rs)

706.40

57

.75 12

0.2

4

58

.12

0.7

5

14

.37

11

7.4

6

37

.84

50

.48

2.5

4

1.5

3

5.1

1

7.2

7

0.7

1

5.9

4

32

.38

0.0

0 39

.49

32

.49

1.9

8

0.5

3

Position of Per Capita Expenditure in year 2011-12 - Municipal Council

102


13(lakh)

1 Establishment 5293.18 50.97 880.73 5011.627

2 Administration 580.30 5.59 96.56 549.4329

3 Solid waste 748.00 7.20 124.46 708.2126

4 street lighting 422.50 4.07 70.30 400.0265

5 Election & Programmes 4.5 0.04 0.75 4.260637

6 Other programme 120.00 1.16 19.97 113.617

7 Road & Over bridge 999.00 9.62 166.22 945.8615

8 Drainage 570.00 5.49 94.84 539.6807

9 Other development work 450.0 4.33 74.88 426.0637

10 Burials and burial ground 52.00 0.50 8.65 49.23403

11 Community hall 27.00 0.26 4.49 25.56382

12 Garaging land 40.00 0.39 6.66 37.87233

13 Garage 53.00 0.51 8.82 50.18084

14 Public Health 4.79 0.05 0.80 4.535212

15 Public Toilets 78.8 0.76 13.11 74.60849

16 Park 226.17 2.18 37.63 214.1396

17 Water 0 0.00 0.00 0

18 Vehicle 317.5 3.06 52.83 300.6116

19 Fire Brigade 357.24 3.44 59.44 338.2378

20 Sewage 30.00 0.29 4.99 28.40425

21 Other office expenses 11.00 0.11 1.83 10.41489

Total 10384.98 100.00 1727.95 9832.585

MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS

Two municipal corporations, Jaipur and Ajmer were chosen on the composite

index basis for in-depth analysis. It was found that, on an average, the area covered

under a Municipal Corporation was 66 sq km. with 66 wards. The number of BPL

families was 20660.

Table 4.40 Demographic profile

Population Census 2011

Area ULBs

Total no.of households

No. of BPL families

Number of wards under ULBs

1807965 66 Sq.km. 279400 20660 66

Financial Position of a Municipal Corporation - INCOME AND EXPENDITURE

The following Table reveals that the own revenue is very little.

103


Table 4.41 Position of Income from govt. grants /schemes/own resources/taxes


S. No.

Expenditure head Corporation

Expenditure in year 2011-12(lakh)


Per Capita (Rs)

1 Establishment 24258.44 51.58 672.28

2 Administration expanses 3126.47 6.65 86.64

3 Sanitization/Solid waste 2463.49 5.24 68.27

4 Election &Programmes 86.85 0.18 2.40

5 Road & Over bridge 2832.98 6.02 78.51

6 Drainage 526 1.12 14.57

7 Electricity 810.39 1.72 22.48

8 Gerage 1015.92 2.16 28.15

9 Seewrage 686.98 1.46 19.03

10 Public Health 83.68 0.18 2.31

11 Public Toilet 57.45 0.12 1.59

12 Park 418.38 0.89 11.59

13 Water Facility/Tanker 70.28 0.15 1.94

14 Shamsan/Kabristan 68.65 0.15 1.90

Own Resource21%

Octroi42%

Sell out Of Properties17%

Income For Security2%

Financial Position of a Municipal Corporation

S.No Income heads Corporation

Income year 2011-12 (lakh) % of Total income

1 Govt grants 4327.46 8.66

2 Schemes 4656.38 9.31

3 Own Resource 10491.84 20.99

4 Octroi 21155.58 42.31

5 Sell out Of Properties 8446.22 16.89

6 Income from Security 918.37 1.84

Total 49995.85 100

104


16 Community hall 380 0.81 10.53

17 Vehicle 689.49 1.47 19.10

18 Fire brigade 384.41 0.82 10.65

19 Other Programme 2290.2 4.87 63.46

20 Other office expenses 3789.76 8.06 105.02

21 Other Dovelopment Work 2986.63 6.35 82.76

Total 47026.45 100 1303.26


Status of Sweepers

At present 9750 sweepers have been working under the two Municipal

Corporations (Jaipur and Ajmer). Taking the population as per Census 2011 into

account, there is need for an additional 1550 sweepers in order to bring per capita

use of sweepers at 319 from the present number of 370.86.

As per the prescribed norms there should be one Jamadar over 25 sweepers.

But presently there are only 320 Jamadars, though there should be at least 390

Jamadars to meet the prescribed norm. It may be stated that 45% people in different

localities are not satisfied with the present state of solid waste-management. If the

number of sweepers is increased as suggested above, the level of satisfaction among

672.29

86

.65

68

.27

2.4

1 78

.51

14

.58

22

.46

28

.15

19

.04

2.3

2

1.5

9

11

.59

1.9

5

1.9

0

10

.53

19

.11

10

.65

63

.47

10

5.0

3

82

.77

Position of Per Capita Expenditure in year 2011-12 Corporation

105


the people may rise. As per the mode of removing solid waste, both the manual and

mechanical methods are in vogue. What however, is more important is the

commitment on the part of sweepers engaged for the job and making supervision

effective in order to maintain regularity in the removal of solid-waste. The SFC

may like to provide funds for motivational training for the cleaning staff

specifically.

Table 4.43 Status of Sweepers

Present

Sweepers Total Regular Contractual Jamadars Additional

requirement Coverage population (Per sweeper)

Planned coverage population per sweeper

9750 6550 3200 320 1550 370. 86 320

State of Equipments

There are different types of equipments used for the removal of solid waste.

Their maintenance is, however, not adequate and hence quite a few of them remain

out of order. There is need to increase the equipments both in quantitative and

qualitative terms. The functionaries associated with the management of solid-waste,

have estimated an additional budget of Rs.1907.6 lakhs for this purpose.

Table 4.44 State of Equipments

SN Assets Present status

Additional requirement in

next year

Estimate budget require in next year

(`in Lakh)

1 1 cubic m. Bins 991 600 100

2 3 cubic m. Bins 436 340 76.60

3 7.5cubic m. Bins 95 30 24

4 Tri cycles - - -

5 Rehedis(with dustbins) 450 1300 82

6 Tractors 103 13 68

7 Mini trucks 12 2 15

8 Trucks 4 2 20

9 Tippers 15 30 75

10 Compactors 23 6 120

11 Dumper Placers 46 10 85

12 Loaders 25 10 120

13 JCBs 16 6 129

14 Dumper Plasers (Macro) 41 25 250

15 Buldozers 2 2 160

106


16 Jeting Machines 11 - -

17 Suction Machines 2 - -

18 Cranes 1 - -

19 Huck Holders 3 - -

20 Mobile Toilets 8 6 18

21 Cattle Catchers 15 - -

22 Road Sweepers 4 - -

23 AutoJets 12 - -

24 Mudpumps 1 - -

25 Hoiests 3 - -

26 Jypsies 1 - -

27 Jeeps 4 - -

28 Cars 7 - -

29 Motorcycles 10 - -

Total 1342.6

Table 4.45 Other Demands for Jaipur Municipal Corporation

S.No. Assets Numbers ` Cost 1 Front End Loaders 10 120 lacs 2 Refuge Compactors 6 120 lacs 3 Electric Hoiests 8 80 lacs 4 Nala Cleaning machines 2 100 lacs 5 Super Sucker Machines 2 120 lacs 6 Hanging Dustbins 500 25 lacs

Total 565

Solid Waste

On an average 1385 a tonne per day solid-waste is produced in the two cities

under the sample. Out of this 1335 tonnes waste is collected everyday leaving 50

tonnes of solid waste uncollected. Needless to say that this huge amount of

uncollected garbage creates unhygienic conditions and becomes a source for

polluting the entire environment. Hence there is need to create the necessary

werewithal both in human as well as physical terms to keep the localities neat and

clean by collecting all the solid-waste generate every day.

Table 4.46 Solid Waste Production


day (Tonnes)

Pick up solid waste per day

(Tonnes)

Gap in solid waste (Tonnes)

Production of solid waste per capita


household

107


1385 1335 50 .40 kg 2.5kg

Street Lighting

At present there is one light point for 18 persons. Owing to expansion of

colonies and construction of new streets, more light points are needed to cover more

people. It is estimated that there should be one light point for 17 persons. Budgetary

provisions have been made for this purpose in the year 2012-2013.


Equipment LED CFL Available

in year 2011-12

Estimated no. for

next year



Estimated no. for

next year


Tube lights 20829 0 0 100000 10000 110 lacs Bulbs 0 0 0 10000 1000 3.6 lacs Mercury lamps

0 0 0 0 0 0

Sodium lights

66881 6000 210 Lacs 0 0 0

High mask lights

103 10 50 lacs 0 0 0

Gen. bulbs 0 0 0 0 0 0 Others 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 87823 6010 260 Lacs 110000 11000 113.6 Lacs


Timer Solar Automatic Manual Coverage population per

timer

Status inyear 2011-12 _ 427 _ 8450.46

Table 4.49 Status of street lights





197823 18.27 214833 16.83

Expenditure on street lighting

108


As per expenditure and estimates given in the Table, presently the

expenditure per capita for street lights were 45.5 in the year 2011-12. Now it is

estimated that during the year 2012-13 the expenditure per capita would be Rs.60.73.

This will improve the status of street lights in the cities of Ajmer and Jaipur.

It may be stated that 35% citizens of the two cities continue to be dissatisfied

with the status of street lights, though a majority has expressed satisfaction. The

stress, however, should be on providing street lights on all the roads in new colonies,

as demanded by the inhabitables of new colonies.

FireFighting Equipments



Estimated for next year

Estimated budget for next year (`)

Snorkel/hydraulic platforms

_ _ _

Water blazers 8 3 5000000

Foam tenders 3 4 8140000

Water tenders 43 7 12600000

Jeeps 3 1 1900000

Other/Fire station 6 2 3000000

Table 4.51 Expenditure on Fire Fighting

Head Exp. In 2011-12

(`)


In year 2011-12

(`)


(`)


In year 2012-13

(`)

Expenditure on establishment 26342000 7.28 30000000 8.29

Expenditure on maintenance of vehicles and equipments

6068000 1.68 10000000 2.76

Expenditure on new purchases 3031000 0.84 30640000 8.47

Expenditure on maintenance of fire stations

2200000 0.61 2960000 0.81

Other 800000 0.221 1400000 0.387

109


Total 38441000 10.631 75000000 20.74

Waste water drainage

Physical status of drainage

Drainage constitutes an important component of city life. Presently, 57.8%

need of drainage has been met. Still a long way remains to be covered. Drainage

facilities of 3750 km are still required. The corporations have, however,provided

budgetary provisions for new construction of drainage of 72.1 kms. This is too little.

However, efforts are on to repair 171 kms. of existing drainage during the current

financial year.

Table 4.52 Physical status of drainage nalis

Requirement of nalis (km)

Total length of drainage nalis

(km)

Proposed nalis next year (km)

Proposed maintenance of nalis next year

3730 Km 5110.65 Km 72.1Km 171 Km


Public toilets are a dire necessity in order to avoid the use of walls as urinals.

Presently, 374 public toilets and 54 Sulabh toilets are functional in the two cities.

Obviously, these are not enough to meet the requirements of a growing population

in the cities. Provisions for the year 2012-13 have been made to construct 70 public

toilets and 13 more Sulabh systems in addition to the existing ones. Even this may

not be enough to meet the growing need.


Status of toilets

No. of public toilets

(2011-12)

Expenditure for public toilets

in(2011-12) (`)


in year 2011-12

(`)


of public toilets

in(2012-13) (`)

Budget for maintenance

of public toilets

in(2012-13) (`)


in year 2011-12

(`)

Public toilets

347 1603000 0.4433 70 3850000 1.06473

110


Sulabh toilets

54 1974000 0.5459 13 13000000 3.5952

Urinals _ _ _ _ _ _

Total 401 3577000 0.9892 83 16850000 4.659935

Cremation and Burial grounds

There are 56 cremation grounds and 35 grave yards in the two cities. They are

not sufficient to meet the requirement in growing cities like Ajmer and Jaipur. The

corporations have taken steps to create more facilities for this purpose. Presently, 10

hectares of land has been given for cremation grounds while the grave yards have

16.5 hectares each for extending the areas for cremation and burials.

Table 4.54 Cremation and burial grounds

No.of Cremation and burial grounds

Area of Cremation and burial grounds

Additional area required for Cremation and burial

grounds




56 35 41 beeghas 67 beeghas 20 beeghas 20 beeghas


The two cities at present have 762 public parks covering an area of 261400 sq.

meters. In view of growing population, more parks are needed. Hence it is required

to have 112 new public parks covering 364400 sq. meters. Evidently the new public

parks will be bigger in size. What however, is more important to note is that for the

maintenance of the existing public parks, there are only 53 regular employees.

Contract labour is mostly used for their maintenance. This is not a healthy practice

resulting in deteriorating conditions of quite a few public parks.

Table 4.55 Status of Public Parks

111



No .of Public parks



required

Additional area required for Public parks


762 261400 Sqm 112 364400 Sqm

Table 4.56 Status of Workers in Public Parks

Total no. of workers in public parks

Regular Contractual

53 53 _

Physical status of Community Halls

There are 48 community halls which are used for public and private

functions. In view of growing population, 74 more community halls are required, for

which 2200 sq. meters of land is needed. The corporations are expected to provide

financial support for this purpose.

Table 4.57 Physical status of Community Halls


No .of Community

halls

Area of Community

halls

Additional Community

halls required

Additional area required for

Community halls

Community halls run by ULBs

48 6000 Sqm 74 22000 Sqm

Physical status and financial requirements for Roads/Pulia and Rapats

The table gives details about the type of roads and the material used for their

respective construction. Evidently there is need to expand the network of roads in

the cities. The corporations have proposed to spend Rs. 1359.4 lakhs for this purpose.

Table 4.58 Physical and financial status of roads/pulias/rapats


roads Km

Construction of

Roads/pulias/rapats in year

2011-12

Construction of Roads/pulias/rapats in year 2012-

13

Estimate construction of

Roads/pulias/rapats in year 2012-

13

Estimate budget for

Roads/pulias/rapats in

year 2012-13 ` in Lakh

112


Km Km Km

C.C. roads 986.92 10.38 29.11 37.23 761

WBMroads 50 1.8 1.6 2 55

Bitumin roads

2823.73 12.87 18.61 27 543.4

Kachchi roads

212 - - - -

Total 1359.4

Table 4.59 Physical and financial status for repairing of roads/pulias/rapats

Repairing Repairing of Road/pulia/r

apat in year2011-12

Km

Repairing of Road/pulia/rapat

in year 2012-13

Km



Km



` in Lakh

C.C. roads 40 236 258 1166.46

WBMroads - - - -

Bitumin roads 69.3 426 466 1009.7

Total 2176.16

Physical and financial requirements for public health activities

The table below gives details about the material required for carrying out

public health activities. The total quantity of material of different kinds was 1350

kgrs. During the year 2012-13 Insecticides, Phenyl, Acid, DDT etc. were used for

maintaining a disease free environment in the cities. Expenditure on these activities

during the year 2011-12 amounted to Rs.51.31 lakhs. Now it is proposed to spend

115.42 lakhs during the year 2012-13 on material required for the security of public

health.

Table 4.60 Physical and financial requirements for public health activities

113


Material Utilize amount in 2011-12

Expenditure 2011-12


Budget require in

year 2012-13

Insecticide 33210 4691000 34210 10982000

Lime 8000 300000 10667 400000

Phenyl 770 50000 920 60000

Acid 3600 40000 4500 50000

D.D.T. 90 50000 90 50000

Total 5131000 11542000

RESULTS OF OPINION SURVEY

Cleanliness

The table below reveals that out of 15 ULBs visited, 10 ULBs are regularly

cleaned and in the remaining 5 ULBs cleanliness is not proper. Grade III ULBs are

facing the biggest problem regarding regular cleaning. Chittorgarh and Surajgarh

have been found to be satisfactory in terms cleanliness and maintenance. The rest

opined that only some portions are cleaned and the far-off wards are not being

cleaned. 58% people in Jaipur City were not satisfied with the cleanliness as the

cleaning staff is on contractual basis and there is lack of supervision. 50% Parshads

stated that there was lack of resources in their management.

Table 4.61 Opinion about Regular Cleanliness

All the Wards are Regularly Cleaned? YES Number (%)

Municipal Corporation (1) 1 100

Municipal Council (2) 2 100

114


(Jaipur not included)

System of garbage collection

The door to door collection was not found in any of the places. When asked

about the system of garbage collection, it was found that in eight ULBs garbage is

being collected by loaders and push carts. In the rest of the ULBs people throw the

garbage at a common place and then the sweepers collect from the designated place.

Out of 15 ULBs properly covered garbage dumping grounds were found only in

nine ULBs. Land has been allotted and boundaries have been made. In the

remaining six, Deoli (Grade II), Nawa, Jobner, Uniara, Suratgarh, Pilibanga (Grade

IV) there is no proper place for garbage disposal. Parshads suggested that garbage

dumping grounds should be covered and developed .35% people felt the need for

door to door garbage collection, while 17% people opined that there was a

requirement of the administration staff‘s high commitment levels.

Table 4.62 Helpline for Sanitation

Helpline for Sanitation YES (Number) (%)

Municipal Council 1 50

Grade –II 3 100

Grade-III 3 100

Grade-IV 4 80

Total 13 87

Complaint Cell or Helpline for sanitation has been set up in only 13 ULBs

whereas in the remaining two no complaint -cell has been set up. The helpline has

been performing very well in Udaipur and Chittorgarh. Parshads expressed that

Grade –II (3) 3 100

Grade-III (3) 1 33

Grade-IV (5) 3 60

Total (15) 11

115


there were complaint registers in which complaints were registered but they were

not timely redressed. 40% of the people opined that no action was taken in spite of

repetitive complaints.

For solid waste management committees have been set up in only seven

ULBs, while in the remaining eight ULBs no such committees are there. Most of the

committees that have been set up are only for the name sake and do not perform

any role. 75% Parshads expressed the need for separate budget and rights regarding

the committees. Most of people viewed that the committees were not working and

there was a lot of political interference which should be reduced.


Solid waste management is one of the most important responsibility of ULBs.

In order to properly manage this core function, a lot of problems were reported by

the ULBs, like inappropriate budget, requirement of funds for equipments and

additional staff. Most of the EOs suggested that there was an urgent requirement for

equipments and additional staff. 35% felt that garbage disposal plants were a must

for effective solid waste management. Parshads viewed that the contractual basis for

cleaning should be monitored carefully or changed to permanent staff. People

viewed that door to door collection was a must and regular cleaning was required

with an honest commitment.

Sewerage system is a very good facility for drains management and the basic

requirement for sewerage is that there should be a minimum flow of 165 litres of

water per day. At various ULBs - Churu, Sawai Madhopur and Chittorgarh - it was

observed that this was being constructed by RUIDP. The EOs opined that as RUIDP

work was slow, it should be under the control of ULBs while the 53% EOs suggested

proper planning according to the norms.

Street Lighting

116


Street lighting was available in all the ULBs. 80% ULBs managed it through

agencies while in the remaining it was managed by the municipalities themselves. In

grade IV new areas have been merged in the existing ULBs.Proposals for new lights

have been sent to RSEB and the sanction is awaited. Parshads viewed that proper

maintenance of street lights was required. Contractors need to change the damaged

lights on time. CFL/LED lights should be used in place of sodium lights so that the

tax on consumer is reduced. 70% of the people were found to be satisfied with the

lights & their maintenance but frequent power cuts were annoying. Regarding the

committees for lighting, we found than 73% of ULBs had committees for complaints

of lights & maintenance. In the remaining 27%, the committees have not been set up

due to local politics.

Keeping in mind the safety of the public, fire brigades are very essential but

these were found in only 7 ULBs. In these ULBs the condition of fire vehicles

&equipments was not satisfactory and even lacked trained fire staff. According to

the Eos, there is a requirement for new vehicles & regular trained staff. It was

suggested that a separate control unit (directorate) for their working &

management should be created. Majority of the parshads mentioned the requirement

of new well developed fire stations.

Drinking Water

In the under developed areas of the ULBs requirement for hand pumps, PSP,

tubewells and over head tankers was reported as available drinking water was not

sufficient. The water reservoirs needed to be regularly cleaned. Water is provided

by PHED at most of the ULBs while at some it was observed that people had

maintained their own resources like PSP, hand pumps, etc. At some of the ULBs

handpumps and PSP and tubewells are also used as a major source for providing

water to the public and even tankers are used to meet the additional requirement of

water. 47% parshads suggested that water reservoirs need to be timely cleaned and

the supply should be proper. People suggested that water should be supplied to the

newly merged areas as well and the quality of water should be improved. It was

117


praiseworthy that the public places had adequate drinking water facilities. It was

suggested that it could be made even more efficient by connecting them to drinking

water schemes. Committees for drinking water were found in only six ULBs, while

in the remaining nine committees were not there, as drinking water is supplied by

PHED and people were not concerned. The existing committees were also not

active and were just on paper. There was a lack of coordination between the

committees & PHED.

Drainage

Drains were found to be cleaned in 13 ULBs but it was during rains or any

festival. The condition is not satisfactory at some places. In the remaining two

ULBs drains have become unusable due to lack of cleaning staff and equipments.

Parshads suggested construction of new drainsand proper maintenance of the

existing ones. People felt the need for proper monitoring during the construction

of drains and new patterns/techniques should be followed.

