NEED FOR A NEW LEGISLATION REPLACING KERALA’s RIGHT TO SERVICE ACT, 2012 (ACT 18 OF 2012)

????NEED FOR A NEW LEGISLATION REPLACING KERALA’s RIGHT TO SERVICE ACT, 2012 (ACT 18 OF 2012)

????????????????Right to Service Legislation is meant to increase transparency and accountability and to reduce corruption among the government officials. Madhya Pradesh became the first state in India to enact Right to Service Act, in the year 2010 by Act 24 of 2010.?Bihar was the second state to enact this legislation.?The Bihar Right to Public Service Act was enacted on 15.08.2011.?The Kerala Right to Service Act 2012 (Act 18 of 2012) has come into force in our state on 01.11.2012.

???????????????Right to Public Service Legislation in India comprises statutory laws which guarantee time bound delivery of services for various public services rendered by the Government to citizens and provides mechanism for punishing the errant public servant who is deficient in providing the services stipulated under the statute.

???????????????The Kerala State Right to Service Act, 2012, Act 18 of 2012 was passed by the 13th Kerala Legislative Assembly. The Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Bill says that Good Governance is essential for sustainable development of both economic and social aspects of public life. The three essential elements of good governance are transparency, accountability and responsiveness of the administration.?To provide for the effective and time bound redressal of grievances of citizens and for delivery of Services to the General Public within the stipulated time limit and to make the government servants liable in case of their default, the government enacted a legislation to create a system whereby general public can make the government servants accountable in terms of the functions, duties, commitments and obligations and entitlement in relation to these.?By the passing the legislation the Government decided to guarantee the delivery of public services like the issuance of birth certificates, caste certificates, income certificates, ration cards, domicile certificates, death certificates, electricity connections and water connection to houses and shops, passport verification report, job verification report etc. which would be notified under the proposed law.????A time limit was to be fixed for the delivery of each service.?If the officials failed to perform their duties or failed to provide such notified services within such time, they are liable to pay fine.?The Bill also provided for appeals at two levels.?This legislation was intended to check delay in providing service to the general public. Though originally it was intended to notify ten services now the number of services ‘notified’ comes around 750.

?????????????Section 5 of the above Act underlines the duty of the designated officer, who on receipt of an application for Service, will provide it or reject the application within the time limit, counted from the day the application is received.?In case of rejection the officer should justify it in writing.?The designated officer is liable to pay a fine not less than Rs.500/- and not more than Rs.5000/- in case of breach.

?????????????Section 3 of the above Act says that every department of the government, head of Department, Local Self Government Institutions and Statutory body should, within six months of the commencement of the Act, notified the services that will be rendered by each of them and the designated officers for providing services and the stipulated time limit for doing so.

????????????The above Act further lays down the procedure for filing appeals and the method of handling appeals by the first and second appellate authorities.?The two appellate authorities will have the powers of civil court in matters of requiring production and inspection of documents, issuing summons for hearing the designated officers and the appellant and any other matter that may be prescribed in the Rules.

????????????The origin of the concept of guaranteed public service can be traced from the citizens’ charter movement of 1990. The Citizens Charter was formally introduced in the U.K.in 1991 and then spread to other nations around the globe. In 1998, the principles of Citizens Charter were revised and replaced with principles of service delivery.?These principles included setting standards of services, providing full information and easy open access, consultation and involving, encouraging access and promoting choices, treating all fairly, putting things right when they go wrong, fuller and effective utilization of resources, innovation and continuous improvement and working with other providers.

??????????????The Report of the Public Affairs Committee 2007, found the charters to be suffering from poor design and content, lacked effective implementation, lack of awareness among citizens and lack of consultation and involvement at every level, from formation to implementation.?Thus, the Citizens’ Charter lacked the spirit for which it was created.?It was not able to fulfil its purpose, could not ensure accountability and transparency in service delivery, rather acted as an unnecessary tool, an impediment in the way for effective delivery.?So, the demand for an effective alternative which could replace the charter gained prominence in public debates.

??????????????Public service guarantee refers to the process by which the State promises to provide public services to its citizens and entitled them to certain services in a time bound manner.?These services are guaranteed to citizens through a legal framework like Acts and Rules.?The Public Service Guarantee can be defined as a legal instrument that binds the State to provide rights-based service entitlements to its citizens and helps in empowering them by providing them with choice and alternatives.

?????????????The functioning of the above Act can be explained as follows:

1.??????????The applicant submits an application to the designated officer (D.O) indicating the service which he/she is desirous of availing.

2.??????????The applicant then receives a receipt issued by the officer against his application.?The stipulated time within which the officer has to provide service begins herewith (date mentioned on the receipt) when the application procedure is completed successfully.

3.??????????The time within which the service has to be provided is fixed, thus the applicant can appeal to first and second appellate authority if the office fails to deliver service within the specified time.

4.??????????In case the officer (DO) rejects the application within that time, he has to provide the reason for rejection and also intimate the applicant about the same.?However, if the officer fails to deliver the services within time, then he will have to pay a fine (penalty) as determined by the provisions under the Act.

