Is it right to dictate on Delhi Government by Centre ?

       

                As we all know, New Delhi is the capital territory of India, officially called National Capital Territory of Delhi. Delhi comprises so many structures of historical importance and it is also houses Supreme Court of India and regional Delhi High Court. Delhi is among one of the union territories which have a legislative assembly and a self administrative system. The Administrative structure of Delhi comprises legislative assembly, Lieutenant Governor, Council of ministers and Chief Minister. The Central Government of India and Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Jointly administer Delhi territory.

            As per schedule 1 of constitution of  India, Delhi is not a fully fledged state. So there is enough provision for centre to exercise its control in Delhi through Lieutenant Governor. But in recent times there was a clash between Central Government of India and Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi in administering Delhi. In case of appointment of high profile officers and bureaucrats, state government cannot use its autonomy as centre intervene through Lieutenant Governor.

            I think this is not fare for a country like India which give importance to spirit of federalism and self governance. I am not a supporter of party which rules in Delhi or an opposer of party ruling in Centre. According to me, centre must provide autonomy to Delhi government. After all Delhi Government was elected by the people directly. In a democratic nation like India, the importance must be given to people and their representatives. How can centre-more specifically the Central Home Ministry-can dictate on appointment of important officials of Delhi especially in secretary level and police department through a indirectly elected Lieutenant Governor. The most important fact is that the police force of Delhi is not in the control of  a directly elected government. We can directly infer this fact through today's incident of invasion of police force in Kerala House in Delhi in the name of supplying of cow meat or Beef in Kerala House canteen. I think the Delhi police force is completely under the control of central home ministry. In my opinion this is totally against the principles of democracy and federalism. Center must provide enough autonomy to Delhi government and give freedom to exercise its control in its sphere because it is a government which is directly elected by people through a massive mandate. In my opinion central Government must act or exercise its control in Delhi only in special circumstances like a threat to the integrity of nation or a terror attack. Political parties and political ideology may differ in UTs and States. In the name of such differences, centre cannot avenge against a democratically elected Government in UTs and States.

               So a effective and friendly Relation Between centre and UTs and States is very necessary for carrying out administration effectively and timely delivery of services to the citizens

IS LAND ACQUISITION ACT A FAIR LEGISLATION? What is the real need of the hour?

            Land acquisition is the process conducted by central or state governments to acquire land from land owners for the creation of infrastructure and economic growth. Earlier this process was governed by land acquisition act 1894 which was a creation of British government. But this act was repealed by the enactment of new The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013 which increased the compensation for acquisition. Now the BJP led government's effort to amend this act had led to a several controversies. The ordinance passed by the government on the behalf of this effort led itself to a big trouble in converting this to an act mainly in Rajya Sabha where the government is outnumbered.

The real question is that 'Is this act a pro farmer one?' 

  In my opinion the act is extremely capitalist and corporate oriented. The main problem with this ordinance is the move to  amend 10(A) of 2013 act. It had excluded five sectors from social impact process and consent clause. In other words, if the land is acquired by government for acquired for national security, defense, rural infrastructure including electrification, industrial corridors and housing for the poor including PPP where ownership of land continues to be vested with the government, the provisions given in consent clause and social impact assessment will not be applicable. Social impact assessment was intended to find out the number of people who was effected by acquisition including those who are not the owners and depended on them. This was an effort to avoid poor land cultivators from the ambit of compensation. Also it led to the destruction of most fertile lands in northern plains.
       Benefits to corporate is also needed for the economic development. But it cannot be done through negligence of farmers and the poor. The real need of the hour is to replace the land acquisition with new alternatives where government must strike a good balance between farmers or poor and corporates needs such as leasing which had successfully accomplished in certain states like UP, Bihar etc.