Public Toilets

It was found that public toilets in the urban areas were insufficient in number

and there was a requirement for more public toilets at public areas like railway

stations, bus stands, hospitals, main markets etc. The existing public toilets were in a

miserable condition due to lack of maintenance & basic requirements like water

supply. Out of the existing ones, separate toilets for women were found to be only

67%. Parshads suggested requirement of new toilets and their regular maintenance.

According to Eos, public toilets were not cleaned regularly due to water scarcity.


Cremation and burial grounds were found in all the ULBs but they seemed to

be lacking in the basic requirements. Boundaries are necessary to stop encroachment

118


70% parshads recommended boundaries and tin shades. Water & lighting facility for

cremation and burial grounds was suggested by the people.

Public Parks

Out of the fourteen ULBs public parks were available in twelve ULBs. In the

remaining two ULBs, the land allotted has been encroached and the ULBs seemed

not taking any action. The parks available were not properly maintained & required

water for plants as well as staff which was not there. 20% of the parks are on contract

for maintenance but the contractor doesn‘t take the pain to even look after

occasionally. In Udaipur, parks were found in very good condition as they have

been adopted by various public committees.

It should be recommended for the ULBs of all sizes. We feel that the

additional staff and water facility for parks is an urgent requirement.People

suggested that new parks should be developed and the public needs to be aware

about the maintenance of public property. Parshads opined that watchmen should be

there for safety from stray animals and dustbins were also required. Committees for

Public Parks were found in 29% ULBs for the maintenance of the parks. However,

their commitment and work plan were found to be missing.

Community Halls

Community halls were found in all the ULBs. The halls were not in good

condition as their maintenance was done by the public only.Basic facilities like

electricity, water, sanitation were missing in most of the ULBs.Community halls

are used by the public for various occasions and due to lack of awareness they get

spoilt. 60% parshads suggested that sufficient budget is not available. 40% people

suggested that if the halls were maintained properly with basic facilities, they would

pay some nominal rent and this could even be a source of income. 20% people stated

the need for new community halls as they could be very useful for the people.

119


Internal Roads

Internal roads have been constructed in all the ULBs but the lack of their

maintenance was disheartening.According to the Eos, drains should be constructed

along with the roads for proper upkeep. We observed that no proper planning is

done before the construction of new roads and the tenders are not issued

transparently. Almost all parshads informed that the contractors compromised on

qualityand supervision was also not very honest. 50% people found the drainage

system unsatisfactory due to improper maintenance of roads. They opined that if the

maintenance was done regularly, longevity of the roads could be maintained. It was

suggested that CC roads should have a built-in component of drains for better

results.

Public Health

It was seen that no steps were being taken to control epidemics by the ULBs.

Health department gets insecticide is not regular in spraying. Lack of coordination

between ULBs & Health Department is also a problem. There should be proper and

regular cleaning of water storage tanks in order to avoid water borne diseases. It was

suggested by the EOs that awareness camps should be organized from time to time

to make public understand the need for controlling epidemics. Parshads opined that

nothing was being done presently for public health.

Most of the funds given by the SFC & TFC used for salaries and allowances

and got hardly any share for street lighting, solid waste management, drinking

water etc.People suggested transparency while spending such grants. They spoke

about the various barriers in the implementation of development works like

inappropriate budget, lack of staff, encroachment problems and excessive political

interference.

120


Summing Up

Due to massive urban growth during the past two decades, quality of urban

life has deteriorated creating an urgent need for vibrant and efficient ULBs that can

deliver adequate services and improve living conditions. Despite decrease rates of

population growth, India‘s urban population will expand rapidly in the years to

come.Urban services need to keep pace with it.

Local governments could be in the best position to improve service delivery

as they can match the level of requirement of public services with local needs and

available funds. Therefore, they are directly accountable to citizens. Unfortunately,

this is not happening.

Elected local governments are not particularly accountable to their

communities for their in action they blame limited financial powers and indifference

of the State. It is true that state still remains powerful, both in law and in the number

of agencies they control at local level. The State continues to grab all decision making

powers. The net result is that urban areas continue to be governed by a plethora of

State departments and there is weak coordination and very little accountability.

Coupled with this, a variety of implementation issues have led to fragmentation of

service delivery institutions at the state and local level.

Traditionally, the provision of urban infrastructure and services has been

among the primary functions of the government where the funding of complete

service delivery is sourced out of tax revenues. These basic services have generally

been considered social goods to be provided by the government for free or at

nominal prices to users. Essential services such as roads, street lighting, water

supply and sewerage are difficult to deliver without adequate cash flow from tax

revenues or other charges. It has been assumed that for the majority of urban

residents, direct user charges would be neither affordable nor desirable.Central

and state governments continue to see themselves as guardian of the ULBs,

making the ULBs feel as puppets on a string.

121


Ensuring high quality public services for all is an end in itself, but also

facilitates exploitation of full economic potential of the area covered. One of the key

features of a developing state is to ensure that all the citizens have access to basic

services. The Constitution places the responsibility on government to ensure that

such services are progressively expanded to all, within the limits of available

resources. It is well known that the basic functions like water and sanitation,

refuse and waste removal, street lighting etc are not fully available in the rural areas.

Even if they are available, they are not upto the desired level of satisfaction. These

services are not only important in providing a basic level of healthy living to the

rural people but would also prevent people‘s desire from migrating to urban centers.

This study is a result of Fourth State Finnace Commission desire to introduce

a system of dedicated allocation of budget to the local bodies perfoming the core

functions. The Commission asked our Institute to work out physical and financial

norms for the purpose. The functions include – solid waste management, waste

water drainage, street lighting, repairing of roads/ pulias/rapats, driking water,

maintenance of cremation and burial grounds and community centres and health

and sanitation.

For calculating the physical and financial norms, the present status was

ascertained during the primary survey. The present expenditure, condition, need

and the estimated cost were identified and then an average was calculated. These

norms were then framed and discussed with the officials of the concerned

Norms for theCore Functions for the PRIs

122


departments as well as compared with the existing norms that were framed

elsewhere. The estimates were accordingly finalized. It was also ensured that the

norms calculated should be workable and implementable. Separate norms have been

developed for the Urban and rural local bodies.

The present chapter focuses on the physical and financial norms for the rural

local bodies to undertake the core functions in their area.


Since the beginning, humankind has been generating waste, be it the bones

and other parts of animals they slaughter for their food or the wood they cut to make

their carts. With the progress of civilization, the waste generated assumed a more

complex nature. At the end of the 19th century the industrial revolution saw the rise

of the world of consumers. Not only did the air get more and more polluted but the

earth itself became more polluted with the generation of non-biodegradable solid

waste. The increase in population and urbanization was also largely responsible for

the increase in solid waste.

Types of Solid Waste

Solid waste can be classified into different types depending on their source:

Household waste is generally classified as municipal waste

Industrial waste as hazardous waste

Biomedical waste or hospital waste as infectious /contagious waste

In the context of rural local bodies, it is found that the solid waste largely

consists of the municipal waste. Which consists of household waste, construction

and demolition debris, sanitation residue, and waste from streets. It is on this

premise, that the calculation for the SWM for the rural bodies has been calculated.

The method that has been suggested for the RLBs has been sweeping of the roads

and public places, collection from common places and dumping at an identified

place provided that the waste is largely non-hazardous and biodegradable. The

123


SWM services in the rural areas are not upto the mark which leaves a lot be desired.

The calculations made for SWM consist of three components:

Manpower

Equipment

Dumping Strategy

Manpower

Total Number of Sweepers

Norms for sweepers (A) Required one sweeper for an average of 175 households (900 Population)

(calculated on the basis of sample survey)

(B) Labour rate – Rs 147 per man day (on the basis of minimum wages rate for

MNREGS)

(C) Interval of Cleaning - Weekly

(D) The manpower would be paid only for the working days

(E) 15% cost be added to the total cost as tender and tax cost.

(F) The cost would include the services for sweeping, collection of the waste and

cleaning of the wasre water drains.

Calculation for sweepers (Calculated for 56 sample GPs)

Total Manpower required per GP

Average Population per GP (X) – 7797 Aveage Population per sweeper (Y) - 780 Number of sweepers per GP (Z) - (X/Y)-10

Labour Rate (L) – Rs 147 per day

Manpower Cost - (Z*L)*52 10 (Sweepers) * 147Rs * 52 Mandays = Rs 76,440 Total Manpower Cost (Premium of 10% of the manpower cost) = Rs 84,084

124


Total Equipment Cost

(A) Tri Cycles/Push Carts for a GP – Six (One per revenue village and one

for HQ)

(B) Bins (1 m3) – 20 per GP on the basis of number of wards with one for

each ward

(C) Tools – A set of Six (Broom, Spade, Parat, kudali,collector) per GP - One

per GP and one for HQ

Table 5.1 Budget for Equipment

Unit Cost1 (in `)

Unit Total Cost per GP (in `)

Push Cart With Bins 3000 6 18000

Bins 3700 20 74000

Other Tools 600 6 3600 Total 95600

1 Cost calculated on the basis of the tender rates for the ULBs

Solid Waste Transfer by Trolleys

Solid Waste Production (per household) = 400 gm.

Transfer interval = Weekly

(In each revenue villages on rotation basis)

Trolley Costing per trolley (with Labour Charges) = Rs.400

Budget Estimation

Total Budget for trolley per GP = 12 times * 12 months * 400 Rs = 57,600

Labour Cost = 84,084

Equipment Cost = 95,600

Trolley Cost = 57,600

Total Cost (in `) = 2,37,284

Total Cost per HH (in `) =

131.90

Per Capita Cost (in `) =

30.43

125


WASTE WATER DRAINAGE

The waste water drainage deals with the ―grey water‖ - wastewater resulting

from the use of water for domestic purposes, but does not include human excreta.

For drainage it is proposed to construct pucca naalis which would be useful in

draining out the wastewater (grey water) and rain water in absence of which the

waste water collects at a low-lying place and becomes a source of disease.

The Naalis being proposed are 6 inch deep and 9 inch in width. These can

either be formed in U Shape or V shape. The cost component is similar for both of

them.

I. Construction of Naali

Aveage Requirement of Naalisper Gram Panchayat = 6017 m

Proposed Naalis for One year = 1251 Mtrs.

(Calculated on the basis of the primary survey as reflected in the discussions and the annual plan)

On an average costing of Nali per m as per (BSR) = Rs.391.73 per m (Details Annexure I)

Total required budget of

naalis for next year (2012-13)(A) = Avearge Rate* Total Size = Rs 490054.23

Total Cost per HH = Rs 272.40

Per Capita Cost for 2012-13 = Rs 62.85

4.5‖ 4.5‖

18”

9‖

126


Maintenance of Naalis

Table 5.2

Maintenance of Naalis (per m) (As per damages of naalis observed and the proposals received from the gram panchayat during interviews with the Sarpanch & gram Secretary)

105/ mtr.

10% Overheads and tender Costing

10.50

Total costing

115.50

Length of Naalis for Maintenance for Next year (2012-13) (As per damages of naalis observed and the proposals received from the gram panchayat during the interviews with the Sarpanch &gram Secretary)

491 Mtr.

Total Estimated costing of maintenance (B) (Rs.115.50/mtr) 491* 115.50

=Rs 56710.50

Total Cost per HH (in Rs) 31.52

Total Per Capita Cost (in Rs) / Operational Cost 07.27

Total Costing for Construction and Maintenance A+B

Total required cost for construction of naalis for next year (2012-13)

Rs 490054.23

Per Capita Capital cost 62.85

Total Estimated costing of Maintenance Rs 56710.50

Total costing with Maintenance Rs 546764.73

Total Cost per HH (in Rs) 303.92

127


Total Per Capita Cost (in Rs) (Capital +Operational)

70.12

128


Annexure

Detailed Estimate for Waste Water Drainage for Gram Panchayats

1. EW in Hard Soil mixed with Kankar for leveling Streets/ Roads and Disposal Up to 1.00 140.4x0.38x0.38 1x50x0.3x0.3 Labour @ Rs.

91.85 + 52.06 @Rs.143.91 Cu.m

20.274 Cu.m 4.5 Cu.m

91.85 x 24.774 Cu.m

Labour Rs. 2275.49

Rs.3565.23

2. Random Rubble stone masonry for foundation and plinth in cement sand mortar 1:8 (1 cement : 8 sand) for above 30 cm. thick walls. 1x50x0.3x0.3 1x50x0.3x0.3 Total Labour

4.50 Cu.m. 4.50 Cu.m. 9.00 Cu.m

@ Rs.402.00 Cu.m.

@ Rs. 1471.55 Cu.m.

Labour 3618.00 Rs.13243.95

3. P/L Cement Concrete 1:6:12 with 40 mm Stone aggregate including curing compaction etc. comp. 1x140.4x0.30x0.05 Labour

2.106 Cu.m

@ Rs.317.55 Cu.m @Rs.1695.54 Cu.m.

Labour 668.76 Rs.3570.81

4. S/F Nimbahera/Chittor rough Stone slabs over 20mm thick CM 1:6 and filling joints with CM 1:3 1x2x140.4x0.30 Labour

84.24 Sq. m. @Rs.63.00 Sq. m. @Rs.334.03 Sq.m

Labour 5307.12 Rs.28138.69

Total Rs.48518.68 Add. 3% Cont. Rs.1455.56

Grand Total Rs.49974.24

@10% Tender Cost Rs.54971.66

Say Rs.55000.00

Labour Rs.8251.00

Material Rs.41749.0

Per mtr.costing Rs.391.73

129


STREET LIGHTING

Lack of electricity infrastructure is one of the main bottlenecks in the

development of rural India. At a very basic level, people do not have a cheap and

safe source of lighting. For fear of snakes, scorpions and antisocial elements, few

venture outside in the evenings because there is no street lighting.

The responsibility of lighting the interior roads, chaurahas, public places and

panchayat building rests with the Gram Panchayat. This includes the maintenance of

the road lights installed by the RVVNL.

The stress during the calculation of street lighting is: a) Gradually public lighting, predominantly solar lighting, would be promoted.

b) The tubelights and bulbs that are still in use need to be replaced with CFL

technology

Norms for Lighting

(A) Ten lighting sources for a village would be provided in a phased manner

(B) Phasing out the bulbs and tubelights

(C) For the first year one revenue village from the gram panchayat may be

considered for solar lighting.

The Total Cost would include

Electricity Consumtion Cost

Installation of New Sources of Lighting

Electricity Consumtion Cost

Energy Expenditure per CFL Bulb 18 Watt

Duration of Lighting 8 HR/day Total Electricity Consumtion per year (X) (18*8*365)/1000

Cost/Unit (Y) Rs 6

Electricity Consumtion Cost (in Rs) (A) X*Y

Rs. 315

Cost per GP 315*50

Rs. 15750

Number of Lighting Points Already available per GP 38

Electricity Consumtion Cost (in Rs) (B) 11970

Total Cost for Electricity Consumtion per GP Rs 27720

130


New Sources

Bulb (CFL) 18 W Set 50

Cost per new Source Rs. 1100

Total Cost of new installations Rs. 55,000

Automatic Timer 5

Cost of Automatic Timer per piece Rs. 250

Total Cost of Automatic Timer Rs. 1250

Total Material Cost of New Instllations Rs. 56,250

Labour Cost of New Installations @ 20% Rs. 11,250

Total Cost of New Instllations Rs. 67, 500

Total cost for Street light Year (2012-13)

Expenditure for Electricity (A) Rs. 27,720

Expenditure for New Points (B) Rs. 67,500

Total of A & B Rs. 95,220

Expenditure for Maintenance @ 20% Rs. 19,044

Total Expenditure for Street light Rs. 1,14,264

Cost per Household Rs. 63.52

Cost per Capita Rs. 14.65

Per Capita Capital Cost Rs.8.65

Per Capita Operational Cost Rs. 5.99 Solar Steet Lighting

Lighting common area and streets through solar photovoltaic power system

It is proposed to install photovoltaic power system to light common area and

streets. For the first year one ward/revenue village may be chosen out of the Gram

Panchayat. This may be chosen on the basis of the development indicator like village

without electric connectivity, high SC/ST population, lowest enrolment rate etc.

Solar photovoltaic can be utilized for illuminating community places and

streets in the villages or the areas, where conventional electricity is not available.

Although stand alone SPV street lighting systems with CFL and LED fixtures are

also available for this requirement but looking to the safety, security and

maintenance problem of these systems, Ministry of New and Renewable Energy

(MNRE), GoI is also emphasizing to arrange such installation with SPV power plants

so that all main components such as SPV Modules, Battery bank and control

electronics should be placed at one place in safe custody and energy should be used

131


to illuminate the common area. Different models of such power plants can be

designed as suggested by the sample model under:

1 No. of Street Lights : 10

2 Each fixture of street light of : 18 W CFL

3 Operation hours /Day : 12 hours

4 Battery storage : for 2 days autonomy

5 Wire length estimated : 600 Meters (in total)

Power plant configuration / bill of material proposed for above model are an under:

Table 5.3

SN Material details Quantity

1 SPV Modules 800W

2 Battery bank 24 V 400Amp

3 Inverter 1 no. of 1KW

4 Hybrid controller 24V/40 Amp

5 G.I Poles (6.5m. height) Net height from ground - 5 meters

10 Nos.

6 Fixture of street light of 18 W CFL each 10 nos.

7 Wire length Estimated 600 Meters

8 BOS (Like Bend pipe etc.) As per requirement

Estimated cost of one Power Plant 240000

Subsidy provided by the MNRE, GoI 64000

Total Cost 176000

Per Household Estimate Budget 97.83

Per Capita Estimate Capital Cost 22.57

CREMATION AND BURIAL GROUNDS

Given our cultural, religious and other social sensitivity cremation and burial

grounds attain social importance.

But, if we see the conditions of cremation or burial grounds in most of the

Indian rural villages, it is very disheartening. People are scared to go to these places

even in day time let alone at night. Further, many burial grounds are prone to land

grabbing by the adjacent land owners since they are unfenced. These burial grounds

132


are unhygienic with no cleanliness, no electricity, no water and covered fully with

wild plants. If not secured properly, the burial place will be used for burying the

other dead body in the same place due to non-availability of land.

Keeping this in mind it is peoposed to provide Tin Shades and Boundary Wall

through the provisions of the SFC.

Table 5.4 Cost for Tin Shades and Boundary Wall at the Cremation and Burial Ground

Tin Shades

Cost for Tin shade Rs. 2,50,000

Number of Cremation Grounds per GP 5

Total Cost per GP Rs.12,50,000

Available Financial Support under the Gramin Janbhagidhaari Yojana (90%)

Rs. 11,25,000

Remaining Amount to be borne by SFC (A) Rs. 1,25,000

Per House hold Estimate Budget Rs. 69.48

Per Capita Estimated Budget Rs. 16.03 Boundary Wall

Number of Cremation/Burial Grounds per GP 6

Average Size of the Cremation/Burial Grounds (Running Feet) 3300

Cost of Construction per running feet (in Rs) 712

Average costing of per running feet of boundary wall Rs. 23,49,600

Available Financial Support under the Gramin Janbhagidhaari Yojana (90%)

Rs. 21,14,640

Remaining Amount to be borne by SFC (B) Rs. 2,34,960

Per House hold Estimated Budget Rs. 130.60

Per Capita Estimated Budget Rs. 30.13

Total Cost for Tin Shades and Boundary Wall (A+B) Rs. 3,59,960

Per House Hold Estimated Budget Rs. 200.08

Per Capita Estimated Budget (Capital Cost ) Rs. 46.16

COMMUNITY HALLS

Each village has a community hall which may be used for community

services, meetings or any community function. These places were found to be in a

miserable condition due to lack of maintenance and wherewithal. This is also

coupled with the lack of ownership resulting in the community halls becoming

133


centres of antisocial activities. Prsently there are 188 community halls in the sample

panchyats out of which two (one in Kota and one in Karauli) are being run by the

community.

