Over the years, the quality of services received by the public at
government offices has declined steadily. This seems a world-wide
problem and to tackle it, the British government introduced Citizens
Charter in 1991 to make the administration citizen-friendly and
accountable. Standards were fixed for the provision of various
government services and steps were taken to make the citizen aware of
their rights with reference to services provided by various government
bodies.
Like many other countries, India followed suit and in 1997, the
central government launched a citizens charter initiative in both
central and state government departments. But the time frames fixed in
the citizens charters for providing various services were rarely
followed and the quality of government services kept on declining (This
problem seems closely connected with corruption). The frustration of the
public with the inefficiency of the government is now reaching the
breaking point and realizing that it is becoming a political liability,
governments are rushing to enact laws which make government servants
accountable and punish them for violations of the citizens charters.
Madhya Pradesh was the first state to pass such a law. Its Right to
Public Services Act came into effect in 2010. Following Madhya Pradesh,
several other states, Bihar, Chattisgadh, Delhi, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu
& Kashmir, Jharkand, Punjab, Rajastan, Uttar Pradesh and
Uttarakhand have implemented their own Right to Public Services Acts.
Kerala and the Central governments have drafted similar bills. Karnataka
legislature has passed the Guarantee Of Services To Citizens Act, 2011
and is expected to implement it soon.
Karnataka's Act follows the Acts passed earlier by other state
governments. It sets time limits for providing some services (not all)
by government departments and prescribes fines for government servants
who do not provide service within those limits. One big difference is
that while the other states prescribe fines of Rs. 250-500 per day for
violating the time limits, the Karnataka Act prescribes a measly amount
of Rs. 20 per day (subject to a maximum of Rs. 500). It is not clear if
this token fine will really force the officials to become efficient.
Another problem with the Karnataka Act (and for that matter, all
other state Acts) is with enforcement of its provisions. These Acts
provide for two levels of enforcement, "the competent officer" and "the
appellate authority" who decide on the fine to be levied on the errant
officials. But no time limits have been fixed for the competent officer
and the appellate authority to give their decisions and no penalties
have been prescribed if their decisions are delayed. With no pressure on
them, will the competent officer and the appellate authority give
decisions against their own subordinates promptly? Since the Act bars
the jurisdiction of all courts, any citizen aggrieved by the delay of
the competent officer or appellate authority has nowhere to go. Why did
all the state governments not anticipate this potential problem?
As mentioned above, not all services are covered by the Act. For
example, we see frequent letters in the local media complaining that
completion reports on buildings are not being issued by Mysore City
Corporation and that MUDA is not issuing title deeds The Karnataka Act
does not prescribe time limits for either of these services.
In fact, only five MCC services are covered by the Act: issue of
birth and death certificates, grant of trade licences, providing khatha
extract, issuing building licences for residential buildings of area
less than 2400 sq. ft. and permission for water and UGD connection for
residential buildings.
Surprisingly, none of the services provided by MUDA is covered by the Act.
N.Dwarakanath, Mysore Grahakara Parishat