The local government at Panjgur district comprises 11 union councils, one district council, and one town committee. The mandate of local councils was to address various socio-economic development issues on local level through need assessment, planning and implementation (see annex 4 for functions of local government). These local councils are supervised and supported by the Local Government and Rural Development Department through an Assistant Director at the district level. However, it is a common complaint that instead of working as an auxiliary organisation, LG&RDD plays a constrictive role in affairs of the local government institutions by posing bureaucratic hurdles.

Ideally the local government institutions were constituted on the assumption that in this way grass root decision making and implementation for development could be ensured. But this ideal has not been realised. Although small communities elect their representatives at local level and there is more intense interaction and exchange of ideas between representatives and the electoral college, participation of common folks in the decision making process is still minimal. After election, members of local councils rarely consult their voters on development issues. Similarly the appraisal of development potential and planning for exploitation of this potential is not according to the bottom-up approach. Rather a top-down decision making and implementation approach is followed. This approach leaves no room for participation of local government institutions in development planning.

All the local government institutions in Balochistan have been dissolved on 18th of December 1996 for new elections in 1997. Now these institutions are working under the supervision of government officials.

The union council is the smallest local government institution. The membership of each union council varies from 5-15 members. However, the elected councillors in every union council have to elect 2 women and one peasant member in their union council. There are 11 union councils in the district, a list of which is given in annex 1.

The union council, ideally, provides an opportunity for the people of rural areas to participate in decision making at micro level. It was assumed that a local council will have better chances of intense interaction and grass root appraisal of the problems of the people. But in the real sense the councils never received sufficient support from the provincial government according to the Act. Chairmanship of union councils have become a status symbol and means to vested interests. Distribution of zakat, prominence in the area and little favours by public officials are some of the vested interests which attracts most of the people to the chairmanship of a union council. The union council is not consulted in development planning for the rural areas. Usually decision making follows top-down approach, therefore, nullifying the ideal function of union councils. In addition, the union council has never received the financial support of higher authorities, it was supposed to receive, to be able to fulfil its functions, as described in the Local Government Ordinance of 1980

The only income of the union councils is a regular grant of rupees 18 thousand per annum from the provincial government. This small amount does not allow the union council to plan development strategies for the people in rural areas. The union council is not consulted in development planning for the rural areas.

The only town committee in the district is Chitkan. It comprises eleven councillors of which 8 are elected directly, one from each of the 8 wards, and these elected councillors elect 2 women and one labourer as councillors. The electorate comprises 3,986 voters. Chitkan was given the status of town committee in 1980. The civic facilities provided to the citizens by the town committee include solid waste disposal and watch & ward. The town committee has one tractor and trolley for collection and afterwards disposal, sometimes by burning, of the solid waste. Six watchmen are employed by the town committee for watch and ward, mainly in the commercial area. . There has never been any sewerage system or town planning in Chitkan

Like other local government institutions, Chitkan town committee is also under severe financial crises. The only permanent source of income for the town committee is octroi and business fees. In 1994-95, collection of octroi was contracted out for raising an amount of 1.002 million rupees per annum. As collection of octroi is a difficult task, specially due to the non-co-operation of the district administration and many open routes for entrance into the town, the contractors refused to bid for the octroi collection. The town committee itself managed the collection for 1995-96 which amounted to rupees 1,222,502. This pace has still been maintained till now, as the octroi collected in the first 5 months of 1996-97 is 574,119 rupees. The total salary of the town committee’s 41 employees is rupees 1.308 million per annum, which is hardly paid by octroi and additional income through business fee which amounts to about 60 thousand per annum. This financial inequilibrium hardly leaves any room for a development budget.

The last annual development plan (ADP) awarded to the town committee was in 1992-93 of rupees 0.523 million. Yearly grant is only 18 thousand rupees, which is totally consumed for honorarium to the chairman of the town committee. In 1994-95, the town committee received a special grant of rupees 0.1 million, which was spent to construct a new office for the Chairman. No development plans have ever been prepared by the town committee due to financial constraints. The main reason behind the unavailability of special funds by the provincial or federal government is the political differences between the elected representatives for the town committee and those for the national and provincial assemblies.

A strict vigilance on the import of octroiable goods and an efficient octroi collection mechanism with full support of the district administration can improve the financial condition of the town committee through an increase in revenue. The committee has a piece of land near the commercial area. If funds are provided for the construction of shops (of 8¢ x8¢ size) on this land, the annually received rent may be used for development of the town. At present there is no land tax levied by the town committee on sale or purchase of property in the town. This taxation can also be utilised to meet development expenditure.

At present (1997) there is no municipal committee in the district.

The District Council Panjgur comprises 15 councillors, out of which eleven are elected directly (one from each of the 11 union councils) while 4 councillors including 2 women, one peasant and one labourer are elected indirectly by the elected councillors. The district council is primarily responsible for the overall development of rural areas of the district (detailed functions of the local government institutions are described in annex 4).

Apart from special grants and annual development plans, zila (district) tax is the sole source of regular income for the district council. The recurrent budget liabilities of the council include the salaries of the employees amounting to 0.66 million rupees and a honorarium of its chairman. Total income of the district council was 1,294,264 rupees in 1994-95 while the total expenditure was 1.19 million rupees. In 1995-96, a bid for collection of zila tax was made by a contractor for 2.6 million rupees per annum. This high bid was made mainly because of increased import of charcoal and other goods from Iran at that time which decreased soon after the bid was finalised. Consequently, the contractor refused to pay further after paying 0.433 million rupees for two months. The district council managed zila tax collection itself and earned 0.6 million rupees in the remaining months. In 1995-96, the total income of the council was 1,510,886 rupees against the expenditure of 1,368,619 rupees. A bid of 0.452 million rupees has been made by a contractor for zila tax collection in December 1996 to June 1997 but has not yet been finalised due to the centralised process of approval of bids. However, it is expected that the district council will be able to earn 1,044,866 rupees to meet its expected expenditure of 940,336 rupees.

It seems that centralisation and lack of proper management are two major factors for the financial crisis of the district council. Fluctuations in the revenue collection confirm this assumption. However, in the past years, the district council received rupees 3.6 million from senator’s fund, apart from a regular grant of rupees 18 thousand per annum for honorarium of the chairman. About 3.2 million rupees have been spent for construction of two water supply schemes at Sordo and Tasp while the remaining amount is planned to be spent for construction of a water tank at Patandar. The water supply schemes completed by the council are non-functional due to unavailability of operation and maintenance budget. The PHED was requested to take over the schemes but the department also refused as they have recently started a program of handing over water supply schemes to the community. Another grant of 80 thousand rupees was given by the central government in 1996 for purchase of a grader which has been purchased and is functional. No annual development plan has been granted after year 1992-93.

The district council Panjgur, also, is a victim of political rivalries. The chairman of the council belongs to a political party other than that of MPA and MNA. The result is that no special development funds were provided to the district council in the previous 4 years. In the past, 5 primary schools and 2 dispensaries were constructed by the district council and handed over to the concerned departments. If appropriate funding and proper management of zila tax collection is arranged, the council can achieve its mandatory goals.

Back to Panjgur