Cost Estimates Number of Community Centres per GP 3.35

The Cost of Constrction per Community Centres (in Rs)(See Annexure)

3,00,000

Average Cost of Maintenance @ 15% (In Rs) 45,000

Cost per GP (In Rs) 1,50,750

Cost per Capita (In Rs) (Operational Cost) 19.33

134


Annexure

Community hall measurement

Average Plinth Height

0.60 No. L m H m

Room height Inside 3.20 Door 2 1.00 2.00

Varandah Pillar Height

2.30 Window 2 0.90 1.20

Varandah Beam Thickness

0.30 Vent 4 0.60 0.30

Wall Thickness 0.38 Almirah 2 0.90 1.20

Foundation Depth 0.90

Community hall Cost

S.N. S. L.M. W.M. H.CM. Amount Unit Rate Amount

1. uhao] [kkbZ rFkk ukyk vkfn ds fy, 1-5 eh- xgjkbZ rd

feV~Vh dh [kqnkbZ djuk] ry dks dqVuk] ikuh Mkyuk cxy

dks lokajuk] [kqnh feV~Vh dks ckgj fudkyuk uhao Hkjus ds

ckn [kkyh LFkkuksa dks iqu% feV~Vh ls Hkjuk rFkk cph gqbZ

feV~Vh dks 50 ehVj dh nwjh rd fuLrkj.k djuk l[r

feV~Vh esa

Labour total Labour total

Long wall 3 7.53 0.75 0.90 15.25

Short wall 2 4.08 0.75 0.90 5.51

Short wall 2 1.48 0.75 0.90 2.00

Total 22.75 qm 82.00 82.00 1865.85 1865.85

2

lhesaV dadzhV uhao ;k Q’kZ esa 40 eheh ukeh; eki dh iRFkj

fxV~Vh] lhesaV jsr elkyk esa 1 lhesaV% 4 jsr % 8 fxV~Vh

vuqikr esa feykdj Mkyuk rFkk dqVkbZ djuk] rjkbZ lesrA

Long wall 3 7.53 0.75 0.15 2.54

Short wall 2 4.08 0.75 0.15 0.92

Short wall 2 1.48 0.75 0.15 0.33

Total 3.79 qm 245.05 1934.00 929.32 7334.45

3 uhoa o dqlhZ esa lhesaV elkyk 1%6 esa iRFkj dh fpukbZ dk

dk;Z

Foundation 3 7.38 0.75 0.75 12.45

2 4.23 0.75 0.75 4.76

2 1.63 0.75 0.75 1.83

Chair 3 7.23 0.45 0.60 5.86

2 4.38 0.45 0.60 2.37

2 1.78 0.45 0.60 0.96

Total 28.23 Qm 366.50 1647.00 10345.91 46493.08

4 lh-lh- 1%2%4 esa 50 feeh eksVh Mh-ih-lh- dk dk;Z

3 7.23 0.45 9.76

2 4.38 0.45 3.94

2 1.78 0.45 1.60

15.30 Sq. 69.00 202.00 1056.01 3091.51

135



5 vf/kjpuk esa lhesaV elkyk 1%6 esa bZV dh fpukbZ dk dk;Z

2 7.01 0.38 3.20 17.05

Community hall

2 4.60 0.38 3.20 11.19

1 7.01 0.38 0.60 1.60

2 7.01 0.38 0.23 1.23

2 6.98 0.38 0.23 1.22

Total 32.28

2 1.00 0.38 2.00 1.52

2 1.50 0.38 1.20 1.37

4 0.60 0.38 0.30 0.27

2 0.90 0.38 1.20 0.82

6 1.50 0.38 0.15 0.51

(-) 4.50

27.78 qm 385.00 2787.00 10696.78 77433.60

6 izFke Js.kh bZV ds oxkZdkj ;k vk;rkdkj [kEcksa dks lhesaV

elkys 1%6 esa vf/kjpuk esa

Community hall

3 0.38 0.38 2.30 1.00 Qm 510.00 2912.00 508.14 2901.40

7

¼v½ lsUVfjax] ‘’kVfjax] izpfyr dadzhV ¼vkj-lh-lh½ dh

Nr] che] NTtks] fyUVu vkfn esa yxkuk] 4-5 ehVj ÅpkbZ

rd rFkk gVkuk vkfn

2 1 4.60 0.40 3.68

1 6.25 4.60 28.75

2 7.01 0.30 4.21

1 7.01 2.38 16.68

1 7.01 0.50 3.51

Total 56.82 Sq. 25.25 83.00 1434.83 4716.46 ¼c½ izpfyr lhesaV dadzhV ds fy, yksgs dk dkVuk eksMuk

rFkk LFkku ij yxkuk rFkk cka/kus dk dk;Z e; vkiwfrZ ds

¼l½ lhesaV dadzhV 1%1%5%3 vkj lh-lh che dejs esa 1 5.36 0.30 0.40 0.64 che cjkens esa 1 7.01 0.38 0.30 0.80 NTtk 1 7.01 0.50 0.075 0.26 iwjh Nr 1 7.01 7.74 0.125 6.78 Total 8.49 sm. 575.00 3614.00 4880.25 30673.43

8 iRFkj ds fljny ¼fyaVu½ dh vkiwfrZ dj] fpukbZ esa mi;ksx

dh xbZ elkys esa mls yxkuk

njoktk f[kM~dh 6 1.50 0.38 3.42

osUV 4 1.00 0.38 1.52

Total 4.94 Qm 128.00 409.00 632.32 2020.46

9 22 xst dh lknk ,e-,l- pn~nj ds 1 eh- x 2 eh- nks iYys

okys njokts] ftlesa yksgs dh 40 x 40 x3 feeh ds dksfu;k

yksgs dh pkS[kV rFkk iYyksa esa 25x25x3 feeh ds dksfu;k

yksgs (Angle Iron) ds fdukjs fn, x, uD’ks ds vuqlkj

e; vxZy fpVduh rFkk idM~ ifVV~;ksa ds vkiwfrZ o yxkuk

2 1.00 2.00 4.00 Qm 99.00 1404.00 396.00 5616.00

136



10 22 xst dh lknk ,e-,l pn~nj dh cuh 0-9 eh- pkSM+h rFkk

1-2 eh- Åaph f[kM+dh ftlesa pkS[kV Qsze 25x25x3 feeh ds

dksfu;k yksgs 10 feeh fxzy e; vxZy] fpVdfu;ka 2 ux

rFkk ifV~V;k 4 ux uD’kk u% 14 v ds vuqlkj vkiwfrZ

djukA

2 1.50 1.20 3.60 Qm 99.00 15.06.00 356.40 5421.60

11 osUVhysVj gsrq fxzy@xsV vkfn esa yksgs dk dk;Z ftlesa

likV] dksfu;k] Vh rFkk ukyhnkj ¼psuy½] dks dkVuk]

p<kuk rFkk yxkuk vkfn

4 5.00 20.00 KL 7.70 62.20 154.00 1244.00

12 lhesaV IykLVj nhokj ij 1%4 vuqikr esa lhesaV &ctjh

feykdj tksMks+ dks dwjsnus rfkk rjkbZ lfgr 20 feeh esa

dejk vanj 2 6.25 3.20 40.00 2 4.60 3.20 29.44 dejk ckgj 2 7.01 3.20 44.86 2 5.36 3.20 34.30 fiyj 3 4 0.38 2.30 10.49 fiyj ds mij 2 1 7.01 0.90 12.62 isjkisV 2 7.01 0.84 11.78 2 6.98 0.84 11.73 dVkSfr;k¡ Total 195.22 njoktk 2 1.00 2.00 4.00 f[kM+dh 2 1.50 1.20 3.60 osUV 4 0.60 0.30 0.72 (-) 8.32 186.90 Qm. 36.60 102.00 6840.44 19063.51

13 lhesaV IykLVj lhfyax ij 1%4 vuqikr esa lhesaV &ctjh

feykdj tksM+ks dks dwjsnus rFkk rjkbZ lfgr 12 feeh esa

dejs dh Nr 1 6.25 4.60 28.75 cjkens dh Nr 1 7.01 2.38 16.68 dejs ds che 1 4.60 0.40 3.68 49.11 59.60 99.00 2927.18 4862.27

14 u, dk;Z ij vk;y ckmUM /kqykbZ ;ksX; fMLVsEcj dk dk;Z

Item no. 12 & 13

236.01 6.10 30.60 1439.67 7221.94

15 u, dk;Z ij ,ukesy is.V dk ysi djuk

njoktk 2 2 1.00 2.00 8.00

f[kM+dh 2 2 1.50 1.20 7.20

osUV 2 4 0.60 0.30 1.44

16.64 20.79 64.00 345.95 1064.96

16 Q’kZ ds uhps lw[ks iRFkjks dk [kjatk yxkuk o vkiqfrZ djuk

dejk 1 6.18 4.53 0.15 4.20 1 6.18 1.93 0.15 1.79 cjkenk 5.99 115.50 613.60 691.66 3674.49

137



17 Q’kZ ds uhps lhesaV dadzhV 1%6%12 feJ.k ftlesa 1 lhesaV 6

ctjh 12 Hkkx 40 feeh ukeh; iRFkj dh fxV~Vh ds lkFk

feykj Mkyuk] dwVdj nckuk] rjkbZ vkfn lesr gkFk ls

feykdj Mkyuk

dejk 1 6.18 4.53 0.10 2.80 cjkenk 1 6.18 1.93 0.10 1.19

3.99 245.00 1640.00 978.11 6547.34

18 20 eh0eh0 1%6 elkys ds mij fuEckgsMk iRFkj Lysc dks

Q’kZ esa yxkuk rFkk tksMks+ dks 1%3 flesaV elkys ls Hkjdj

lery djuk

1 6.25 4.60 28.75

1 7.01 2.38 16.68

45.43 77.00 365.00 3498.40 16583.34

19 30 feeh ls 40 feeh eksVkbZ ds iRFkj ds NTts] nkc iRFkj

ds lkFk] lhesaV elkys esa 1%4 esa yxkuk rFkk vkiwfrZ djuk]

nhokj rFkk NTts ds tksM+ ij lhesaV dadzhV 1%3%6 dk 7%5

lseh dk xksyk cukuk vkfn

f[kM+dh 2 1.80 0.45 1.62 osUV 2 0.90 0.45 0.81

2.43 209.00 450.00 507.87 1093.50

20 izFke Js.kh dks bZVks dh 112 fe-eh- eksVkbZ esa uhoa rFkk

vf/kjpuk esa lhesUV ctjh elkyk 1%4 esa fpukbZ dk dk;Z

djuk e; rjkbZ ds ¼ikVhZ’ku nhokj½

vyehjk 2 0.90 1.20 2.16 63.00 364.00 136.08 786.24

21 e’khu ds dkVsa ls 25&30 feeh- eksVkbZ ds iRFkjks dh rkd

dks 1%3 elkyk esa yxkuk rFkk vkiwfrZ iw.kZ djuk

4 0.90 0.38 1.37 50.05 236.00 68..47 322.85

22 lh/ks [kjats ds Åij ;k vkj-lh-lh- Nr ds mij 25 fe-eh-

eksVkbZ dk lhesaV 1%6 dk IykLVj djkuk vkSj vkiwfrZ djuk

rjkbZ lesr

1 6.25 6.98 43.63

43.63 56.80 132.00 2477.90 5758.50

23 o"kkZrh ukys ds fy, 110 feeh ihohlh ikbZi dh vkiwfrZ e;

fQV djuk

4 Unit 0.00 50.00 0.00 200.00

Total 53167.54 293742.68

2 % 5874.85

Total 53167.54 299617.53

53200.00

246800.00

Grand Total 300000.00

138


DRINKING WATER

There are three primary sources of drinking water in the rural areas in Rajasthan:-

(a) The traditional water sources like ponds, tanka, etc., which use rain water.

(b) Ground water in the form of hand pumps

(c) Piped water supply which eventually uses the ground water. The ground

water is lifted using a motor. The capacity of the motor varies from place to

place depends on the level of water table, from 5 KW to around 35 KW. The

connection required is also variable ie one phase and three phase depending

on the depth of the groundwater.

Expenditure on Maintenance of Traditional Water Sources

The Gram Panchayats own ponds from 0 to 300 hectare CCA. This is an

important source of drinking water in the rural areas. Presently there are 2094 ponds

under the panchayats and about 2/3rdof them need repair and renovation. The

avearage requirement for this would be Rs 1, 50,000 per resource.

Maintenance of Hand Pumps

(a) In the survey conducted, it was found that around 40 hand pumps per gram

panchayats are available. These hand pumps are maintained every year

through a special drive by the PHED department. The cost is also borne by

the PHED. This drive is for a limited period of the year and if the hand pump

needs repair during any other part of the year, no provision is available which

eventually create a lot of problem for the supply of drinking water.

Hence, it is calculated that Rs.3000/- (the cost of two per pipes @ Rs. 65 Per Ft,

Pump Set, Chain Set and labour is needed by a gram panchayat for

maintenance. The maintenance duing the summer drive is borne by the

PHED.

Requirement per Hand Pump Rs. 3000

Number of Hand Pumps per GP 40

139


Total Requirement per GP for maintenance of Hand Pumps Rs. 1,20,000

(b) In the last few years as per the direction of the State Government, the

drinking water scheme Janta Jal Yojana has been transferred to the

Panchayats. The PHED has handed over the mechanic and the motor to the

Panchayat. The cost of the repair – mechanic and the electric connection has

not been given by the PHED. This eventually stops the water supply. It is

suggested that this expenditure may be given by the SFC. The details are as

under :-

Table 5.5 Cost for Janta Jal Yojana

Electricity Consumption

Rs.5000 x 12 x 2

(For Three Phase Connection for average two connection)

Rs. 1,20,000

Rs.1500 x 12 x 3

(For Three Phase Connection for average three connection)

Rs. 54,000

Repair

Rs.1000 x 12 x 5 Rs. 60,000

Labour

Rs.500/- x 12 Rs. 6,000

Total Cost for Borewells Rs. 2,40,000

Total Cost for Drinking Water per GP

Expenditure on Maintenance of Traditional Water Sources (A) Rs. 1,50,000

Total Requirement per GP for maintenance of Hand Pumps (B) Rs. 1,20,000

Total Cost for Running Borewells (C) Rs. 2,40,000

Total Cost for providing Drinking Water per GP A+B+C

Rs. 5,10,000

Per Capita Cost for Drinking Water(Operational Cost) Rs. 65.40

Suggestion

In Rajasthan there are places where conventional grid electricity is not

available and also it is not viable to draw a transmission line. The water table has

gone down and hand pump are not in a position to lift the water from the ground.

The most viable solution is Solar Water Pump System. The Solar Water Pumping

140


System of the capacity of 3 KW and 5 KW will be suitable in Rajasthan as water table

is low. The cost of Solar Water Pump System is Rs.8 lacs and Rs.5 lacs a 5KW and

3KW pump respectively. The good thing is that Solar Pump works without battery

in the day time. If the requirement is good in number, a proposal can be sent to

MNRE for providing 30% subsidy.

HEALTH AND SANITATION

A. Insecticide/DDT

Table 5.6 – Cost for Health and Sanitation in PRIs

Insecticide

Average requairment of insecticides per HH (in gm)

Spray Insecticide/D.D.T. = per H.S. 100 gm for twice an year

*rate as per availability in the district

100

Per gram panchayat Requirment for year 2012-13 (in kg) 360

Average costing of per kg (in Rs) 18.50

Estimated Budget Requirment for year 2012-13 (A) Rs. 6660

Equipment

Average costing per equipment (in Rs) (B) Rs. 1000

Labour

Number of Mandays required @ 40 household per day per person

90

Labour Cost @170 per person (C) Rs. 15,300

Total Cost for Sparaying Insecticide per GP A+B+C

Rs. 22960

Per Household Cost for Sparaying Insecticide per GP Rs. 12.76

Per Capita Cost for Sparaying Insecticide per GP (Operational Cost)

Rs. 2.94

141


PUBLIC TOILETS

A public toilet is a public facility which may be a standalone water closet, or

part of a bathroom. At a minimum, a public toilet can be a single unit featuring a we

and a hand basin for hand washing. These toilets are important as the lack of

sanitation is probably the world‘s biggest cause in the rise of infectious diseases.

Millions across the country are deprived of proper access to public toilets.

It was found that GPs on an average have only one public toilet facility per

GP. It is proposed to provide a set of three urinal-one laterine set for the rural areas

so that public toilets are available in the villages.

Table 5.7 - Costing for Public Toilets

Average Number of Public Toilets per GP (in numbers) 1

Additional Requirement for year 2012-13 per GP (in numbers)

(on the basis of the annual plan of the GP)

3

Average Costing of Per Toilet Set (in Rs) (See Annexure) Rs. 35000

Total Cost per GP for Construction of Public Toilets (A) Rs. 1,05,000

Per Capita Capital Cost Rs.13.46

Cost for Maintenance of Public Toilets

Required Number Of Sweepers 4

Cost for Sweepers @ Rs500 per unit Rs. 24,000

Cost for Equipments for toilet cleaning (Brush, Basket,Brooms) @ 100

per unit per year

Rs. 4800

Cost for cleaning material for toilets @ 50 per unit per month Rs. 2400

Total Cost for Maintenance of Public Toilets (B) Rs. 31,200

Per Capita Operational Cost Rs.4.00

Total Cost for Public Toilets (A+B) Rs. 1,36,200

Per Capita Cost for Public Toilets Rs. 17.46

142


Toilet Design

143


Annexure

njas lkoZtfud fuekZ.k foHkkx t;iqj dh ch-,l-vkj- 2010 ds vk/kkj ij

Øa-

la-

BSR

Item No. dk;Z dk fooj.k bdkbZ Ekk=k nj ¼:-½ jkf'k ¼:-½

lhesUV

¼cSx½

ctjh

¼?k-eh-½

fxêh

¼?k-eh-½

iRFkj@

bZaV

1 B-2/1.8

uhao eas 1-5 eh- xgjkbZ rd l[r] fpduh] dadj

feêh dh [kqnkbZ djuk] ry dks dwVuk] ikuh

Mkyuk] cxy dks laokjuk] [kqnh feêh dks ckgj

fudkyuk] uhao Hkjus ds ckn [kkyh LFkkuksa dks iqu%

feêh ls Hkjuk rFkk cph gqbZ feêh dks 50 ehVj dh

nwjh rd fuLrkj.k djukA vfHk;Urk }kjk fn;s x;s

funZs’kkuqlkjA

?ku- eh- 2.65 84.00 222.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

2 B-9/3.1.7

lhesUV dadjhV uhao ;k Q’kZ eas 40 fe-eh- eki dh

iRFkj fxêh@bZaV dh fxêh ds lkFk 1%5%10 vuqikr

eas lheasV&jsV&fxêh feykdj Mkyuk rFkk dqVkbZ

djuk] rjkbZ lesrA

?ku- eh- 0.59 1638.00 963.02 1.65 0.29 0.58 0.00

3 B-21/6.1.6 uhao rFkk dqlhZ eas csjn~nk iRFkj dh fpukbZ 1%6

lheasV & elkys eas e; rjkbZ dsA ?ku- eh- 2.61 1420.00 3700.77 4.17 0.913 0.00 2.975

4 B-9/3.1.5

lheasV dadjhV uhao ;k Q’kZ eas 20 eheh eki dh

fxêh ds lkFk 1%3%6 vuqikr eas lheasV&jsr&fxêh

¼M- 10 xzsM½ feykdj Mkyuk rFkk dqVkbZ djuk

rjkbZ lfgrA

?ku- eh- 0.39 2132.00 842.01 1.74 0.19 0.37 0.00

5 B-17/5.2.2

izFke Js.kh dh baZVksa ¼Class 75½ ls vf/kjpuk eas

lheasV&ctjh elkyk 1%6 eas fpukbZ dk dk;Z djuk

e; rjkbZ dsA

?ku- eh- 0.99 2034.00 2009.75 1.19 0.237 0.00 470

5

a B-17/5.41

izFke Js.kh dh baZVksa ¼Class 75½ ls vf/kjpuk eas

oxkZdkj ;k vk;rkdkj [kEcksa ds fy, lheasV& ctjh

elkyk 1%6 eas fpukbZ dk dk;Z djuk e; rjkbZ dsA

?ku- eh- 0.32 2176.00 690.66 0.38 0.08 0.00 151

6 B-18/5.9.3

izFke Js.kh dh baZVksa dh 112 feeh eksVkbZ eas

vf/kjpuk eas lhesaV& ctjh elkyk 1%6 eas fpukbZ

dk dk;Z djuk e; rjkbZ dsA

oxZ eh- 15.95 236.00 3763.02 2.39 0.48 0.00 949

7 B-24/6.18

iRFkj ds floy ¼fyaVy@csM@ IysV½ dh vkiwfrZ

dj] fpukbZ eas mi;ksx dh xbZ lhaesV&ctjh elkyk

1%4 mls yxkukA

?ku- eh- 0.02 4745.00 98.22 0.02 0.01 0.00 iRFkj ds

fyaVy

8 B-43/10.16

vOoy ntsZ dh iRFkj dh ifê;ksa dh Nr Mkyuk]

Åij rFkk uhps ls tksM+ksa eas iRFkj pkSi ds lkFk 1%4

vuqikr eas lhesaV elkys ls HkjukA oxZ ehVj upto

2.0 m span

oxZ eh- 1.74 851.00 1481.42 0.74 0.104 0.00 iRFkj dh

ifV~V;kW

9 B-47/11.3.1

Q’kZ eas lhaesV&dadjhV 20 feeh] eki dh fxêh ds

lkFk 1%2%4 vuqikr esa lhaesV&jsr&fxêh dks feykdj

Mkyuk] dwVuk] nckuk] rjkbZ lfgr ¼40 feeh eksVkbZ

easa½A

oxZ eh- 2.63 154.00 404.25 0.85 0.19 2.47 0.00

10 B-55/12.3.3

12 feeh eksVkbZ eas lheasV IykLVj nhokj ij 1%6

vuqikr eas lheasV&ctjh feykdj tksM+ksa dks dqjsnus

rFkk rjkbZ lesr djukA

oxZ eh- 40.89 58.00 2371.33 2.86 0.94 0.00 0.00

11 B-15/4.17

50 feeh eksVh lheasV dadjhV dh tkyh dks 1%3

lhesaV&jsr elkys ls jks’kunku eas yxkuk rFkk

vkiwfrZ djukA

oxZ eh- 0.18 317.00 57.06 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00

