Local government and local self-government are interchangeably used. The distinction between them is a legacy of alien rule. The term 'local self-government' has been used in those countries was ruled by the British and we did not have any self-government at the central and provincial levels. after the British government decided to associate us in administrating local affairs, it meant a slice of self-government for the people. Hence the term 'local self-government' was meaningful at that time. But now the word 'self' has become redundant as the country enjoys self-rule at all levels. The term 'self-government' may also appear embarrassing as well, because it has a ring of virtue around itself which it is unnecessary to claim but, on occasion, difficult to justify. Moreover self-government, which reflects the government by the people of a local area through their elected representatives, sometimes is conspicuous by its absence as election to local bodies does not take place for years after they have been created or superseded for indefinite periods. (Though now it is obligatory for the state governments to hold election to the local government bodies regularly and to the superseded local bodies within six months as provided in the Constitution [74th Amendment] Act, 1992). That is why the term ‘local government’ and not the term ‘local self-government’ is used in Entry 5 of List II of the Seventh Schedule of our Constitution. Despite this distinction, both the terms continue to be in vogue in our country. The terms signify a government, representative of local inhabitants, more or less autonomous in character instituted under state legislation, in a village, a district, a city or in urban areas to administer services as distinguished from state and central service.
Sachdeva, P. (2011). Local government in India. Delhi: Pearson.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1f7r_dMlIn6CTu8VYYJXWkOp6u4Ed02wm/view?usp=sharing
(List II—State List p.322, Sl. No.5)
Post a Comment