Q1) Though there is still a gap in the Constitution envisaged cooperative federal structure and in current practice, but federalism has come a long way in India. Comment. (200 words)

India adopted cooperative federalism, a set of interlocking governments, where each are made dependent on one another, and centre acts as an elder brother. Dynamism in practicing federalism in India is still evolving from bargaining federalism to towards cooperative and competitive federalism.

There are three contentious dimensions which hinders the evolution of cooperative federalism in India.

1. President’s Rule and institution of Governor:- Instead of working as a lynchpin of centre and state relation, Institution of Governor is become an agent of Centre and there was drastic misuse of President’s rule under Article 356 of the Constitution. Since S.R. Bommai Judgement guidelines (1994) and the continuous proactive role played by Supreme court, have placed gentle breaks on exercise of this power. Though use of Article 356 is not so frequent but still it is used for political gain by political parties.

2. Fiscal Federalism:- Fiscal federalism on one hand is concerned with the assignment on the one hand of functions to different levels of government, and with appropriate fiscal instruments for carrying out these functions on the other. Recognising the possibility of imbalance between resources and responsibilities, Constitution of India provide more fiscal power to Centre and for issues relating to the correction of vertical and horizontal imbalances have been devolved to Finance Commission(FC). However, with the evolving role of Planning Commission until recently as well Party Politics over interstate relations led to emergence of bargaining federalism instead of cooperative federalism. Though with the rise of regional parties and proactive role played by successive FCS (10th FC’s Alternative Devolution Scheme and 14th FC’s 42% devolution) has broken new ground in terms of allocation of resources. However there has been always concerns with regards to the Term of reference to FC and the no say of states in appointment of FC.

3. Linguistic and Cultural Rights of State:- Recent Karnataka Flag issues and Assam’s protest to Citizenship Amendment (2016) Bill and other North Eastern state concerns represent there is still an issue in the sphere of cultural autonomy of State.

Centre and State should work a in the spirit of the Constitution. Institution of Governor should be remodeled as suggested by Punchhi Commission not by appointment/removal of Governor through doctrine of pleasure. There is need to overhaul FC, the lynchpin of fiscal federalism, in line with GST council so that state will also represented in the appointment and fixing TOR.

Q2) How Social Audit is part of good Governance? Critically examine the evolution and working of Social Audit in India. (200 words)

Social audit is a process where potential and existing beneficiaries (stakeholders) evaluate the implementation and objectives of government programme especially those pertaining to developmental goals by comparing official records with ground realities.
Social Audit leads to good governance by enabling people’s participation in the planning, execution and monitoring of public programmes, which intern leads to better outcomes. It also helps to narrow gaps between vision/goals and reality and promotes the collective decision making and sharing responsibilities. In the words of President Ram Nath Kovind, “You will not only see the accounts in auditor’s books, but also listen to their accounts”

Social Audit in India were first mandated by law in 2005 under the MGNREGA. Subsequently, Parliament, the Supreme Court and many Central ministers mandated them in other areas as well. Social audit is performed through social audit units (SAUs) in India based on parameters specified in the auditing standards jointly pioneered by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) and the Ministry of Rural Development.

However there are following limitations in Social Audit in India:

❖ No all India Phenomenon, issues of independence and inadequate funding, staff and lack of expertise hinders effective functioning.
❖ Unprocessed monitoring with limited follow-up action- For the period 2016-17 and 2017-18, only 13 SAUs registered grievances and/or detected irregularities and have identified a significant misappropriation amount of ₹281 crore. However, the action taken by the State governments in response to the social audit findings has been extremely poor.
❖ The scope of social audits is intensive but highly localised and covers only certain selected aspects out of a wide range of audit concerns in the financial, compliance and performance audits.

There is need that SAUs should have an independent governing body and with adequate staff. The CAG as an institution could partner with local citizens and SAUs to train them, build capacities and issue advisories on framing of guidelines, developing criteria, methodology and reporting for audit. Education and awareness of Gram Sabha should be initiated to enable them to comprehend and understand their rights better.