12 LS

f}rh; Js.kh dh 200 feeh x 300 feeh eki dh

ekud lQsn] xzs vFkok gYds jax dh VkbYl Q’kZ]

lh<h ij 20 feeh lheasV Lyjh ds Åij yxkuk e;

vkiwfrZ rFkk tksM+ksa dks lQsn lhesaV ls Hkuk vkfn

iw.kZ dk;ZA

oxZ eh- 7.98 350.00 2793.00 0.96 0.2 0.00 0.00

13 LS

forh; Js.kh dh 300 feeh x 300 feeh uke

fQlyujks/kh (Mat finish) lQsn] xsz vFkok gYds jax

dh VkbYl Q’kZ] lh<+h rFkk [kEHkkas ij yxkuk e;

vkiwfrZ rFkk tksM+ksa dks lQsn lheasV ls Hkjuk vkfn

iw.kZ dk;ZA

oxZ eh- 2.31 400.00 924.00 0.28 0.06 0.00 0.00

14 B-35/9.5

Vh vk;ju Ýse 15x3 feeh pkSM+kbZ o eksVkbZ dh

pks[kV cukuk o yxkuk ftleas gksYM QkLV

15x10x10 feeh lkbZt ds lheasV@dadjhV ¼1%3%6½

elkys eas yxkuk rFkk Ýse ds lkFk LØw ls fgatst

yxkukA

fd-xzk- 21.00 53.00 1113.00 0.25 0.05 0.00 0.00

144


Øa-

la-

BSR Item

No. dk;Z dk fooj.k bdkbZ Ekk=k nj ¼:-½ jkf'k ¼:-½

lhesUV

¼cSx½

ctjh

¼?k-eh-½

fxêh

¼?k-eh-½

iRFkj@

bZaV

15 B-37/9.17

ekbYM LVhy pn~nj dks 35x35x5 feeh lkbZt

dh ,axy vk;ju Ýse esa 25x3 feeh ¶ySV vk;ju

ls d.kkZor czsflax dj ,d iYys dk njoktk cukuk

tks bleas yksdjsy 50x5 feeh dk gks leLr fQfVax

lfgr rFkk jsM vkWDlkbZM izkjej ds nks taxjks/kh

isaV ds lkFkA

oxZ eh- 2.21 1544.00 3404.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

16 LS

Hkkjrh; lQsn dkWp phuh feV~Vh WC 450 feeh

lkbt ds lkFk 100 feeh ih ,l Qank ¼Vªsi½ yxkuk

o O;oLFkk djuk e; ik;nku yxkuk o vkiwfrZ

djukA

Lka[;k 1 500.00 500.00 0.2 0.05 0.00 0.00

17 S-5/1.39.1

Vsjstks ¼ekstsd½ gkFk /kksus dh ok’k csflu vkiwfrZ e;

yxkuk] czsdsV difyax rFkk PVC Mªsu ikbi lfgr

420x280 feeh eki dkA

Lka[;k 1 558.00 558.00 0.1 0.02 0.00 0.00

18 S-17/2.24.2

vkj-lh-lh- ikuh dh Vadh 25 feeh- eksVs doj rFkk

15 feeh ft-vkbZ- vksoj ¶yks ikbi ds lkFk

90x60x60lsUVhehVj uki dh 270 yhVj tyHkj.k

{kerk dk yxkuk] vkiwfrZ e; leLr dusD’ku iw.kZ

dk;Z

Lka[;k 1 504.00 504.00 0.2 0.06 0.00 0.00

19 S-3.22.1

psEcj dk fuekZ.k e; [kqnkbZ 10 lseh CC1%5%10 Q’kZ

eas] 30 lseh dh iRFkj dh fpukbZ] 20 feeh eksVk 1%6

lhesUV elkys eas IykLVj M-15 xzsM 50 feeh dk

Q’kZ e; <+Ddu vUnj dh uke 300x300 feeh-

xgjkbZ 0-5 eh- rdA

Lka[;k 1 405.00 405.00 0.6 0.16 0.00 0.15

20 LS

1&1-5 ehVj xgjs lks[rs xM~<+s dk fuekZ.k ftleas

40 feeh fNnzkdkj fjax Mkyuk vanj dh uki 900

feeh rFkk 80 feeh eksVh iRFkj dk <+Ddu 1%3

lhesaV elkys eas yxkukA

Lka[;k 3 900.00 2700.00 3.2 0.94 0.00 0.00

21 S-27/3.17.2

75 feeh O;kl ds ihohlh ikbZi Mkyuk rFkk

lksYosaV lheasV ls tksM+uk] jcj fjax rFkk Y;qczhdasV

dh dher lfgrA

j- eh- 4.00 100.00 400.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

22 B-60/12/43.1

nhokjksa ij tyjks/kh vizwOM czakM dh lhesaV isaV

¼leksle½ dk;Z fpduh lrg cukrs gq, ikM+cUnh

lfgrA

oxZ eh- 32.91 30.00 987.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

23 B-61/12.48 njoktksa&f[kM+fd;ksa ij buesy isUV dk;Z nks vFkok

T;knk dksV ,dlkj jax cukus ds fy,A oxZ eh- 4.41 33.00 145.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

24 LS jsEi fuekZ.k 75x150 lsehA la[;k 1 500.00 500.00 1.00 0.26 0.00 0.65

25 LS

'kkSpky; eas ty vkiwfrZ ds fy, QkslZ ,.M fy¶V

iEi miyC/k ty L=ksr eas yxkuk e; leLr

duSD’ku dk;Z lkbV bapktZ vfHk;Urk ds

funsZ’kkuqlkjA

3500.0

Total 35037.95 22.80 5.24 3.63 1570

Say Rs.35000.00

23 6

20

mm –

2.0?k-

eh- 40

mm –

0.6?k-

eh-

1600

bZV

3.9?k-

eh-iRFkj

dV~Vs ?ku eh- ?k- eh- la[;k

145


The Total Cost for a Gram Panchayat may be summarized as below:

Table 5.8 – Cost of Core Functions for PRIs

(in `)

SN Core Area Total Cost

Per Capita

Cost

Per Capita

Capital Cost

Per Capita Operational

Cost

1 Solid Waste Management 237284 30.43 - 30.43

2 Waste Water Management 546765 70.12 62.85 7.27

3 Street Lighting 114264 14.65 8.65 5.99

4 Solar Light 176000 22.57 22.57 -

5 Cremation and Burial

Grounds

359960 46.16 46.16 -

6 Community Halls 150750 19.33 - 19.33

7 Drinking Water 510000 65.40 - 65.40

8 Public Health 22960 2.94 - 2.94

9 Public Toilets 136200 17.46 13.46 4.00

Total Cost for Core Functions per GP 22,54,183 289.10 153.69 135.36

146


The Twelfth Schedule of Constitution (Article 243 w) provides an illustrative

list of eighteen functions that may be entrusted to the municipalities. Besides the

traditional core functions of municipalities, it also includes development functions

like planning for economic development and social justice, urban poverty alleviation

programmes and promotion of cultural, educational and aesthetic aspects.

However, conformity legislation enacted by the state governments indicates

wide variations in this regard. Rajasthan has included all the functions as enlisted in

the Twelfth Schedule in their amended state municipal laws. Municipal

governments are assisted by parastatal agencies (RUIDP/RUFIDCO) operating

either at the state level or at the city level to carry out various functions including

sanitation (sewerage/drainage) as well as the line departments that continue to cater

to some of the basic services like drinking water. Besides these state level agencies,

City Improvement Trusts and Urban Development Authorities, like Jaipur

Development Authority (JDA/UITs), have been set up in a number of cities. These

agencies undertake land acquisition and development works, and take up

remunerative projects such as markets and commercial complexes, etc. This leaves

the municipal bodies with only with the functions of garbage collection/disposal,

street lighting, maintenance of inner city roads, registration of births and deaths, etc.

In terms of the theory of fiscal federalism, functions whose benefits largely

confine to municipal jurisdictions and which are subject to heterogeneous

preferences are suitable for the Municipalities. These may be termed the ―essentially

municipal‖ functions. Services with large spillover effects, distributional and

Norms for the Core Functions for the Urban Local Bodies

147


stabilization attributes and services providing uniform benefits need to be entrusted

to the higher levels of government. Similarly, functions that involve substantial

economics of scale or are of national interest may not be assigned to small local

bodies. For valid reasons, certain functions of higher authorities are appropriate for

entrustment to the Municipalities – as if under principal-agent contracts. These may

be called ―agency‖ functions that need to be financed by intergovernmental

revenues. Thus instead of continuing the traditional distinction between obligatory

and `discretionary‘ functions the municipal responsibilities may be grouped into

`essential municipal‘ `joint or shared‘ and `agency‘ functions (Mukesh P. Mathur,

www.developmentfunds.org). The assignment of functions to municipal

corporations, municipalities and Nagar Panchayats as suggested in Mohanty (1995)

is given in table below:

148


Table 6.1 Suggested Assignment of Functions

Essentially Municipal Functions Municipal Corporation

Municipal Council

Nagar Panchayat

Urban planning including town planning (subject to broad `outline‘ or `structural‘ plan prepared by the District and Metropolitan Planning Committee/State Government)

Yes Yes Yes

Regulation of land-use and construction of buildings (subject to broad `outline‖ or structural‘ plan prepared by the District and Metropolitan Planning Committees/State Government)

Yes Yes Yes

Planning for economic and social development (Preparation and implementation of socio-economic development plan)

Yes Yes Yes

Roads and bridges Yes Yes Yes

Water supply domestic, Industrial and commercial purposes Yes Yes Yes

Public health, sanitation, conservancy and solid waste management

Yes Yes Yes

Fire services Yes Yes No

Urban forestry Yes Yes Yes

Preventive Health Care Yes Yes Yes

Provision of urban amenities and facilities such as parks, gardens, playgrounds

Yes Yes Yes

Burials and burial grounds, cremations, cremation ghats/grounds and electric crematoria

Yes Yes Yes

Cattle pounds, prevention of cruelty to animals Yes Yes Yes

Vital statistics including registration of births and deaths Yes Yes Yes

Street lighting Yes Yes Yes

Parking lots, bus stops and public conveniences Yes Yes Yes

Regulation of slaughter houses and tanneries Yes Yes Yes

Slum improvement and up gradation Yes Yes Yes

Agency Functions Protection of the environment and promotion of ecological aspects

Yes Yes Yes

Safeguarding the interests of weaker sections of society, including the handicapped and the mentally retarded

Yes Yes Yes

Urban poverty alleviation Yes Yes Yes

Promotion of cultural, education and aesthetic aspects Yes Yes Yes

Primary Education Yes Yes No

Primary Health Care Yes Yes No

Source: Mohanty (1995), Reforming Municipal Finances : Some suggestions in the Context of India’s

Decentralization Initiative, Urban India, A Journal of National Institute of Urban Affairs, New Delhi,

Vol.XV (No.1), January-June, 1995.

149


Functional domain of municipalities has direct impact on the volume and

structure of municipal finance. The matching of municipal responsibilities with

finances should be based on the broad principles of assignment of revenues – taxes,

user charges, shared revenues, grants-in-aid, borrowing, etc. Norms and standards

should be taken into consideration while deciding the financial structure of urban

local governments. The present chapter attempts to identify the cost of the core

functions that are being taken care by the municipal bodies in Rajasthan.

For ascertaining the per capita cost three methods have been used here. The

first cost has been calculated on the basis of the norms established according to

various national standards for municipal services which largely depict the ideal

picture. Secondly, on the basis of the statement received for actual expenditure from

the various ULBs, the present per capita expenditure has been calculated. This

would reveal the gap between the normative and actual expenditure. In some of the

core functions, on the basis of the needs ascertained during the discussions with the

municipal bodies and their annual plan, a third cost has been established.


Solid waste management is one among the basic essential services provided

by municipal authorities in the country to keep urban centers clean. However, it is

among the most poorly rendered services in the basket-the systems applied are

unscientific, outdated and inefficient; population coverage is low; and the poor are

marginalized. Waste is littered all over leading to insanitary living conditions.

Municipal laws governing the urban local bodies do not have adequate provisions to

de3al effectively with the ever-growing problem of solid waste management. With

rapid urbanization, the situation is becoming critical.

The waste generation rates in India are lower than the low-income countries

in other parts of the world and much lower compared to developed countries.

However, lifestyle changes, especially in the larger per capita waste generation are

increasing by about 1.3 per cent per year. With the urban population growing at 2.7

150


per cent to 3.5 per cent per annum, the yearly increase in the overall quantity of solid

waste in the cities will be more than 5 per cent

Though a large portion of the municipal budget is allotted for solid waste

management, most of it is spent on the wages of sanitation workers whose

productivity is very low. There are no clear plans to enhance their efficiency or

improve working conditions through the provision of modern equipment and

protective gear. Unionization of the workers, politicization of labour unions and

the consequent indiscipline among the workforce are all results of bad working

conditions and incept handling of labour issues.

Community participation has a direct bearing on efficient SWM. Yet, the

municipal authorities have failed to mobilize the community and educate citizens

on the rudiments of handling waste and proper practices of storing it is their own

bins at the household-, shop- and establishment-level. In the absence of a basic

facility of collection of waste from source, citizens are prone to dumping waste on

the streets, open spaces, drains, and water bodies in the vicinity creating insanitary

conditions. Citizens assume that waste thrown on the streets would be picked up by

the municipality through street sweeping.

The Rajasthan government has issued a policy document for solid waste

management after a cabinet approval in the year 2001. This policy document outlines

the manner in which private entrepreneurs would be selected for setting up waste to

energy or waste to compost plants in the state, the type of facility that would be

extended to them and the responsibilities that would be placed with them. The state

government has set up a state level empowered committee under the chairmanship

of Secretary, Local Self Government to recommend the proposals received for useful

conversion of solid waste.

Out of 183 urban local bodies, 152 local bodies have either been allotted land

or land has been identified for them for construction of landfill site. All district

collectors have been requested to make land available for landfill sites to the ULBs.

Development of landfill sites is in progress under most ULBs providing approach

road, fencing, etc. The landfill sites in six divisional headquarter cities are being

151


developed centrally by Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development Project

(RUIDP).

Standard Norms

Types of Solid Waste

Solid waste can be classified into different types depending on their

source:

Household waste is generally classified as municipal waste

Industrial waste as hazardous waste

Biomedical waste or hospital waste as infectious waste

The calculations here have been made for Household Waste. In the state, Self-

Financing Scheme is there for the Biomedical Waste. For Industrial waste

management RIICO is responsible. For the municipal waste, the cost calculation is

divided into three heads viz Manpower, Instruments and Dumping and Recycling

Strategy. The recycling is done on BOT basis and has not been accounted here.

Component – Manpower - Norms

1. Norms for Sweepers Required one sweeper for average 250 Population (calculated on the basis of guideline of Government of India) Additional sweepers required weekly holidays (1/7 sweeper)

2. Labour Rate Rs 147 per man day as per the minimum rates prescribed rate of the Labour and Welfare Department

3. Interval of Cleaning Twice in a day 4. Instruments One Wheel Barrow for three sweepers

One Auto tipper for 25 WB (to be provided by the Contractor) - Funds to be provided for depreciation cost and diesel cost

5. Functions The cost would include the services for sweeping, door to door collection of municipal waste and cleaning of the waste water drains.

6. Supervision Cost 15% cost is added to total cost as the supervision cost in Corporation Council and Municipal Board Grade-2 while 10% in Grade-3 and Grade-4

Table 6.2 Standard Cost Calculation for Sweepers

152


Municipal

Corporation Municipal

Council Municipal Board II

Municipal Board III

Municipal Board IV

Manpower Cost

Average Population 1804175 300500 86496 48160 18746

Number of Sweepers 7217 1202 346 193 75

Additional Number

1031 172 49 28 11

Total Manpower Required per ULBs (A)

8248 1374 395 220 86

Labour Rate (in Rs) (B) 147 147 147 147 147

Total Working Days (C) 365 365 365 365 365

Manpower Cost A*B*C A*B*C A*B*C A*B*C A*B*C

(in Lakh) 4425.46 737.22 211.94 118.04 46.14


Wheel Barrows

Number 2749 458 132 73 29

Rate Cost 3700 3700 3700 3700 3700

Total WB Cost (in lakh) 101.71 16.95 4.88 2.70 1.07

Tippers @ 3.9 lakh

Number 110 18 5 3 1

Depreciation @ 15% 64.35 10.53 2.93 1.76 0.59

Diesel for Tippers @ 1 Lt/day

20.07 3.29 0.91 0.54 0.18

Total Cost 186.13 30.77 8.72 5.00 1.84

Transportation Cost

Total Per Capita Production (in gms)

450 375 325 275 250

Production in Tons 296336 41131 10261 4834 1711

No. of trolley 197557 27421 6841 3223 1141

Cost of Trolley @500Rs. Per trolley

987.79 137.10 34.20 16.11 5.70

Total 5599.38 905.09 254.86 139.15 53.68

Supervision charge@15% or in grade-3&g-4 is10%

839.91 135.76 38.23 13.91 5.37

Grand Total 6439.29 1040.85 293.09 153.06 59.05

Per Capita 356.91 346.37 338.85 317.81 315

Table 6.3 Calculation Based on actual expenditure (2011-12)

153


Municipal Corporation

Municipal Council

Municipal Board II

Municipal Board III

Municipal Board IV

Establishment Cost (Includes Salaries of the Health officer, Chief Sanitary inspector, Sanitary inspector (Grade I), Sanitary inspector (Grade II), Jamadar, Sweeper)

(Rs in Lakh)

17965.7

2149.7

733.2

229.8

131.4

Operational Expenses (Including the Equipment, Contract and other costs)

(Rs in Lakh)

2463.5 722.7

123.7

105.6 174.9

Total (Rs in Lakh) 20429.2 2872.4

859.9

335.4

306.3

Sample Population (Census 2011)

3608350 601000 259489 144481 93731

Per Capita Expenditure (2011-12)(in Rs)

566.20 478.0

330.2

232 326.78

Per Capita Establishment Expenditure

497.90 357.8

282.5 158.9 140.18

Per Capita Operational Expense

68.30 120.2

47.7 73.1 186.6

Standard Per Capita (in Rs)

356.91 346.37 338.85 317.81 315

Prevalent Per Capita 2011-12 (in Rs)

566.2 478.0

330.2

232 326.8

STREET LIGHTING

Street lighting is an undeniable aspect of modern civic life. Providing street

lighting is one the most important – and expensive – responsibilities of a city:

Lighting can account for 10–38% of the total energy bill in typical cities worldwide

(NYCGP 2009). Street lighting is a particularly critical concern for public authorities

in developing countries because of its strategic importance for economic and social

stability. Inefficient lighting wastes significant financial resources each year, and

poor lighting creates unsafe conditions. Energy efficient technologies and design can

cut street lighting costs dramatically (often by 25-60%); these savings can eliminate

or reduce the need for new generating plants and provide the capital for alternative

energy solutions for populations in remote areas. These cost savings can also enable

municipalities to expand street lighting to additional areas, increasing access to

154


lighting in low-income and other underserved areas. In addition, improvements in

lighting quality and expansion in services can improve safety conditions for both

vehicle traffic and pedestrians.

Street Lighting facility was found in almost all the tiers if the urban local

bodies and the calculations have been made keeping in mind the status of the

present availability. The basic scot calculations would include the cost for

Installation of Additional Points for Lighting, Maintenance, Extension and

Supervision.

Norms for Lighting

Twenty people for One Point (Standard Norm)

The Points would be 69.8% for CFL/LED lighting, 30% for a set of four

light points (4 Set)

The Electricity Consumption is to be taken care by the Cess levied by the

State Government for Street Lighting

It has been assumed that 25% points would require maintenance every

year.

There should be an extension of 10% points due to the growth and

extension of the urban areas. (5% for extension in urban area and 5% for

unserved area)

It is proposed to provide a Four Light Set Point instead of the conventional

Sodium Light

155


Table 6.4 Standard Cost Calculations


Municipal Council

Municipal Board II

Municipal Board III

Municipal Board IV

CFL/LED Lights (in Number)

According to the Norms 62966 10487 3019 1681 654

Total Cost 69262600 11535700 3320900 1849100 719400

4 Set Lights


Total Cost 108252000 18032000 5188000 2888000 1124000

High Mask


Total Cost 90000000 15000000 4500000 2500000 1000000

Total Instrument Cost (A) 267514600 44567700 13008900 7237100 2843400

Per capita capital cost 148.27 148.31 150.39 150.27 151.68

Labour and Installation Cost (15 % of Instrument Cost) for Installation, Regulation and

Maintenance includes the cost of labour, installation vehicle @ 15% of the Equipment Cost

Labour and Maintenance

Cost (B)

40127190 6685155 1951335 1085565 426510

Sum (C) = (A)+(B) 307641790 51252855 14960235 8322665 3269910

Extension Cost @ 10%

Sum (C) = (D)

30764179 5125285.5 1496023.5 832266.5 326991

Total Sum E = (C) + (D) 338405969 56378140.5 16456258.5 9154931.5 3596901

Supervision Cost (F) Rate 20 15 15 10 10

Supervision Cost (F) 67681193.8 8456721.07 2468438.775 915493.15 359690.1

Total Cost 406087162.8 64834861.5 18924697.28 10070424.65 3956591.1

Per Capita Cost (C+O) 225.08 215.76 218.79 209.10 211.06

Per Capita operational

Cost

76.81 67.45 68.40 58.83 59.35

156


The following tables reveal a comparison between the present sources of

street lighting with the number calculated on the basis of the existing norms for

street lighting of one point for 20 persons.

Table 6.5

Municipal



Municipal Board III

Municipal Board IV

CFL/LED Lights (in Number)

Present 65415 11915 5051 2514 1001


Requirement -2449 -1427 -2033 -833 -347

Sodium Lights

Present 33441 2778 1249 131 63


Requirement -6378 1730 49 591 219

High Mask

Present 52 6 7 3 2


Requirement 129 24 2 2 -1

Population per Point

(Standard Norm 20) 18.2 20.4 13.7 18.2 17.6

The above table reveals that the number of street lighting points is presently

are according to the prescribed norms. Even the distance between the two poles was

in accordance with the norm of 30 meter between the two poles. Accordingly it is

calculated that the cost would be on extension, maintenance and supervision. The

Installation of new points is being calculated on the basis of the requirement as

spelled by the difference between the norms and the present status.

