View Article - Institute of Development Studies

33Debates in the Legislative AssemblyThe West Bengal Panchayat Bill, 1973 was tabled in the Assembly’s 55 th session bySubrata Mukherjee, MLA, for consideration by the House.Highlighting the main differences with the earlier two Acts and the new Bill,Mukherjee focused on the following:i. A 3 tier, not 4 tier-system of PR.ii. Direct elections at all the 3 tiers not like the earlier Acts that provided for directelections at only the lowest tier.iii. The earlier Acts provided for reservation of seats for 2 members of the SC, STsand 2 women members at the ZP and AKP level, whereas the new Bill securesthe provision at all the 3 levels.iv. MPs and MLAs, as members of ZPs and AKPs, could also become elected asChairmen, Presidents etc. under the earlier Acts. Under the new Bill, theywould not have such rights. This will encourage local leadership to emerge.v. The new Bill seeks to augment the resources of PRIs by enhancing the rate oftaxes on land, buildings, trades, businesses, etc. as also for charging additionalstamp duty for any transfer deed relating to immovable property in the GP area.vi. ZPs are to be given matching grants for road and public works cess collected byit.vii. The Bill provides for a State development board and District Development boardsto supervise and evaluate the working of PRIs. This is an improvement over theearlier Acts for if the Accountant/Auditor finds and reports any illegal workperformed by any PRI, its members will be liable to pay a surcharge. ThusPRIs will work legally, and within their jurisdiction.A perusal of the debates in the WBLA proceedings pertaining to the WB PanchayatBill, 1973 shows that opinions were sharply divided among the protagonists and theopposition members. We may recall that in the 281-member 7 th WBLA, the Congress had215 seats, the CPI(M) 13. The latter charged that the elections of 1972 were rigged andtherefore it boycotted the House. The CPI, with 36 seats, was the main opposition party inthe House when the Congress introduced the Bill in 1973. It is possible to argue that thenature of the Assembly debates on the Bill was shaped in no small degrees by the fact thatthe CPI(M) members could not lend their voice of support to their CPI peers.The following core issues were highlighted during the course of debates.