5.??????????The appellate authority can also be penalised if they fail to ensure timely delivery of services and when they fail to give any valid reason for the cause of delay in delivery of public service.

6.??????????The Act is intended to ensure transparency, accountability, and to curb corruption and ensure availability of services for all, at all times and with appropriate quality standards.

????????????????In Madhya Pradesh, the Madhya Pradesh Guarantee of Public Service Delivery Act, 2010 was enacted on 18.08.2010.?The Public Service Delivery in Madhya Pradesh is managed by the newly formed Public Services Management Department.?In Bihar, the Bihar Right to Public Service Act, 2011 was enacted on 15.08.2011.?This Act is administered by the General Administration Department.?Apart from this, the Bihar Rights to Public Grievance Redressal Act, 2015 is also in place for Grievance Redressal.?Bihar set up a separate grievance redressal mechanism with separate grievance redressal officers with wide ranging powers. The first Act guaranteed service delivery and the second grievances redressal.?Almost all other states enacted only a single Act to address both the problems.

????????????????In Delhi, the Delhi Right to Time bound delivery of Public Service Act, 2011 was enacted on 28/4/2011 the penalty fixed in Delhi for the erring officers is as low as Rs.10/- per day to a maximum of Rs.200/- being the lowest in the country.?The best feature of the Act is that it was the first State which first used and relied heavily on information and communication technology tools.?The use of e-kiosk provides online interface between citizen and Service delivery agency thus reducing duplication of work, improving co-ordination and time liners in Service delivery.

???????????????In Goa, the Goa (Right to Citizens to Time Bound Delivery of Public Services) Act, 2013 (Act 19 of 2013) was passed on 21.06.2013.

?????????????Rajasthan has enacted its Rajasthan Guaranteed Delivery of Public Services Act on 21/9.2011.?This Act is administered by the Administration Reforms Department as is done in the case of our State.

?????????????In Uttarakhand the State enacted the Uttarakhand Right to Service Act on 4.10.2011.?The Act is administered by the General Administration Department.?The novel feature of this Act is that it has provisions for appointment of designated officers and appellate authorities from various departments rather than drawing from one single department which administer the Act.

??????????????Himachal Pradesh has passed the Himachal Pradesh Public Services Guarantee ??Act, 2011, on 17.10.2011.?Home Department of Himachal Pradesh is administering the Act.

??????????????In Punjab, Punjab Right to Services Act, 2011 (Act 24 of 2011) was passed on 20/10/2011. The Act was administered by the Governance Reforms Department of the State.?Thereafter the Punjab Transparency and Accountability in Delivery of Public Service Act, 2018 (Act 16 of 2018)?was passed repealing Act 24 of 2011 to provide for transparency and accountability in the delivery of service to the eligible persons in the State of Punjab within the stipulated time limit.

?????????Importance of Right to Service Act are the following.

1.?????The applicant is aware and assured of the service being provided.

2.?????It ensures accountability, transparency and citizen centricity.

3.????It helps in developing more informed citizens.

4.????It provides for a mechanism to redress citizens grievances.

5.????Penalty (fine) imposed on errant officials who fail to comply with the provisions under the Act.

??????????????This is a good time?to reassess The Kerala state Right to Service Act 2012 (Act 18 0f 2012) and?make it more effective to meet the challenging demands of the present day.?This Act lacks the provision to ensure the quality in service delivery.?Therefore, the objective of this Act should not be limited to service delivery alone rather it needs to ensure both quality and timeliness in service delivery.?Quality in service results in satisfaction among the citizens leading to trust and confidence on the government.

???????????????Due to the absence of a strong centralised enforcement mechanism in government, the provisions of this Act have not resulted in full compliance under the Act.?Feedbacks from the citizens are not readily available to measure the gap between expectations and outcome.?No Data/ Delivery Management Mechanism or monitoring is in position for assessing the number of grievances / applications received and the redressal provided.?The designated officers engaged in the task of Service Delivery lack training.

????????????Accountability and answerability of the public servant for various acts of omission and commission in the delivery of public service has not been envisaged in this Act. The provisions of this Act have not been made to be part of the service conditions of the public servants.

?????????The Act does not provide the citizens with an opportunity to obtain and monitor the status of his application online. Any failure on the part of the Authority/Designated officer to deal with and dispose of the applications/requests for service need to be taken as a serious default in the discharge of its/his duties and a violation of the right of the citizens under this Act and to be punished. Provision to this effect need to be incorporated.

?????????A nodal department has to be made responsible for evaluating the performance of departments on certain parameters. Most of the States are planning to revise their existing Acts by setting up a Commission to supervise the entire process of service delivery.?An independent mechanism to monitor and take corrective action is required.

??????????????A large number of services (750) are listed in the Act. There is a need to assess whether all these services can actually be provided. A new digital initiative on provision of services (eSevanam) was launched on 1/10/2021. This lists 609 services. There are administrative and institutional barriers like lack of infrastructure, lack of resources, lack of accessibility and lack of awareness about the provisions in the Act. Effective service delivery requires a process re-engineering and an establishment of a dashboard which monitors delivery. In the absence of these, the effort may not yield adequate results.

?

?????????Johnbrittokurusumuthu.