157


Table 6.6 Cost Calculations based on the Identified Needs

Municipal



Municipal Board III

Municipal Board IV

Installation of New Points

CFL/LED 0 0 0 0 0

4-Set Lights

Requirement 0 1730 49 591 219 Total Cost (in Rs Lakh)

6920000 196000 2364000 876000

High Mask

Present 52 6 7 3 2


Requirement 129 24 2 2 0 Total Cost (in Rs Lakh) 64500000 12000000 1000000 1000000 0 Timer Cost 1370850 228000 65550 37050 14250 Total Equipment Cost 65870850 19148000 1261550 3401050 890250 Maintenance Cost for existing and new installations 30858075 4670775 1611615 848010 333765 Sum 96728925 23818775 2873165 4249060 1224015 Extension Cost 9672892.5 2381877.5 287316.5 424906 122401.5 Sum 106401817.5 26200652.5 3160481.5 4673966 1346416.5 Supervision 15960272.63 3930097.87 316048.15 467396.6 134641.65 Sum 122362090.13 30130750.38 3476529.65 5141362.60 1481058.15 Per Capita Additional Need 67.82 100.26 40.19 106.75 79.00

Table 6.7 Actual Present Cost

Municipal



Municipal Board III

Municipal Board IV

Establishment Cost 44215000 10929000 2300000 123000 444000

Operational 120116000 24004000 11881000 4502000 2074000

Total 164331000 34933000 14181000 4625000 2518000

Population (Census 2011) 3608350 601000 259489 144481 93731 Per Capita Establishment Expenditure 12.25 18.18 8.86 0.85 4.74 Per Capita Operational Expenditure 33.29 39.94 45.79 31.16 22.12

Per Capita Total Expenditure 45.54 58.12 54.65 32.01 26.86

Table 6.8 Cost Comparisons

Per Capita Cost Municipal Corporation

Municipal Council

Municipal Board II

Municipal Board III

Municipal Board IV

Standard Norms 225.08 215.76 218.79 209.10 211.06

Identified Needs 67.82 100.00 40.19 106.00 79.00

Actual Expenditure 45.54 58.12 54.65 32.01 26.86

158


Maintenance of Public toilets

The cost component for toilets consists of construction and maintenance of

public toilets. As per the mandate given to the Institute, the cost here has been

calculated for maintenance of public toilets only.

The maintenance of the public toilets would include the cost of effective and

efficient cleaning of choked underground drainage and sewer lines. For this it is

proposed to hire a High Pressure Nano Jet- Mini Sewer Jetting which would clean

the public toilets at least once a day. It is proposed to provide one jetting machine for

25 public toilets.

Table 6.9 Standard Norms Cost Calculations


Municipal Council

Municipal Board II

Municipal Board III

Municipal Board IV

Average Population 1804175 300500 86496 48160 18746

Number of Public Toilets 209 174 41 23 25

No .of sewer jetting machine need (One Machine for every 25 public toilets )

9 7 2 1 1

Running Cost of machine

Depreciation cost of Machine @15% of the machine cost of Rs 7,00,000 (A)

945000 735000 210000 105000 105000

Diesel for jetting machine & Pick Up Vehicle

Diesel -2Ltr./machine/per day (B)

328500 255500 73000 36500 36500

(2Ltr./per day/per pick-up 328500 255500 73000 36500 36500

Total Diesel Cost 657000 511000 146000 73000 73000 Total Running Cost (A+B) 1602000 1246000 356000 178000 178000

Labour cost Driver @167 per day 548595 426685 121910 60955 60955

Operator @157 per day 515745 401135 114610 57305 57305

Total 1064340 827820 236520 118260 118260

Cleaner Cost Total cleaner @ Rs 2500/machine per month (Phenyl, Acid, Deodorant, Naphthalene)

270000 210000 60000 30000 30000

Total costing 2936340 2283820 652520 326260 326260

Per capita 1.63 7.60 7.54 6.77 17.40

159


Table 6.10 Actual Present Cost and Standard Norms Year 2011-12

Municipal



Municipal Board III

Municipal Board IV

Standard Norms

Construction &

Maintenance Cost

35.77 35.68 5.59 5.25 2.46

Population (Census

2011)

3608350 601000 259489 144481 93731

Total Maintenance

Cost

32.22 25.06 7.16 3.58 3.58

Per Capita 0.99 5.94 2.15 3.63 2.62

Table 6.11 Cost Comparisons

Per Capita Cost Municipal Corporation

Municipal Council

Municipal Board II

Municipal Board III

Municipal Board IV

Standard Norms 1.63 7.60 7.54 6.77 17.40

Actual Expenditure 1.0 6.0 2.15 3.63 2.62

PUBLIC HEALTH

The activities undertaken for public health include:

Works for Anti Larvae

Fogging Works

Spray Works

Spray of Phenyl, DDVP,Propoxur on the dumping stations

The costs for these works have been calculated and are categorized as follows:

Cost of Insecticides

Labour Cost

Equipment Cost

Fogging Cost

Table 6.12

160


Municipal

Corporation Municipal Council

Municipal Board II

Municipal Board III

Municipal Board IV

Cost of Insecticide(values in Rupees)

Phenyle @ 7 ml per

Capita (57.5 Rs liter) 726225 120922 34815 19385 7545

Pyrathrum @ 0.2 ml per

capita (1300 rs liter) 468000 78000 22490 12520 4875

Temophos @ 0.4 ml per

capita (950 Rs liter) 685900 114000 32870 18300 7125

Propoxer @ 1.6 gram per

capita ( 220 Rs kg) 635140 105600 30445 16950 6600

Bleaching powder/

Deodorant cum

disinfectant Powder @ 5

gram per capita (42 Rs/

kg)

378840 63084 18164 10115 3937

Total Cost of

Insecticides (A)

2894105 481606 138784 77270 30082

Labour Cost

One Sprayer for 40

households @ 147 per

day (B)

*Two times in one year

2053590 388080 161700 130536 54684

Equipments

One Knapsack/Ganesh

Pump for 3000

population

601 100 29 16 6

Cost @ Rs 750 450750 75000 21750 12000 4500


(in Rs) (C)

450750 75000 21750 12000 4500

Municipal Municipal Municipal Municipal Municipal

161


Corporation Council Board II Board III Board IV

FOGGING

One fogging machine is

required per 50,000

population

(In MB III &MB IV

fogging not Applicable

36 6 2 NA NA

Cost of Depreciation 15%

@ 7,00,000

3780000 630000 210000 NA NA

Fogging Material /Petrol

@8350 Rs/Lit for each

machine twice an year

601200 100200 33400 NA NA

Helpers 2 @ Rs 147 for 20

rounds per year

211680 35280 11760 NA NA

Cost of Pick Up Vehicle

@ Rs 1200 per round

with diesel

864000 144000 48000 NA NA

Total Fogging Cost (D) 5456880 909480 303160 0 0

Total Sum (A+B+C+D) 10855325 1854166 625394 219806 89266

Supervision Cost @ 15% 1628298.75 278124.90 93809.10 32970.90 13389.90

TOTAL COST 12483623.75 2132290.9 719203.1 252776.9 102655.9

Per Capita Cost 6.92 7.10 8.31 5.25 5.48

Present Cost 2011-12

Expenditure on Public

Health

2565500.00 214500.00 174333.33 50000.00 59400.00

Cost Per Capita 1.42 0.71 2.02 1.04 3.17

Cost Comparison (in Rs)

Norms Per Capita Cost 6.92 7.10 8.31 5.25 5.48

Present Cost Per Capita 1.42 0.71 2.02 1.04 3.17

Gap 5.50 6.38 6.30 4.21 2.31

162


SEWERAGE

Sewerage is the core element of physical infrastructure that determines the

environmental status of any settlement and as such requires minute planning,

development and management. Development of appropriate sewage carriage system

with efficient treatment is the key element, which acts as a prerequisite for

facilitating balanced and harmonized development. Augmentation of existing

inadequate systems/treatment facilities as well as adoption of new technologies of

waste treatment presents a gigantic task demanding special efforts.

It has been notices that the responsibility of maintenance of sewerage has

been entrusted to different agencies at various places. In Jaipur the maintenance has

been entrusted to the Jaipur Municipal Corporation while in Ajmer this

responsibility has been given to the UIT, Ajmer. In Jodhpur & Udaipur the PHED is

taking care of the O&M of the sewerage.

In order to meet out the expenditure done for operation & maintenance

(O&M) of sewerage system, state Government levied sewerage charge @ 20 percent

of the water charges Since than PHED is regularly collecting sewerage charge and

supposed to reimburse the O&M expenditure to the municipal corporation up to the

limit of sewer charges collected. This tariff is expected to meet the O&M costs of the

sewerage in the identified ULBs and thus the detailed calculations for the sewerage

costs have not been made. The maintenance costs would be around Rs 450 per capita

both for the Municipal Corporation and Councils.

163


Maintenance of Community Parks

Table 6.13 Standard Norms Calculations


Municipal Council

Municipal Board II

Municipal Board III

Municipal Board IV

Number of Gardens maintained By ULBs

381 83 23 3 1

Staff Cost(values in Rupees)

Horticulturist(1)1000/Day Only for Municipal Corporation

360000 0 0 0 0

Horticulture Supervisor @Rs 217/Day one for 40 garden

792050 158410 0 0 0

Assistant Choudhary @217/Day one for 20 garden

1584100 316820 158410 0 0

Gardner @ 167/Day one for two gardens

11642405 2499155 731460 121910 60955

Chokidar @Rs 147/Day one for each garden

20442555 4426537.5 1251950 160965 75117

Sweeper@ Rs 147/Day one for 2 garden

10221277.50 2213268.75 625975.00 80482.50 37558.50

Maintenance of equipments and water sources @ 15 per cent

6756358.13 1442128.69 415169.25 54503.63 26044.58

Total Staff Cost (A) 51798745.63 11056320 3182964.3 417861.1 199675.1

Additional Costs

Seed, Plants and Pots @Rs 5000 per garden

1905000 415000 115000 15000 5000

Toys and Benches @ Rs 20000 7620000 1660000 460000 60000 20000

Solar Lights @Rs 17,500 for per light, two Lights for each garden

13335000 2905000 805000 105000 35000

Electricity Charges for Tubewells @Rs 1500 per month

6858000 1494000 414000 54000 18000

Per Capita Capital Cost 12.67 16.57 15.95 3.73 3.20

Total Additional Cost(B) 29718000 6474000 1794000 234000 78000

Total Cost (C) 81516745.6 17530320 4976964 651861.1 277675.1

Per Capita Cost (C+O) 45.18 58.34 57.54 13.54 14.81

Per Capita Operational Cost 32.51 41.77 41.59 9.81 11.61

Table 6.14 Actual Expenditure 2011-12


Municipal Council

Municipal Board II

Municipal Board III

Municipal Board IV

Actual Expenditure 2011-12 (values in Rupees)

Total Expenditure on Public Park (Does not include the salary component)

41838000 19458000 3515000 1286000 72000

Total Population 3608350 601000 259489 144481 93731

Per Capita Expenditure 11.59 32.38 13.55 8.90 0.77

Cost Comparison

Normative Per Capita Cost 45.18 58.34 57.54 13.54 14.81

Actual Per Capita Expenditure 11.59 32.38 13.55 8.90 0.77

Gap 33.59 25.96 43.99 4.64 14.04

164


Maintenance of Community Halls

Table 6.15 (Cost In Rs.)

Municipal



Municipal Board III

Municipal Board IV

Calculation as per the Standard

Total Community Halls Maintained by the ULBs

24 34 9 7 2

TotalConstruction Cost for Community Hall as per the BSR, JMC @1000000

24000000 34000000 9000000 7000000 2000000

Maintenance Cost of Community Hall (10% Of Construction Cost) Based on the cost of needs identified for the community halls in the ULBs

2400000 3400000 900000 700000 200000

Total Cost 2400000 3400000 900000 700000 200000

Per Capita Cost 1.33 11.31 10.41 14.53 10.67

Actual Expenditure 2011-12

Actual Expenditure 2011-12 (Includes the Cost of Construction)

38000000 921000 5680000 500000 50000

Per Capita Expenditure 2011-12

10.53 1.53 21.89 3.46 0.53

Per Capita Expenditure on maintenance (Based on the assumption that the maintenance expenditure is average 10%)

1.05 0.15 2.19 0.35 0.05

Gap 0.28 11.16 8.22 14.19 10.62

165


Per Capita Cost for Core Functions for ULBs

Table 6.16


Municipal Council

Municipal Board II

Municipal Board III

Municipal Board IV

Solid Waste Management (values in Rupees)

As Per Standard Norms 356.91 346.37 338.85 317.81 315 As per Actual Revenue Expenditure

68.30 120.2 47.7 73.1 186.6

Gap 288.61 226.17 291.15 244.71 128.4

Street Light

As Per Standard Norms 225.08 215.76 218.79 209.10 211.03 As per Actual Revenue Expenditure

33.29 39.94 45.79 31.16 22.13

Gap 191.79 175.82 173 177.94 188.9

Public Toilet


1.0 6.0 2.15 3.63 2.62

Gap .63 1.60 5.39 3.14 14.78

Public Health


1.42 0.71 2.02 1.04 3.17

Gap 5.50 6.38 6.30 4.21 2.31

Public Park


11.59 32.38 13.55 8.90 0.77

Gap 33.59 25.96 43.99 4.64 14.04

Community Halls


1.05 0.15 2.19 0.35 0.05

Gap 0.28 11.16 8.22 14.19 10.62

166


Per Capita Cost for Core Functions for ULBs (Capital and Operational)

Table 6.17


Municipal Council

Municipal Board II

Municipal Board III

Municipal Board IV


As Per Standard Norms 356.91 346.37 338.85 317.81 315

Capital - - - - -

operational 356.91 346.37 338.85 317.81 315

Street Light

As Per Standard Norms 225.08 215.76 218.79 209.10 211.03

Capital 148.27 148.31 150.39 150.27 151.68

operational 76.81 67.45 68.40 58.83 59.35

Public Toilet


Capital - - - - -

operational 1.63 7.60 7.54 6.77 17.40

Public Health


Capital - - - - -

operational 6.92 7.10 8.31 5.25 5.48

Public Park


Capital 12.67 16.57 15.95 3.73 3.20

operational 32.51 41.77 41.59 9.81 11.61

Community Halls


Capital - - - - -

operational 1.33 11.31 10.41 14.53 10.67

167


As a part of this study a review the staffing pattern of the Urban Local Bodies

in view of their role. This review has been done keeping in mind that urbanization is

growing phenomenon and is rapidly engulfing not only land but also those gifts of

nature which sustain life.

When we look at the history of Urban Local Bodies since their inception in the

19th Century British India, one stark fact looms large at us. The present structure

makes us feel that we are still living in the colonial days with our Urban Local

Bodies filled up with staff some of which is totally redundant today. In the days

when satellites are looking at every inch of land and mapping it out, we still employ

a large number of Revenue Inspectors and property tax assessors who are not only

inefficient but also use manual methods of assessment of area and tax.

We have also seen that these bodies, since their inception, have never shown

any enthusiasm for levying local taxes. The British had also complained that the

elected representatives were not interested in increasing their own income and,

therefore, the State had always to impose direct and indirect taxes on their behalf to

meet their financial needs. Things have become far worse today. Taxes like house

tax, which were mandatory, were sacrificed at the altar of politics. Octroi which was

a big contributor to internal revenue was also abolished without batting an eye lid

by the State Government. A further obstacle in the way of municipal bodies is the

setting up of bodies like the Jaipur Development Authority, Housing Boards and

Human Resource and Staffing in Urban Local Bodies

168


UITs. These bodies have taken over all those revenue generating activities which

were with municipal bodies, especially selling of land. The JDA is headed by the

Minister himself. There are possibilities of biased decisions by the State Government

if there is a point of dispute between the JDA, Housing Board and municipal bodies

like the Jaipur Municipal Corporation. Municipal bodies are Constitutional bodies

whereas the developmental bodies are not. The State should provide a higher status

to Municipal bodies than to developmental agencies.

There are many other such obstacles which come in the way of strengthening

of internal resources. More and more dependence is now on grants by the State

Government and the Central Government through various schemes to sustain these

bodies. The studies made by our Institute have clearly shown that unlike the 73rd

amendment to the Constitution, the 74th amendment has failed miserably in all its

objectives, especially the stranglehold of the State.

The way the administrative and financial powers of the Urban Local Bodies

are being centralized by the State Government is the crassest example of

―Centralized Decentralization‖ and a snub to the 74th amendment of the

Constitution of India. The second tier of governance, i.e., the State government, has

not given the respect due to the third tier of governance, i.e., the panchayats and

urban local bodies set up under the Constitution of India. Duly elected Municipal

bodies are almost an appendage of the government appointed developmental

agencies like the JDA, the Housing Board and UITs. This has crippled these bodies.

We would like to request the State Finance Commission to link its grants to the

vesting of total fiscal powers to the urban local bodies.

It is proposed that in cases of dispute, a body under a retired High Court

Judge should be set up to adjudicate between the Municipal Bodies and urban

development agencies and not the State Government.

As good governance is the backbone of rapid development, we must put our

energy together to improve the governance in the Urban Local Bodies. Staffing

pattern is a major component of good governance. The last attempt at looking at the

staffing pattern of urban local bodies was made in 1965 in Rajasthan. In many other

169


States also we find that no fresh attempts were made for changing the staffing

pattern for several years. As it is not possible for us to look at detailed changes in the

staff pattern from the top to the bottom level, within the means and time available

with us, we have selected some broad areas for improving the staffing pattern and

strengthening the system to meet the present day needs.

Need for a Separate State and Subordinate Services Cadre :

At the outset, we would like to prioritize on creating a separate State and

Subordinate Services cadre for the Urban Local Bodies on the pattern of the

recently created Rajasthan Rural Development Services with similar rules for

appointment, promotions etc. It is of extreme importance that we create a group of

highly trained administrative and technical officers to administer the Urban Local

Bodies from the lowest grade Municipalities to Municipal Corporations.

Unfortunately, urban local governance has never been put on a priority by the

governments. For example, even in Jaipur Municipal Corporation, we find that a

large number of Municipal Commissioners have risen from the ranks without any

specialized knowledge of the changing administrative and technical requirements of

urban governance. This should be set right at the earliest.

Need for Capacity Building at the Third Tier: Creation of a State Level Institute

for Urban Development

There is no direct recruitment at any level. We also feel that along with the

creation of State and Subordinate level Service, an institution on the lines of the

Indira Gandhi Panchayati Raj Sansthan (IGPRS) should be set up by the

Government, which can take up training needs of officers for the urban local bodies,

right from the foundational level to the senior most level.

Unless and until these two basic requirements of modern day urban local

governance are met, it will not be possible to achieve our goals by only changing the

170


staffing pattern. The State Finance Commission may like to provide initial funds

for this purpose.

Some other areas of concern are as follows:

Need for a separate department of Solid Waste Management in the State

The work of this department should be limited to dealing with Solid Waste

Management Planning and Execution throughout the State. It should provide all the

technical knowledge and the functions regarding cleaning the cities, including

purchase of equipment should be dealt with by it.

Suggested Pattern of Cleaning Staff in ULBs

Regarding sanitation, including Solid Waste Management, we would like to

propose that throughout the State, in different municipal bodies, we would like to

emphasizes that there should be one sweeper for every 250 residents. There should

be one Jamadar over 25 sweepers and a Sanitary Inspector for a population of 20000

residents and in each zone, having a population of 2 lakhs, there should be one Solid

Waste Management Officer. We would suggest that his designation should be

changed from Health Officer to Solid Waste Manager because the word ‗health‘ is

very ambiguous.

Chief Executive Officer

We propose that in all those Municipal bodies where there is a Mayor, the

CEO should be from the IAS. Looking to the experience of IAS officers as CEO in

Jaipur, we propose that he should be from the super time scale of the IAS. The others

can be from the selection grade of the IAS. We also propose that the Government

should send a panel of names to the Mayor who should be authorized to select

one.

Zonal Officers : - Making A More Rational Division of Jurisdiction

171


The rising population of urban areas needs a continuous look at the number

of Zonal Officers required in various urban local bodies. There should be a Zonal

Officer for each zone. There should be a Zonal officer for two lakh population across

the State. We suggest that there should be a delimitation of the jurisdiction of zones

looking to the present and future needs of next 5 years. The number of Zonal

Officers should be raised accordingly.

At least 1/3rd of the Zonal Officers in towns with more than 10 lakh

population should be from the Rajasthan Administrative Service and the rest from

Municipal Services. In Municipal bodies other than corporations, Zonal Officers

should be for general purpose administration but should not be involved in

collecting taxes which should be dealt with by another wing.

Executive Officers in smaller municipal bodies should be from junior scale,

senior scale and selection scale of the Municipal Services and should be posted in

smaller to bigger municipalities in that order. These officers should be recruited

directly from the market.

Municipal Commissioners at Headquarters

There are Municipal Commissioners at the headquarters for various works.

We shall take up only those posts which need either abolition or strengthening.

Commissioner - Solid Waste Management

It is recommended that Health and Sanitation is divided into two divisions -

Public Health and Solid Waste Management. There is a difference in the needs

between Health and Public Health. We should also understand that sanitation has

become such a major issue with solid waste management as an important

component. There must have a separate Municipal Commissioner who is trained in

trained in Solid Waste Management for it. He should be in-charge of management

of solid waste of all types. He should be a technical officer specially selected for the

job.

172


The work of cleaning the towns needs much more technical and

administrative focus. It should be insisted that under the Commissioner, there

should be Solid waste Engineers and not Civil Engineers. Each member of the staff

needs to be trained for solid waste management techniques. He should be assisted

by Zonal Officers. Officers supervising Sanitary Inspectors may be called Solid

Waste Management Officers instead of Health Officers.

Commissioner – Public Health

His primarily duty would be dealing with preventive health issues. We also

propose that he should be a professional person with a specialized degree in Public

Health. He should be held responsible for the spread of any disease originating from

sewerage, impotable water, adulterated food, insects, animals etc. He should have

direct control on all the necessary staff and equipments as well as funds and should

have delegated administrative and financial powers for emergency use. He should

be of CMHO level, who can coordinate with District CMHOs. He should be assisted

by Zonal officers.

Municipal Commissioner (Revenue)

A weak area in the Municipal set up is revenue collection although it should

be a very important part of administration. The Commissioner who should be from

the Rajasthan Accounts Service should be supported by Revenue Officers in every

zone and there should be one Revenue Inspector for four assessors. There should be

one assessor for 3000 assesses depending on the demand raised from the Zone.

There should be at least 2-4 Assessors to help the Municipal Commissioner

(Revenue) at the headquarters. Each field Revenue Officer should have at least three

Revenue Inspectors and five Assistant Revenue Inspectors in each zone. The

Municipal Commissioner (Revenue) should be supported with modern day

techniques of assessing property and other taxes through GIS, satellite mapping and

other necessary equipments. The revenue officials should not be only to assess the

taxes at the ground level but timely collection of local taxes also should be their

173


responsibility. We also suggest that the revenue assessment and collection should be

directly under the Municipal Commissioner (Revenue). He should be from Rajasthan

Accounts Service. Zonal Commissioners should be kept out as they are busy with

general administrative duties in their zones. Those people who want the bills

through internet and also want to pay by internet should be allowed the facility as

has been allowed in several other services.

Municipal Commissioner – (Garage)

We feel that the vehicles in an Urban Local Body along with the drivers

should be totally outsourced except for a few vehicles for emergency use for the

Chief Elected official, the Chief Executive Officer and those Commissioners who

need to go to the field frequently. We feel that the garage can be under the

Commissioner (Establishment) with one technical person to look after maintenance,

etc. The post of Municipal Commissioner (Garage) should be abolished.

Municipal Commissioner (Gardens)

Another work which needs to be totally outsourced is the development and

maintenance of gardens. Serious efforts need to be made to get the public sector

undertakings, the corporate sector or charitable clubs like the Rotary and Lions

involved. The Zonal officer can be asked to supervise the work. The post of

Municipal Commissioner (Gardens) may be abolished.

Public Relation Officer

This post should be created in all those ULBs where the population is above

three lakhs. His main job should be to launch public awareness programmes such as

cleaning of the town and citizen‘s responsibility, pollution, techniques of Solid Waste

Management, public health, revenue recoveries etc. He could be on deputation from

the Department of Public Relations.

174


Chief Fire Officer

The fire division is a major weakness of Urban Local Bodies. There is

shortage of skilled manpower, equipment and fire extinguishing chemicals. The

entire work is technical in nature and should be under the Chief Fire Officer. The

CFO should be directly under the CEO and the post of Municipal Commissioner

(Fire) should be abolished. He should be assisted by all Zonal Commissioners, each

with a team of officers who should be responsible to ensure that fire safety norms are

fully implemented in their jurisdiction in all the buildings which need their

certification and who should be held personally responsible in case of a default.. All

the towns above a population of five lakhs should have a Chief Fire Officer. Towns

below a population of five lakhs should have Fire Officers suitably trained in

firefighting of all types.

Civil Engineering Wing in ULBs

As per the Director, LSG, as on 1.4.2010, the following was the staff position

for the engineering wing in various ULBs and the additional demand raised by the

Local Self Government in 2010 for new positions given below:-

Table 7.1

Post Present Additional Requirement

Total

Chief Engineer Nil Nil 0

Additional Chief Engineers Nil 1 1

Superintendent Engineers 3 Nil 3

Executive Engineers (Civil) 13 5 18

Executive Engineers (Electrical) 4 1 5

Executive Engineers (Mechanical) 2 Nil 2

Assistant Engineers (Civil) 32 6 38

Assistant Engineers (Mechanical) 4 1 5

Assistant Engineers (Electrical) 4 5 9

Junior Engineers (Civil) 146 13 159

Junior Engineers (Mechanical) 6 6 12

Junior Engineers (Electrical) 8 13 21

On 18th February, 2011, the demand went up suddenly to –

175


Table 7.2

Chief Engineer 1

Additional Chief Engineers (Civil) 2

Superintendent Engineers (Civil) 7

Executive Engineers (Civil) 24

Assistant Engineers (Civil) 110

Junior Engineers (Civil) 427

No reasons have been mentioned in the order of Finance Department

for this sudden rise in demand. These positions are also not linked with any central

or state schemes.

The Government also sanctioned one post of Additional Chief

Engineer (Civil) for the headquarters. How was the number of posts raised so

suddenly and sanctioned by the FD even while the report of the State Finance

Commission is under preparation is strange, especially when the staffing pattern

in ULBs is under scrutiny by the Commission needs an explanation. There was no

need for this additional financial burden on the municipalities when they have no

funds to bear the burden of salaries even for the existing staff. We strongly

recommend that any staff reduction or augmentation has to be done in

consultation with the municipalities as they are independent Constitutional

bodies and not an adjunct of the State Government’s department of Urban

Development.

In the PWD, the post of an Additional Chief Engineer is at the Zonal

Headquarters only and there is one Superintendent Engineer in one district. An

XEN is allowed for works of Rs.15 crores as per the government orders. With every

XEN, there are three AENs and with every AEN there are three JENs. We strongly

propose that for each municipal body whether it is a corporation or a municipality

of 3rd Grade, the staff should be totally based on the funds sanctioned for civil

work and the PWD norms. It is also seen that posts which have been sanctioned for

the Directorate of Local Bodies cannot be and should not be paid for under the State

176


Finance Commission grants. Another drawback with the positions existing or asked

for is that not a single post has been suggested for Environmental Engineers, which

is the need of the hour especially in bigger cities where the rate of urbanization is

very rapid and where pollution levels are sky rocketing.

We also propose that promotions from Junior Engineers to Superintendent

Engineers and above should be strictly on the pattern followed in the PWD.

We also propose that as the urban local bodies are no longer involved in

electrical or mechanical work, posts of all mechanical and electrical engineers

should be abolished. Instead, posts of environmental engineers, wherever

required, created.

Legal Division

Another weak area of administration in the Urban Local Bodies is the legal

cell. Let us take the example of the Jaipur Municipal Corporation. There are 22000

cases pending in the Municipal Courts in Jaipur, 8000 at the District and Sessions

Judge‘s court, 2000 in the High Court and 50 in the Supreme Court. For this the staff

is as follows –

Table 7.3

(i) Director Law in the rank of the Joint Legal Remembrancer 1

(ii) Deputy Legal Remembrancer 1

(iii) Assistant Legal Remembrancer 2

At present there is Director Law and one Law Officer, who is of the rank of

Assistant Public Prosecutor. Looking to the need of quicker disposal of the cases,

posts of one DLR, two ALRs and eight HLAs are absolutely needed. In the

Municipal Councils at least one ALR is necessary. In smaller Municipalities if

required, there could be at least one parokar. The present Joint LR in JMC is also the

Director of Law in the Local Self Department, which should not be permitted.

Revenue Collection

177


The situation of revenue collection is simply pathetic in all the municipalities.

The reasons are obvious, there is no desire politically or administratively to collect

taxes. The untied grants of the State Finance Commission to the Urban Local Bodies

is one of the biggest reasons for this lack of enthusiasm, politically and

administratively to improve the financial position of the municipalities. We feel that

the present Finance Commission should put a stop to that. How long will it keep on

compensating inefficiency of the Urban Local Bodies? It is absolutely essential that

any grants to urban local bodies should be based on the collection of taxes from their

own sources. Compensating for establishment costs leads to rising administrative

costs and is against any administrative and economic logic.

We must look at the qualifications of the assessors who are simple graduates

at present and have no specialized skill for assessing the demand. It is also important

to introduce the latest technology to find the exact size of a plot and the built up area

of houses and commercial complexes for computing the correct demand. There is

also need to lower the exemption limits and raise the rates for vertical expansions.

Information Technology

Urban local bodies have failed to recognize the need of using

information technology in their day to day administrative and financial work. Today

the need is to establish systems which can improve the overall functioning of a

municipal body. We suggest creation of the posts of system managers and data entry

operators in all the urban local bodies.

Staff positions in ULBs which need to be abolished

We find that there are several positions, which should be abolished and put in

a dying Cadre or made surplus for absorption elsewhere like those of Tehsildar,

Patwari, Jaldhar, Watchman, Peon, Chowkidar, Parcha Vitrak, Assistant Parcha

Vitrak, Sab Nakedar, Gangman, Scavangar, Painter, Data Computer, Bhisti, Time

Keeper, Mechanical Grade-I & II, Electrician, Pump Driver, Carpenters, Job Officers,

178


Skandhpal, Pump Driver, Cleaner, Fitter, Helper Fitter, Luhar, Helper Lauhar,

Weldar, Job Operator, Draftsman, Surveyor, Tracer, Gajdhar, Mistri Construction

Gang, Kaarigar, Mate, Beldar, Pipe Fitter, Teacher, Naka Guard, Statistical, Machine

Man etc.

Proposed Staffing Pattern for Various ULBs

The following are our suggestions for major staffing in different types of

ULBs.

Depending on the size of the urban local body and the required capability of

the CEO, he could be from the super time scale of the IAS to lower scales in the IAS

or RAS.

1. For ULBs for population above 10 lakhs

Commissioner CEO 1

Addl. Commissioner Commissioner ( Estab.) 1

Commissioner GAD RAS (selection scale) 1

Asst. Commissioner Rajasthan Municipal Services 1

System Manager 1

Computer Asst. /Data Entry Operators

5

Commissioner (Revenue) R. Acct. Service 1

Revenue Officer One for each zone.

Revenue Inspector One for 4 assessors

Assessors One for 3000 assesses

Accounts

Chief Accounts Officer R. Acct. Service 1

Accounts Officer 2

Jr. Accounts Officer 2

Sr. Accountants 6

Jr. Accountants 8

Public Health

CMHO Health Public health specialist 1

Asst. Public Health Officers 1 for each zone


Birth and death Officer One for each zone

Engineering Norms should be strictly according to PWD guidelines

Zonal Officers One Officer for every zone having a population of two lakhs. One-third should from the RAS.

CEO RAS 1

Commissioner (Est.) RAS 1

Asst. Commissioner Municipal Services (Grade-1)

179


Computer System Manager 1

Data Entry Operators 2

Revenue

Commissioner (Revenue) 1

Revenue Officer 1 for each zone

Revenue Inspectors 1 for 4 assessors

Assessors 1 for 3000 Assessors

Accounts

Sr. Accounts Officer 1

Accounts Officer 1

Junior Accounts Officer 1

Sr. Accountant 4

Jr. Accountant 6

Public Health

CMHO Health 1

Asst. Public Health Officer 1 for each Zone

Birth & Death Registrar 1 for each zone

Solid Waste Management Norms suggested earlier

Engineering

Norms strictly in accordance with PWD guidelines.

Public Relations Officer 1

ZONAL OFFICERS There will be one zonal Officer For a population of two lakhs. He will be dealing with all municipal matters in his jurisdiction except taxes.

1

ULBs with Population between 3-5 lakhs

Estb.

CEO RAS 1

Comm. (Estb.) 1

Asstt. Comm.(Adm.) 1

Systems Manager 2

Data Entry Operators 2

Revenue

Dy. Comm. 1

Revenue Officer 1


Assessors 1 for 3000 assessees

Accounts

Accounts Officer 1

Junior Accounts Officer 1

Sr. Accountant 3

Jr. Accountant 5

Public Relation Officer 1

Zonal Officers

There will be a Zonal Officer for every 2 lakh population who will be in-charge of all the activities of the ULB in his jurisdiction other than revenue collection.

Public Health and Solid Waste

180


Management

Public Health Officer 1

Solid Waste Manager 1

Cleaning teams as per norms suggested earlier

Birth & Death Registrar 1 for each zone

Engineering Should be strictly as per the norms of the PWD

ULBs with a Population Between 1 lakh and 3 lakhs

Estb.

E.O. 1

Asstt. E.O. 1

Systems Manager 1

Data Entry Operator 1

Revenue

Dy. Commissioner Raj. Acct. Service 1

Revenue Officer 1


Assessor 1 for 3000 assesses

Accounts

Jr. Accounts Officer 1

Sr. Accountant 3

Jr. Accountant 3

Public Health

Public Health Officer 1

Birth and Death Registrar 1

Solid Waste Management Cleaning team

Solid Waste Manager 1

Cleaning team will be on the pattern suggested earlier. The staff for sanitation shall help the Public Health Officer in the discharge of his duties.

Engineering Strictly as per the norms of PWD

ULBs with Population Between 40000 and 1 lakh

Estb.

EO 1

Systems Manager 1

Data Entry Operator 1

Revenue

Dy. Commissioner 1

Revenue Officer 1

Revenue Inspector 1 for three assessors


Accounts

Sr. Accountant 1

Jr. Accountant 2

Engineering Strictly as per PWD norms

ULBs with Population Below 40000

Estb.

E.O. 1

Systems Manager 1

System Data Entry 1

Revenue

Revenue Inspector 1 for 4 assessors


181


Accounts

Jr. Accountant 1

Public Health and Sanitation Norms for Cleaning Staff will be the same as suggested earlier.

Some Glaring Examples of Local Governance

1. Municipal Corporation, Surat

The rapid urbanisation and rise in population in Surat led to the growth of slums,

increase in garbage and overflowing drains. In 1994, Surat was struck by an outbreak

of a virulent disease somewhat like the plague. The disease caused panic

countrywide and while the citizens blamed the municipality, the civic authorities in

turn blamed the citizens for their lack of civic sense. It was a harsh reminder of what

negligence in the area of solid waste management can lead to. But what was most

amazing was that within a span of 18 months the city made a complete reversal from

a dirty, garbage-strewn city to become one of the cleanest cities in the country.

This transformation was possible by efforts of the Surat Municipal

Corporation and the Community. Subsequent to the disaster, the attitudes of the

citizens changed and they diligently tried to improve its living conditions.

Institutional changes were the first thing to happen. The city was divided into six

zones to decentralize the responsibilities for all civic functions. A commissioner was

appointed for each zone with additional powers. The officials responsible for solid

waste management were made accountable for their work; and field visits were

made mandatory for them each day. The solid waste management department and

other related departments were made to work and cooperate with one another.

Grievance redressal cards were issued to people so that complaints could be

registered. The complaint was attended to within 24 hours and the card returned to

Success Stories

182


the citizen. In addition to the administrative changes, the changed laws had an

important role to play in improving the conditions by also making the citizens aware

of and responsible for certain preventive actions. Indeed, these are some of the very

basic changes that needed to be introduced in the functioning of all urban local

bodies. Initially, the Gujarat Government‘s Municipal Act did not have any

provision to penalize littering. However, after the plague, the government realized

that it was important to impose such a penalty in order to make people aware of

their responsibility in maintaining their city‘s cleanliness. Thereafter, a fine of Rs 50

was imposed for every offence of littering and it was doubled for every

subsequent offence. The city roads were swept twice a day and the corporation, in

an appreciable attempt, has engaged private sweepers to cover different inner

areas of the town. Private contractors are also actively involved in the transport.

The private sector has been involved in solid waste collection and transportation,

maintenance of street lighting, construction of a roads, tree planting and operation of

water treatment plants. As a result of collection of and transportation of garbage,

the collection efficiency increased from 30 percent in 1995 to above 90 percent

now.Another example, by contracting out the street lights maintenance to private

company, the level of service has improved and about 95 percent of street lights

are now in working conditions.

(Source: .TERI, Municipal Finance and Municipal Services in India Present Status

and Future Prospects, Dr. Mukesh P. Mathur, Professor, National Institute of Urban

Affairs (NIUA), 1995)

2. Rajkot Municipal Corporation, Rajkot

Rajkot Municipal Corporation undertook its first

initiative of privatization in 1998 with the privatization of transportation and

collection of solid waste. Encouraged by the results achieved in the first attempt,

RMC undertook privatization of telephone, EPABX system, public toilets

maintenance, employment of security guards, drainage complaints management etc.

183


The initiative has demonstrated that privatization of small works helps an urban

local body to achieve efficiency in administration and good governance.

Rajkot Municipal Corporation (RMC) has contracted out maintenance of

street lights, solid waste removal and transportation, cleaning of public toilets,

maintenance of gardens, a forestation etc. RMC has also undertaken various

entertainment projects with the help of private entrepreneurs. By using the services

of the private sector, RMC has been able to save a significant amount of money and

has been able to close the gap between demand and supply by improving service

provision. Huge investments that are needed for acquiring capital equipments such

as tractors, trollies, etc. have now been given over to private contractors. However,

RMC has not retrenched any of its staff but has stopped new recruitment. RMC

continues to use its present manpower as well as equipment in certain areas in the

city. This also serves as contingency plan in case of service disruption due to

problems with the private contractors. Some initiatives are as follows:

Privatisation of The Maintenance of Street Lights by RMC

Most of the street lights in the city were damaged

and un-repaired. This invited a number of accidents as well as antisocial

activities. The Rajkot Municipal Corporation failed to answer the complaint of

public satisfactorily. From September 1991 private sector was involved for

maintaining the streetlights. Initially four wards were privatised followed by the

others. 33 percent out of the total streetlights (20,000) have been contracted out

till now. There is a saving of Rs. 3.73 lakhs to the corporation per year after the

initiation of privatisation Opinion poll conducted by the corporation suggests

that the public is appreciating the change.

Privatisation Of Maintenance Of Pipelines And Drainage Pumping Station By

RMC

Water is supplied only for 30 minutes everyday. In scarcity period water is

supplied on alternate days. Every summer,RMC used to recruit daily wager

persons to maintain special service of water supply and incurred huge

expenditure. Private contractors were asked to make arrangements for

184


maintenance and repair of pipelines round-the-clock during the scarcity period.

The contractor was to arrange 10 labour and one truck and he was paid Rs.

1000/- per day and 2 fitters were provided by the RMC. This scheme saved lakhs

of rupees. Problems regarding payment of daily wages and regularisation on the

permanent jobs were done away with.

Privatisation of Parks And Entertainment Facilities by RMC

Parks were ill-maintained by the municipality department. It was decided to

hand over maintenance of two parks namely Race Course (12000 Sq. Meters) and

Sorathiawadi Chowk garden (5500 Sq. meters.) on contract. 17.5% of the total

park areas in the Rajkot is privatised (i.e.17, 50 sq.meters out of the 1,00,000

sq.m). Privatisation brought better management and efficiency in the system

apart from the financial advantages. Net financial advantage of Rs 6,30,000 was

achieved.

Entertainment Projects & Schemes by RMC

Besides providing basic amenities to the citizens, RMC has taken up various

entertainment projects and schemes with active participation of entrepreneur

experts in respective fields. In some cases lands and buildings are provided to the

entrepreneur for running the scheme on lease while in other cases only land is

provided on lease. The private entrepreneurs are allowed to charge stipulated

fees from the user. The general rules and regulations of running such facilities are

decided by RMC an agreement has been made with private entrepreneurs for

smooth running of the scheme.

Privatisation of The Health and Other Services by RMC

The health facilities for the poor and the slum dwellers were unsatisfactory and

were available to a negligible part. A mobile clinic was introduced. Financial

Advantage of Rs. 4,000/- pm or Rs. 48,000 / per annum was achieved. The most

important benefit of the scheme is the involvement of NGOs who have social

motive and thus rendering good work.

Innovations In Revenue Collection

Property tax is the second major source of revenue in Rajkot. In order to simplify

the procedure and to increase the base of this tax the corporation has recently

185


introduced the self-assessment forms. Revenue of the RMC has increased after

the introduction of these forms. Many of the informal housing societies and

unnoticed co-operative societies who were not in the list of the Corporation

earlier have come forward for filling the forms.

Recruitment of Professionals in RMC

To initiate corporate culture in the Corporation recently a few professionals were

recruited in the RMC. These professionals work at the level of assistant managers

in the corporation. The corporation has recruited professionals MBAs and

Charted Accountants at the level of Assistant managers in the key branches like

Octroi, Tax, SWM, and Streetlights. Now, the services are better managed and

tackled more efficiently. (Source-The time of India July 24, 2012)

(Source: Urban Management Center(UMC), http://umcasia.org/)

3. CIDCO, New Mumbai

The City and Industrial

Development Corporation (CIDCO), a public sector institution at New Mumbai has

had a very successful experience with privatization efforts. The privatization

experience includes maintenance of sewerage pumps and water pumps, meter

reading and billing, maintenance of parks and gardens, collection of CIDCO's service

charges and so on. CIDCO has given the collection of its service charges to the

Senior Citizens Club (as association of retired persons) whom it pays one percent as

commission. If CIDCO was to collect the charges on its own it would cost it three

times.

For Road sweeping garbage collection, disposal, maintenance of drains,

spraying of insecticides etc. the CIDCO allotted the work to different

contractors for a group of sectors on yearly basis. The work done by the

contractor was supervised by the Sanitary Inspectors of CIDCO. There are

15 contracts in all the 7 town-ships. This system has been functioning for

over 8 years. Now, the streets are well maintained as well as the system is

186


economical. The total cost of all contracts in 7 town-ships is Rs. 58.0 lakh per year. If

this work is done by CIDCO, there would be at least 400-500 sweepers + 20 trucks.

The all inclusive maintenance cost including salary etc. would be around Rs. 100.0

lakh. As against this, the work is done quite satisfactorily through private contracts

at half the cost and with no performance liability of maintenance department.

(Source : Municipal Finance and Municipal Services in India Present Status and

Future Prospects, Dr. Mukesh P. Mathur, Professor, National Institute of Urban

Affairs (NIUA), 1995)

4. Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC)

Pune, the second-largest city in Maharashtra after Mumbai, offers a shining

example of what a city can do to manage the growing menace of garbage as it

urbanises at a rapid pace. The city has always been an important commercial

centre of Maharashtra, but the rapid growth of industry in the Pune district,

particularly the concentration of IT companies and of automotives and auto-

components, has added a modern flavour to its development. Growing numbers

and rising prosperity has meant that not only is the quantity of solid waste

growing—Pune generates 1,400 metric tonnes of solid waste per day—but its

composition is also changing with more plastics and non-biodegradable elements

to reflect the changing patterns of consumption of the growing middle classes.

The Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC) has been trying a range of solutions

from the most traditional and informal to the most modern and scientific,

converting waste to energy with state-of-the-art environment-friendly technology

and developing scientific landfills for depositing the much reduced garbage that

cannot be reused. Rag-pickers‘ cooperatives are participating in the clean-up as

much as the corporate sector with the latest technology.

Pune was no different from other Indian cities in having piles of waste on street

corners and overflowing community bins which were rummaged by rag-pickers

to seek out a living from selling the recyclable bits. Garbage used to slowly find

187


its way from the bins to transfer stations and was finally transported to the

dumpsite 22 km away at Urali to rot.

Things began to change in the 1990s much before the government of India

notified the Municipal Solid Waste (Management and Handling) Rules in 2000

for all Indian cities. The inspiration for change came from Poornima Chikarmane

and Laxmi Narayan, two lecturers at the SNDT University in Pune who urged

city residents to segregate wet and dry waste so that the scavengers did not have

to sift through the garbage looking for what they could sell. Their efforts led to

the setting up of the Kach Patra Kashtakari Panchayat (KKPKP) in 1993, a trade

union of waste-pickers. The municipal corporations of Pune and Pimpri-

Chinchwad started issuing photo ID cards to rag-pickers, which allowed them to

scavenge, reducing the scope for police brutality.

When the PMC set out to develop an integrated strategy to comply with the

SWM Rules of 2000, they found the arrangement with the rag-pickers as well as

the habit of segregating dry waste from wet waste on the part of households very

handy. In 2007, the PMC and the KKPKP jointly promoted the creation of

SWaCH, a cooperative of waste-pickers and other urban poor, using their

members to provide door-to-door collection services for households, shops,

offices, etc. Those not covered by door-to-door collection, were required to use

containers and compactor buckets as prescribed by the PMC.

SWACH members are authorised to collect service-based user fee. They work in

pairs covering 250-300 households for segregated waste collection, further

segregating the recyclables and dropping the non-recyclable waste at feeder

points. From there, the waste is collected by Ghanta trucks. Altogether, they

collect more than 600 tonnes of solid waste per day; in addition, about 10 tonnes

is composted and 150 tonnes is recycled by them in spaces provided by the

housing societies themselves.

The PMC has agreed to pay Rs 8.6 crore for the administrative and management

cost of operations if the collection coverage is 100%, under a five-year MoU. So

far, 35% of the households have door-to-door coverage, and the PMC has paid Rs

3 crore towards administration costs and Rs 70 lakh for uniforms, gloves, badges,

188


wheelbarrows, buckets and sorting sheds, to improve the working conditions of

the rag-pickers. On the other hand, the PMC saves on handling cost (estimated at

R12 crore per annum) and the cost of transportation of the waste to the landfill.

Another very important initiative of the PMC is the Zero Garbage project in

Katraj, the largest ward in Pune. Launched in February 2011, this was a collective

effort of Janwani, an NGO, Cummins India, and SWaCH, who came together to

provide the model, the financing and manpower. The result is that only two

tonnes of waste is sent per day to the landfill site, compared with 10 tonnes per

day earlier. The PMC is determined to scale up this initiative.

A pioneering initiative of the PMC has been to set up 14 biomethanation-cum-

power generation (BCPG) plants, mostly of 5 tpd capacity. The technologies were

selected on the basis of competitive bidding and O&M contracts for five years

were granted to the different parties which brought in the technology.

Transporting wet waste to them is the responsibility of the PMC. These plants

treat organic waste in a decentralised and environment-friendly manner. Given

the collection efficiency of 80-90%, of which 45% is segregated waste, the PMC

has allotted separate vehicles for the collection of wet waste, which comes to

about 300-350 tonnes per day. For each BCPG plant, the PMC provides 600 sq

metres of land, 5,000 litres of water and electricity connection at site (both water

and electricity free of cost).

The waste is treated in two-stage biomethanation process by using closed vessels

where, in the absence of oxygen, micro-organisms break down the organic matter

into a stable residue, and generate a methane-rich biogas in the process. This gas

can then be used as a source of renewable energy to produce electricity (net

surplus after own requirement) of 400 kWh per day, which is being used for

street lights in the surrounding area. The solid residue is used as manure, and the

aqueous liquor is a nutrient-rich fertiliser which can be used to recycle nutrients

back to agricultural land.

As Mahesh Pathak, municipal commissioner of Pune, put it, ―Besides the income

of 1 crore resulting from savings in electricity and from the sale of manure from

the 11 plants, the saving on the cost of transportation and dumping is 80 lakh.

189


The environmental saving because of the reduced transportation of the waste, is

an added bonus.‖

From June 1, 2010, the PMC has stopped open dumping, and the total waste

generated is processed scientifically.

At the high end of the technology spectrum is the ―non-incineration based

thermal waste to energy‖ plant set up in a PPP model in the Ramtekdi Industrial

Area. The investment of R140 crore was made by the private company, Rochem

Separation Systems India Pvt Ltd, based on the patented Concord Blue

gasification technology on the 2.5 acre land provided by the PMC on a lease-

rental basis. This state-of-the-art technology, for which the patent is held by

Prayas Goel, Managing Director of Concord Blue, processes unsegregated waste

to produce energy, fulfilling the requirements of the EPA and European

standards with regard to emissions. The syngas (synthesised gas) is produced

from unsegregated waste, which is a combination of biodegradable and non-

biodegradable components by a thermal process of heating in complete absence

of oxygen followed by reformation of the produced gas, which leads to a clean

hydrogen rich gas that can be utilised for power generation (currently

operational in the said facility). Unlike biogas which is produced from a

biological activity of bacteria breaking down only the biodegradable component

of the waste, syngas is produced from a thermal process and hence is a solution

for the complete spectrum of solid waste sans inerts. Also, syngas is rich in

hydrogen, making it one of the cleanest fuels, unlike biogas which constitutes

about 50% methane.

With the increment in the quantum of plastics in our lifestyle, we need an

environmentally friendly solution for its disposal. Owing to its non-

biodegradable nature, plastics cannot be landfilled. Incinerating plastics without

expensive control equipment gives rise to dioxins and furans from the PVC

component of plastics which are carcinogenic in nature and hence extremely

harmful to all living beings. The Concord Blue technology, owing to its non-

incineration platform, converts solid waste into gas without production of dioxin

and furans over the permissible limit.

190


The PMC is committed to transporting 700 tonnes of unsegregated waste for 30

years, and the company has to process the waste on the same day. The PMC has

to pay a processing fee of R300 per tonne of waste, and the company is free to sell

the power to appropriate third-party buyers. The carbon credits when realised

will be shared equally by the two.

With 28 surrounding villages added to its jurisdiction only last week, Pune‘s

population has increased from 39 lakh to 50 lakh and the area under the

jurisdiction of the PMC has expanded from 244 sq km to 430 sq km. The

challenge of solid waste management and disposal is that much greater. The

vision shown by the PMC in garnering the support of important stakeholders

from among city residents is the key to preparing for the future.

Pune‘s range of solutions for managing waste range from the most traditional to

the most modern and scientific, and are already resulting in saving money for the

municipality—and that‘s without even accounting for the carbon credits

(SOURCE: High-Powered Expert Committee on Urban Infrastructure

Services,Isher Judge Ahluwalia,Oct 31, 2012)

GRAM PANCHAYAT

Solid and Liquid Resource (Waste) Management

Sikkim has become the first state to achieve 100 per cent rural

sanitation coverage, becoming the first ‗nirmal rajya‘ in the country. The challenge

ahead is that of the sustainability of the campaign, with prime focus on solid and

liquid waste management (SLWM) in the villages. The Rural Management and

Development Department adopted the ‗zero waste management‘ concept developed

by Exnora Green Cross, Vellore, with a pilot project in Yangang Rangang gram

panchayat unit, GPU, South Sikkim. A detailed survey was first made of the village

to study the existing practice of waste disposal, and other details. A suitable spot for

a shed, for collection of waste using tricycles, was also identified.

http://www.financialexpress.com/columnists_landing_page.php?pg=1&username=isherjudgeahluwalia

191


Sixty young people and self-help groups from the village and surrounding

areas were trained for one week, after which 19 volunteers were selected as master

trainers of the SLRM project. An eco-friendly, cost-effective SLRM compost shed was

constructed as a rigorous information and education campaigns – awareness

campaigns in schools, market places and residential areas – were carried out

simultaneously by volunteers in the village. Calendars containing information on

organic and inorganic waste, and general instructions on waste disposal, were

distributed at all these places. Residents and shop-owners were distributed at all

these places. Residents and shop-owners were given two buckets (green for

biodegradable and red for non-biodegradable waste) and asked to dump all old and

mixed waste in the truck as per the existing practice. They were then asked to follow

segregation method by dumping their household waste in the respective red and

green bins from that moment onwards. A tricycle has been engaged for the door-to-

door collection of waste. In fact, this tricycle is custom-made and fabricated

according to the requirements of the hilly terrain. It has two compartments, red and

green, for the collection of inorganic and organic waste, respectively. Currently,

there are six workers in the project, including a chief coordinator and one night

chowkidar (guard). Collection is done twice daily: every morning from 6 am to 8 am

and from 4 pm to 6 pm in the evening.

The organic and inorganic waste collected is then transported to the shed

where it is goes through a secondary segregation process. All the cattle eatables are

segregated, washed and given to the cattle; the rest of the cattle non-eatable organic

waste is soaked in cow dung-mixed water, filtered and used for the compost beds.

Inorganic resources are similarly segregated category-wise. For instance, paper, tin,

bottles, plastics, etc, are packed, stored and sold to a scrap dealer in East Sikkim. The

compost beds are currently getting ready for harvest. As much as this project has

encouraged everyone, the challenge of difficult terrain remains. Due to the

unavoidable slopes, the tricycle needs constant maintenance and repair. The lack of a

competitive market for the non-recyclable waste is another challenge.

192


(SOURCE:From Dreams to Reality Compendium of Best Practices in Rural Sanitation

in India, Water and Sanitation Program,MoRD,GoI,2010)

Community Surveillance of Water Sources and Sanitation Practices

Sunderkhal gram panchayat (GP) in Uttarakhand is an excellent example of

community ownership in water quality monitoring and surveillance, as also

sanitation behaviour change. The following practices in Sunderkhal deserve

mention:

All the 21 water sources in the GP are tested by the community for

bacteriological contamination using H2S vials three times in a year and

necessary remedial measures are undertaken as per requirement using

bleaching powder/chlorine tablets, etc.

The community also fills sanitary survey formats once a year to assess the risk

associated with their water sources and the related reasons. Based on the

findings of the survey, protection measures are undertaken by the community

members themselves. These include repair, white wash, cleaning or protection

of various structures of water sources. The community contributes Rs

10/month/household for the purpose. At times, community members also

contribute voluntary labour.

To ensure protection from illnesses, there is a practice of consuming boiled and

filtered water in almost all households. Domestic water filters exist in 60

percent households.

Ladles are used for taking out water from pitchers.

Proper drainage has been constructed for disposing wastewater, particularly

from water sources and houses.

Nobody defecates in the open in Sunderkhal. The GP imposes a Rs 50 fine on

defaulters.

All the schools1, anganwadi centre and other community buildings (Panchayat

Bhawan, sub-centre of health department) have toilets that are properly

193


maintained. To solve the problem of water shortage (for use in toilets) in the

inter college, a rule has been formed, with the consent of students/parents, that

every student would bring half-a-litre extra water which would be poured in a

big container put near the toilets in the school.

Handwashing with soap/ash and water after defecation and before meals is

being practiced by students and community members.

Four garbage bins have been installed by the GP at main locations.

There are about 75 compost or vermi-compost pits in the village for safe

disposal of cow-dung and other biodegradable waste. Non-biodegradable

waste is either sold to rag pickers or buried in pits.

A user water supply and sanitation committee (UWSSC), which is responsible

for overseeing water and sanitation in the village, has been formed in the

village.

This was initiated on January 24, 2009. A training workshop was

organised in Dhari block of district Nainital by District Project Management Unit,

Bhimtal, and conducted by Knowledge Links as part of IDM 2007 project number

245, ‗Institutionalising community-led action for sanitary surveillance (CLASS)

through development and launch of a reward scheme‘,with the support of the World

Bank. Key Resource Centre (KRC), Centre for Good Governance (CGG),Uttarakhand

Academy of Administration (UKAA),Nainital, and the Project Management Unit

(PMU), Swajal Project, Uttarakhand, Dehradun, provided their consent for this IDM

pilot project.The gram pradhan of Sunderkhal, Ms Leela Bisht, wasone of the

participants in this workshop. Impressed by the CLASS approach, she requested

resource persons from Knowledge Links to trigger CLASS in her own village during

the course of training. Thus, triggering was done and post-triggering follow-up

support was also provided by Knowledge Links professionals and a few DPMU

staff. During the triggering exercise, the community members present were engaged

in self-analysis of water and sanitation profile of the village using a number

ofparticipatory exercises, such as disease transmission routes, calculation of medical

expenses, calculation of amount of faeces left in the open, demonstration of sanitary

194


survey of nala and dhara (traditional water sources), visits to defecation areas, water

testing through H2S vials, etc. The exercise revealed that 50 per cent households

were suffering from jaundice; one person had died of jaundice just a month ago.

Most of the households were practicing open defecation; one school toilet was

choked and defunct. Many people in the community had the perception that

jaundice is occurring due to bad air. For the first time, they now realised the

connection between their consumption of bad water and occurrence of jaundice.

They also realised that open defecation was polluting the water sources. The risks

associated with their water sources and related reasons that emerged during sanitary

survey demonstrations gave them ideas as to what they could possibly do on their

own to improve the situation. They immediately agreed to undertake a sanitary

survey of all the water sources in the GP, cleaning of all the nalas, repair of tank in

dhara and disinfection of all the water sources using bleaching powder. The natural

leaders visited the schools and mobilized students and teachers. Students organised

processions in the village, shouting slogans to end open defecation.Women were

mobilised to form teams and convince community members in their neighbourhood

regarding cleaning and protecting sources, water testing and ending open

defecation. Similarly, men in teams mobilized the males. Community contribution

was started and deposited in the UWSSC account. For the first time mengot

associated with protection of water sources; earlier only women were responsible for

this.Drainage was constructed to safely dispose wastewater from one naula. A water

tank was repaired with community contribution and GP fund. A system of weekly

cleaning of water sources was introduced. Self-help groups of women and Yuvak

Mangal Dal contributed to this process by doing vigilance in the morning to check

open defecation. The committee decided to purchase H2S vials, bleaching powder,

etc,from the contribution. Seven ward members also took the responsibility of

monitoring. All the water sources were tested initially in January and February 2009,

then in July 2009 and then in October 2009. Now, these tests are done during the

monsoon, after monsoon and in the winters. Thus the village became open

defecation free (ODF) in 13 days, and all the water sources had been tested and

sanitary surveys undertaken. The sanitary surveys revealed that most of the water

195


sources were a ‗high risk‘ category. Therefore, remedial and protection measures

were undertaken. Within six months, the community members upgraded their

toilets. All sections of the community have participated including men, women and

children. Community institutions such as Yuvak Mangal Dal, GP, women self-help

groups, anganwadi and schools contributed in the process. School teachers,

Accredited Social Health Activist (ASHA) and anganwadi workers mobilised the

people in their work places. The initial indications are encouraging. The practice has

been operational for more than a year-and-a-half. Thispractice is sustainable –

women and village committees ensures water quality monitoring and surveillance

and cleanliness in the village. Many persons who earlier built temporary pit toilets

have now proper pucca (permanent) toilets. As mentioned above, there is a regular

community contribution in cash; labour is also being contributed by community

members to ensure proper upkeep of water sources and water testing.While before

the initiation of the project in Sunderkhal, 50 per cent people were suffering from

jaundice and one person had died of the disease, there are hardly any occurrences of

jaundice in the GP now. In 2010, the GP Sunderkhal bagged the best GP reward (Rs

70,000) under the IDM project. There is another factor which is contributing to the

sustainability of community processes and outcomes,which is that, often, group

participants of various training programmes that are organised in the KRC, CGG

and UKAA visit to see the best practice. This reinforces community participation and

boosts the morale of the community.This practice of triggering CLASS has been

replicated in many villages across Dhari block of district Nainital in Uttarakhand.

The approach has been successfully pilot tested in this block. It has the potential of

replication at scale under the GoI‘s National Rural Water QualityMonitoring and

Surveillance Programme, provided the implementing agency at the state and district

level decide to use the CLASS approach to achievethe objectives of the national

programme, and also strategically use the information, education and

communication as well as human resource development funds available under the

national programmes of water quality and total sanitation.

(SOURCE: From Dreams to Reality,Compendium of Best Practices in Rural

Sanitation in India, Water and Sanitation Program,MoRD,GoI,2010)

196


Cleanliness - Gram Panchayat Piplantri, Rajasthan

The work was going on under the complete cleanliness program of the

village. Until year 2006-07 none of the gram panchayats of Rajasthan received the

Nirmal Gram Award. With the inspiration of main working officer,sarpanch Shri

Shyam Sunder Paliwal took a resolution to make the gram panchayat into Nirmal

Gram Panchayat in may 2006.

The Total population of Piplantri Panchayat is 5138 and 7 Rajasv gram are

Piplantri, Morwad, Gugleta, Umthi, Aarna and Bhudan. On taking the post of

sarpanch by Shri Shyam Sunder Paliwal on 4 feb 2005, the first work done was sector

reform and Swajaldhara Yojna along with acceptance of 11 drinking water plan due

to which the water scarcity was removed forever.

Generally gram panchayat Piplantri is well known for its marble mining

industry. In this gram panchayat, the famous R.K.Marbles is located whose name is

recorded in Guinness Book of World Record for maximum production of marble.

But the environment got badly affected gradually. Without considering the future,

previous gram panchayats gave 50-60 N.O.C‘s due to which there were many mines

in govt.land.

Gram panchayat ran the program, evening to night, Panchayat at your

door and got in touch with the problems of the villagers and tried to solve it quickly

and rest was on thought.

After drinking water the first problem which they faced were of

lights and cleanliness. For cleaning the village, start was made by the Sarpanch,

Panchayat members and other officers along with other villagers. For solving the

197


light problem at night, the suggestion was made that the lights which uses least

voltage is to be used on the streets and roads on expense of gram panchayat &

whose electricity bill will be beared by the person infront of whose house the lights

will be placed and this experiment was remarkably successful. Today aprox.350

lights are working in the village with the contribution of the villagers due to which

whole gram panchayat is lighted.

With the mutual efforts of the villagers, the main roads of the village were

broadened. Along with cement and concrete roads, pakki drains were formed.

For fulfilling the requirement for the dream of Nirmal Gram, 26 toilets were

constructed for the students for 13 schools. For the three anganwadi centres special

sanitation facility were constructed. From the total of 799 families the selected 215

families were provided with Rs.1200 monthly under the plan along with other

support like material, WC etc to the experienced workers.

The 11 ward panch and all 103 workers created sound contact with each

other on sharing their houses which resulted in success of the program.

Cleaning of houses, self cleanliness, proper storage of drinking water, use of

ladles, washing hands before taking meals and after sanitation, child care were given

the importance. The responsibility of vaccination was taken by the workers of

A.N.M. anganwadi which brought surprising changes in the village.

On making all such efforts, the panchayat applied for Nirmal Gram Award on 15

august 2006 on which the inspection committee of central govt. made a survey and

then high inspection committee inspected and made a contact with the villagers.

In the end, on 4 May 2007 h‘ble president A.P.J Kalam awarded Gram

Piplantri with president‘s award.

(Source : piplantri.com)

Fly changes life of people at Bachoda Village of District Indore in Madhya Pradesh:

198


Village Bachoda where agriculture is the only source of economy is in

limelight inentire Madhya Pradesh for receiving Nirmal Gram Pursakar for TSC.

Not far behindjust one year before village Bachoda was like any other village in rural

India, wheredue to open defecation in entire village one would find dirt everywhere.

Mr. Manish Bharadwaj took the initiative to solve the problem of drinking water and

sanitation. He faced lot of resistance by the community members to construct toilets.

Information was disseminated amongst community members through medium of

meetings; pamphlets were also distributed to create awareness. But it was a long

way to to convince the entire village for the same.

But suddenly transformation could be seen, and that was because of a

small

example, which was sited to community members during meetings. The examples of

a small fly how it goes and sits on excreta, and again it fly and come and sitson what

we eat. People were asked to think as to what do they consume now whilethey eat,

the food??? The answer was simple one also consumes excreta along withthe food

which is transferred by the fly, when she sit on food items. The examplewas an eye

opener people realized and agreed to construct toilets so that system ofopen

defecation can be totally abolished in Bachoda Village.

Few individuals were given the responsibility to become policeman for

the cause ofcleanliness; there duty was to not allow a single individual to go for

lavatory in opendefecation. In order to achieve cent percent sanitation target,

individuals not

constructing toilets were penalized, for some time even they were not given grains

from the ration shop and pensions of few pensioners was also stopped for

thisreason.

After construction of toilets was over, the next target was health and hygiene

ofcommunity members. The woman were explained the importance of

hygiene.Individuals, who use to keep them self-dirty, were punished by giving them

bath in

cold water. In order to keep village clean, the roads were broaden, dustbins were

199


kept on roadside.

(Source: www.ddws.gov.in)

200


Under the 73rd and 74th Amendments of the Constitution the State Finance

Commission has been formed for deciding norms for allocating grants to the PRIs

and ULBs. Most of the earlier grants had been based on population and had not

accounted for the basic needs of villages and the smallest unit of ULBs in the absence

of primary information regarding needs and gaps.

The present Fourth State Finance Commission has taken an innovative

approach by initiating an in-depth study into the present needs, funds available and

the gaps that are necessary to be filled during the next five years. The basic premise

is to evolve formulae for an equitable allocation of the grants to be distributed to the

local bodies. The present Study was entrusted to the Shiv Charan Mathur Social

Policy Research Institute to quantify physical and financial norms, for allocation of

funds especially in the crucial areas of health, sanitation, sewerage, cleanliness of

inner roads in the villages and small urban local bodies, street lighting, etc. by the

State Finance Commission.

Panchyati Raj Institutions

It was a matter of worry to find that the expenditure incurred by the PRIs was

far less than the funds provided. It was also noticed that the panchayats have very

little fiscal autonomy. The locally raised revenues are, therefore, very negligible. The

general environment of not levying any taxes at the State level for fear of losing

elections has pervaded to the 3rd tier which has harmed the third tier the most. The

result is that not only development but establishment requirements are being met,

that also only partly, by the State government. This has led to wide gaps in funds

Summary & Suggestions

201


required and available for even basic infrastructural requirements of panchayats and

urban local bodies. Minimum needs of the people are being put on the back burner.

This implies that the State Government has to provide funds to meet the

larger share of expenditure to these bodies from their own kitty or through the State

Finance Commission grants. This cuts into their own needs for larger infrastructural

and core sector requirements. It is suggested that the local governments should not

only have the power to raise revenues but their own sources of revenues should

constitute a very significant share in the total revenues, as is done in Kerala.

Panchayati Raj Institutions should be strengthened by providing to them

ownership of all rural roads, including their construction and maintenance. They

may also be given some powers to act as a watch dog to keep an eye on the quality

and timely delivery of road works. In several developing countries, the participation

of beneficiary communities has been tried out successfully. In China for example,

the Government provides them material like bitumen, cement and steel and the local

villagers construct the roads. In India they can do it under MNREGA, where the

material may be provided separately and not as a material component under

MNREGA. Through road cooperatives, they can also take up maintenance of rural

roads with assistance from the Government. It is suggested that the Panchayati Raj

Institutions should also be provided funds to directly control road maintenance for

which they may like to have a convergence with MNREGA.

According to the Rule 33 of the PR Act the Core functions of a panchayat are

sanitation, street lighting, safe drinking water, drainage, public distribution system,

maintenance of village roads and birth and death registration. It was found that the

focus at the gram panchayat level was on water and rural housing and most of the

funds received were spent on these areas. This led the other functions like Solid

Waste Management, Rural Sanitation, Drainage, and Public Facilities out of focus.

Solid Waste Management and Drainage facilities were available at some

places but people expressed their dissatisfaction about them. There was hardly any

facility of street lighting in the GPs and temporary arrangements were being done by

202


the panchayat during festivals. The people expressed their satisfaction on the

condition of the roads in the rural areas except the desert and canal area. The

incidences of encroachment on the Cremation and Burial Grounds were found to be

all pervasive.

The condition of the public parks in Kota was appreciable while the others

lacked maintenance and were in a bad shape. The main reason stated was a lack of

budgetary provision for their upkeep. The basic facilities like sanitation, electricity,

drinking water and toilets are lacking in most of the community halls and the

maintenance is also unsatisfactory. The availability of public toilets and their

maintenance and cleanliness was also missing at most of the GPs.

The availability of drinking water in the nearest habitation was in mere 64.10

percent of the sampled panchayats. The water is mostly provided to the main village

only which makes local arrangements for supplying to the smaller revenue villages.

This leaves the onus on either the gram panchayat or the individual to make its own

arrangements (tankers, rain water harvesting). The condition of drinking water

availability at public places (markets, schools, bus stands, hospitals, etc) is even more

unsatisfactory. Drinking water is available at only 57.14 percent of public places.

During the discussions, the sarpanchs and the community members

expressed the need for more resources (both financial and manpower) for improving

the scenario in the rural areas. A need for introducing solar technology for street

lighting and using CFL technology for saving power was also emphatically

expressed.

It is really disheartening to see that most of the members of the GP were not

aware about the various development committees formed at the GP level. All the

GPs reported to be forming their annual plan but it was found that it was just a

routine exercise which did not reflect the local needs or the community voices. All

the stakeholders were very positive about the reward system as they felt it promoted

the zeal for development and motivated the representatives for performance.

203


It may be pointed out that in rural areas the topmost priority may be assigned

to drinking water followed by Solid Waste Management and Drainage along the

inner village roads. Solar Lighting may help in utilizing the enormous solar power

endowed by the nature on the state. In the urban areas the focus may be on solid

waste management and sanitation along with street lights.

Table 8.1 – Cost of Core Functions for PRIs

(in `)

SN Core Area Total Cost

Per Capita

Cost

Per Capita

Capital Cost

Per Capita Operational

Cost

1 Solid Waste Management 237284 30.43 - 30.43

2 Waste Water Management 546765 70.12 62.85 7.27

3 Street Lighting 114264 14.65 8.65 5.99

4 Solar Light 176000 22.57 22.57 -

5 Cremation and Burial

Grounds

359960 46.16 46.16 -

6 Community Halls 150750 19.33 - 19.33

7 Drinking Water 510000 65.40 - 65.40

8 Public Health 22960 2.94 - 2.94

9 Public Toilets 136200 17.46 13.46 4.00

Total Cost for Core Functions per GP 22,54,183 289.10 153.69 135.36

Urban Local Bodies

In the Urban Local Bodies, it was observed that their expenditure

responsibilities are increasing day by day, but their own revenue efforts for revenue

generation have more or less remained stagnant. The 74th amendment widened the

functional domain of ULBs by including additional functions such as Town

Planning, planning for social and economic justice, environment protection and

204


reducing urban poverty etc. But as far as the financial requirements of ULBs are

concerned, it is left to State Finance Commission,which is asked to recommend more

fiscal devolution to complement the State resources. The additional functions given

to local bodies are not accompanied with additional devolution. This further acts as

a constraint on ULB‘s and handicaps them in ensuring quality civic amenities to the

citizens. Rapid growth of cities and towns is not matched by a corresponding

increase in the revenue of ULBs.

The revenue augmentation efforts by ULBs do not match with their ever

increasing resource requirement to render satisfactory service to the citizens. The

reason for this mismatch between revenue generation and expenditure are:-

The Raj Municipality Act under Section 102 provides for levy of six obligatory

taxes, of which the tax on land and building situated in Municipal area by

unit area base, tax on profession, trades and callings, toll on bridges and

ferries, tax on advertisement and hoarding, taxes on roads and bridges owned

by or built from municipal funds are important.On these obligatory taxes on

land and building House tax or Property tax is a very important.

Even those taxes which are mentioned in the Municipal Act are not being

levied.

No action is taken against officials, if the tax targets are not achieved.

Surprisingly, not paying tax on time is being rewarded by discounts for late

payment.

The municipal budgets are not prepared as per the instructions while the

expenditure estimates of the municipalities are unrealistic. The achievement

of revenue targets estimated is hardly 30% thereby leaving huge gaps in

revenue mobilization. The liabilities pending at the end of the close of a

financial year are not accounted for or if accounted for their level is kept quite

low so as hide the realistic picture. There is an urgent need to introduce a

systematic computerized accounting system

205


Thus, there is a glaring mismatch between the expenditure responsibilities of

urban local bodies and their revenue augmentation efforts. Further, the position of

the smaller municipalities is much worse, and at times, they find it difficult to even

meet their establishment costs. The ULBs with inadequate taxation efforts, coupled

with inefficient and corrupt financial and administrative management render the

municipal services far from satisfactory level.The citizen is the ultimate loser.

In the Urban Local Bodies it is found that the focus of the Municipal Boards is

on building and conversion activities.Construction of inner roads, sanitation, solid

waste management and death-birth registration activities are never considered

important.

It was found that the public toilets in the urban areas were insufficient and

there was a requirement for more public toilets at public areas like railway stations,

bus stands, hospitals, main markets etc. The existing public toilets were also in a

miserable condition due to lack of maintenance & basic requirements like water

supply.

Cremation & burial grounds were found in all the ULBs‘ but they seemed to

be lacking the basic requirements. Boundaries which are necessary to stop

encroachment were missing. It was suggested that boundaries & tin shade, Water &

lighting facility should be available at the cremation and burial grounds. The parks

available were not properly maintained & required water for plants as well as staff

which was not there. 20% of the parks are maintained on a contractual basis but the

contractor doesn‘t take the pain to look after them even occasionally. In Udaipur,

parks were found in very good condition as they have been adopted by various

public committees. This needs to be replicated.Providing funds from the SFC will

come in the way of efforts at involving private initiatives.

The equipment for firefighting is not adequately available anywhere. In fact

contract labour is mostly used and most of contract laborers are untrained. There is

need to augment the capacity of equipment available for fire fighting. This should be

a very important core function at present time. Not only equipment but funds

206


should be provided for tubewells or water storage tanks in sensitive location to be

identified by ULBs.

Development committees were not constituted in many ULBs because of local

politics. Even where the committees were found, these were not achieved and were

just on paper.

In the urban areas, infrastructure for water supply, sanitation, sewerage and

solid waste management continues to be woefully inadequate, badly supervised and

of poor quality. The deprived sector is the urban poor, who spent much more to

access drinking water and sanitation facilities than the middle and high income

groups. The level of de-centralization, as envisaged in the 74th Constitutional

Amendment has not reached urban local bodies. There is hardly any desire in the

ULBs to design or modify urban poverty alleviation programmes or levying taxes.

Looking to the fast growing minimum needs of the urban areas in the core sectors

districts where the urban population growth rate is higher than the average may

need special provision from the State Finance Commission.

The State Finance Commission may also like to look at the norms and

guidelines for micro planning and inherent systematic weaknesses in the 3rdtier of

governance to absorb funds allocated to it. In the rural areas, unfortunately, true

spirit of decentralized planning continues to be more of a theoretical idea with

multiple plans being formulated. While the line departments and District Panchayati

Raj System should play a significant role, due to lack of support from the state

government it does not reflect local demands emerging from the block and gram

panchayat level. For this purpose, it is very important that the State Finance

Commission should consider a comprehensive and regular capacity building

programme as one of the core functions and allocates suitable funds for it.

More and more responsibilities are being transferred to the local governments

which require capacity building of the staff to become the fulcrum of development.

The capacity building exercises may be taking place to some level of success in the

207


PRIs but for the ULBs, no such efforts were seen. Good governance is one of the

basic needs of the people of the state.

Table 8.2 - Per Capita Cost for Core Functions for ULBs

(in `)


Municipal Council

Municipal Board II

Municipal Board III

Municipal Board IV


As Per Standard Norms 356.91 346.37 338.85 317.81 315

Capital - - - - -

operational 356.91 346.37 338.85 317.81 315

Street Light


Capital 148.27 148.31 150.39 150.27 151.68

operational 76.81 67.45 68.40 58.83 59.35

Public Toilet


Capital - - - - -

operational 1.63 7.60 7.54 6.77 17.40

Public Health


Capital - - - - -

operational 6.92 7.10 8.31 5.25 5.48

Public Park


Capital 12.67 16.57 15.95 3.73 3.20

operational 32.51 41.77 41.59 9.81 11.61

Community Halls


Capital - - - - -

operational 1.33 11.31 10.41 14.53 10.67

208


Vertical and Horizontal Distribution of Funds

The Institute in this report has calculated the norms for the core functions to

be performed by the PRIs and ULBs. The total per capita cost for the core

functions per Gram Panchayat comes to Rs 289.10 while for Urban Bodies it is

Rs 613.27. For ascertaining the total cost required the per capita cost was

multiplied by the total urban and rural population according to the Census

2011. The ratio of the total cost of rural vis-à-vis urban areas for the identified

core functions roughly comes to 60:40. The prevalent practice of the State

Finance Commissions has been to devolve the funds according to the rural-

urban proportion. The same formula has also been adopted in the second

interim report submitted by the Fourth State Finance Commission. Keeping in

view the needs of the PRIs and ULBs and their present financial situation as

well as the future challenges, it suggested that the ratio of the urban maybe

increased. Thus, the horizontal distribution of devolutions should be 60:40.

Within the ULBs 80 percent of the funds may be devolved among all the ULBs

in proportion to their population and additional 20 percent among all the

municipalities in proportion to their population on the same pattern as

proposed in the interim report.

As far as Vertical distribution of State Finance Commission grants to PRIs is

concerned the present share of 85:12:3 and may be changed to 85:13:2 in

favour of the Panchayat Samitis, which are the fulcrum of panchayati raj

system.

For the distribution of funds to the PRIs the following norms based on the

indicators are suggested:

209


Table 8.2 – Indicators for Distribution of Grants to PRIs

Area Indicator Source Weightage

Basic Fact of the District including Natural resources

Population Census of India 50

Type of Geographical Terrain and distance from district headquarters

Census of India 10

Infrastructure and services for the public (Any Two)

% Houses Electrified or % Houses with Solar energy or % Houses with Water Availability or % Houses with Drainage Availability

Census of India 10

Data on important indicators and assessment of development

Infant Mortality Rate NFHS/SRS 05

Child Sex ratio (0-6 years) Census of India 05

Gender Gap in Enrolment DISE 05

Financial Information

Contribution to the SDP/Tax Revenue

Finance Department

05

Own Revenue Finance Department

05

Number of BPL Families BPL Survey 05

Total 100

Other Suggestions

The distribution between the State,panchayats and municipalities of the net

proceeds of the taxes, duties, tolls and fees leviable by the State, be based on

some yardsticks which would lead to more inclusive growth in the entire

State, especially in the field of quality of life. There can be different yardsticks

for categorization of Panchayati Raj Institutions and Municipalities. One

could be on the basis of geographical zone which Rajasthan has always

followed: Desert districts, tribal districts and others. The second could be the

human development index as reflected in the local level indicators like

210


childsex ratio (0-6 years), number of Institutional deliveries, number of drop-

out students, number of SHGs, etc. A third can be the radial distance of a

panchayat from a town. A fourth could be the financial performance of a

Panchayat or a ULB. There are Panchayat and Municipalities which just

cannot generate resources howsoever they may try. But human beings live

there also and they also need a basic infrastructure to live like others. Another

indicator may be Innovation introduced for socio-economic development.

Such bodies do require extra devolution.

The State Finance Commission may like to link funds with the condition that

the plans are coming from the block or Gram Panchayat level only. It is

advised that a condition which the SFC may like to impose is that the funds

should be released only if there is sufficient staff and infrastructure available

with the gram panchayat.

It is of utmost importance that the local bodies at the third tier start making

efforts of generating resources. To encourage this, it is necessary that the

distributing of funds by the State Finance Commission should also be linked

with the resource generating efforts made by the recipients.

Inequalities were seen in financial and development status of the local bodies.

It is proposed that the State Finance Commission should make an attempt to

bring about some semblance of inclusive growth of different parts of the State,

otherwise some rich Urban Local Bodies and PRIs will become richer and the

poor will become poorer.

It is advised that the State Finance Commission may provide sufficient funds

for good governance especially in the urban areas. There is a need for a

Rajasthan Institute for Urban Development (RIUA). It has been ascertained

that that this would require initially a capital expenditure of about 250 crores

and would gradually become a self sustaining model. It would be an Institute

for research, training and information dissemination in urban development

and management. The Institute in addition to evaluating the social,

211


administrative, financial and other aspects of the implementation of urban

development plans and programmes may be the centre for capacity building

for the elected representatives and municipality staff.

The State Finance Commission may also like to review the recruitment and

deployment policy for the Municipalities. Recently the State Government has

created a dedicated cadre of state administrative officers for rural areas. The

Rajasthan Municipalities Act 2011 entrusts the responsibility of recruitment

and selection of the municipal officers to the Department of Local Bodies

(DLB) which raises a serious question on the quality of the officers recruited.

It needs to be entrusted to RPSC. Urban Governance is gradually gaining

immense importance and it would be advisable if a separate cadre of the

Rajasthan Urban Development Services is created.

It is suggested that the State Finance Commission should stress the idea of

Solar Energy for lighting and water pumps. The first phase may include areas

where conventional sources are not available. It is also suggested that there

should be a gradual transition from conventional to solar power for bore and

surface water pumping also. This renewable source is now being widely used

in the developing countries. Technical Solar Power Pump System consists of a

solar panel array that powers an electric motor, which in turn powers a bore

or surface pump. Photo voltaic power pumping station is a cost effective

alternative for remote area water supply.

There is need to highlight the need for toilet facilities as a priority area for

rural sanitation.

There is a crucial need to provide clean and safe drinking water to the

slipped-back habitations.

The following could be areas where the Panchayati Raj could levy taxes :-

(a) Tax should be levied on the purchase of animals, which are sold in the

Panchayat area.

212


(b) Vehicle tax, as on tractors.

(c) Pilgrim tax, wherever applicable.

(d) There is tax on a limited number of commercial crops- chillies, cotton,

mustered, sugarcane, zeera and groundnut. However, it should be

extended to tobacco, poppy, fruits, orchards, betel, etc.

(e) Tax should be imposed on contractors working in different rural

development schemes. If already taxed, a surcharge could be levied.

(f) Surcharge should be levied on petrol and diesel and related products

like oil and automobile repair shops.

(g) Hotels and Dhabas.

(h) Country liquor

(i) Ensuring that the surcharge on stamp duty on property is passed on to

the concerned Panchayats, which is not happening at present.

(j) Surcharge on Krishi Upaj Mandi fee.

(k) Major and minor minerals in scheduled notified areas. Any approval

by the Government should need the approval of the Gram Sabha. An

approval fee as well as a cess on production should be levied. Any

mining activity directly impacts on the environment of the Panchayat

adversely affecting the health of the people in the area. They must be

compensated.

(l) Cess on fishing contract which is under jurisdiction of a Panchayat.

(m) Minor forest produce

(n) Lighting the streets

(o) Fairs

(p) Sanitation

(q) Slaughter houses

(r) Shops

(s) A cess on the irrigation charges, collected from tanks/ponds of zero to

80 hectares to Panchayats, from 80 to 300 hectares to Panchayat

Samities.

213


(t) The octroi compensation is available only to the urban local bodies

whereas these products are used in the rural areas also. The

Government may reconsider the issue.

In order to enhance the revenue augmentation in the context of Urban Local

Bodies in Rajasthan :-

(a) A simplified method for Property tax needs to be introduced which may

encourage self –assessment of Land & Building Tax. The system may

learn from the success of the Surat municipality model.

(b) Vacant land tax should be charged.

(c) Powers for periodic revision of taxes should be delegated to ULBs.

(d) Transfer of additional functions to ULBs should be accompanied with

corresponding financial devolution.

(e) Parking fee for motor vehicles should be mandatory.

(f) There should be periodic and regular revision of fees, fines and user

charges (if levied).

(g) ThePer capita grant to local bodies, if abolished must be restored

immediately.

(h) The devolution from the State should be so designed as to encourage

own revenue augmentation by the Local bodies and must not be used to

defray their establishment expenditure.

(i) The State Finance Commission recommendations should promote the

ULB‘s to be more capable of generating their own resources and less

dependent on the State Government. State Government‘s devolution of

funds should be in accordance and should act as an incentive for

generation of own resources by the ULBs. More autonomy to local

governments would enable them to generate additional resources

according to their expenditure responsibility.

Presently, the government is collecting cess for street lighting alongwith the

electricity bill in the urban areas. It is found that the actual expenditure is far

less than the amount being collected. The SFC should suggest that this

amount should be dedicatedly used for promoting the Urban Energy Saving

Programme.

214


The part of the share of the Surcharge on the Stamp duty was scheduled to be

transferred to the Local bodies but is not being done presently.

We would like to stress on some requests, even at the cost of repetition.

They are –

(1) Specific needs of rural and urban women should be met otherwise the

purpose of their reservation is lost.

(2) The growth rate of urban population should be a major criterion. The faster

growing towns need special provision.

(3) Greater stress should be put on those core functions which directly impact on

human development indices.

(4) The State should take the lead in suggesting areas which can be taxed by the

rural and urban local bodies. It may be asked to suggest areas where indirect

taxes can be imposed as they are easier to collect.

(5) Governance at the third tier continues to be a sore factor in service delivery

systems. The less said the better for urban governance which has reached its

rock bottom.

(6) The State is under constitutional obligation to link the grants to a certain level

of satisfactory work done by the recipients.

(7) Full stress needs to be laid on solar power not only for public lighting but also

for drinking water from bore wells. The latter use is widely prevalent in many

developing countries.

The funds from the State Finance Commission should not only fill the gaps in

the required and available levels of funds for infrastructural development and

meeting their core functions but also should work as a catalyst to improve their

capacity and motivate them to generate their own resources to fulfill their unmet

needs. If the Grant is sufficiently utilized it can bring about substantial

mandatory returns as well as lead to bridge the various gaps is developing our

infrastructure which can lead to a faster, wholesome and quicker development of

these institutions and the State.

sfc.rajasthan.gov.in · 2015-06-30 · i need assessment study of urban local bodies and panchayati...

Documents