Ravi S.Dhavan, J.

1. This matter is about the voids which are at present in the State legislation in not placing the Committee for District Planning (Article 243ZD). That it is not there in accordance with the Constitution of India is not in issue but is accepted.

2. Notice in this case was issued, as a constitutional exercise had to be gone into, to the Governor of Bihar, and the Chief Minister, Bihar. Notice was also issued to the Advocate General on 24 June, 2004.

3. The constitutional amendments came in 1993. The obligation to fall in line with the Constitution should have been done within one year (Article 243N and Article 243F).

4. Avoiding the obligations which have been given in the Constitution for ten years is an insult to the Constitution. Truly, the issue is about hesitation in transferring power to the peoples representatives of the third tier of government. In this regard, the following observations at the Chief Ministers conference on poverty alleviation and Rural Prosperity through Panchyati Raj dated 29 June, 2004 is reproduced:

"Our challenge today is to institutionalize this system of local self-government to make lndia not only the worlds largest democracy, but also to make it the worlds most representative and participatory democracy. Much remains to be done however, before we can actually claim to have empowered the elected bodies to function as institutions of local self-government. 37th Report of the Parliaments Standing Committee on Urban and Rural Development tabled in the Parliament in December 2002 gives us an indication of the possibilities that we explore."

5. But, how will Bihar do it? It does not have even the District Planning Committee in its place.

6. Truly, this is a matter for legislation, a nuance of correct politics to be subservient to the Constitution. Bihar has not enacted it, other States have. In the circumstances, if such of those States which have enacted legislation to represent the District Planning Committee, perhaps, they are in a position to object, as if to say funds should not be given directly to the third tier of government. Has Bihar attempted to fall in line by installing to institutions which are mentioned in Chapters "Panchayats" and "Municipalities"? The answer is no.

7. . For three long years, this Court has waited. That the institutions referred to in Chapter IX and IXA (Panchayats and Municipalities) respectively, will be installed forthwith, this has not been done. The Court apprehends that the people of Bihar will loose out on a lot of Central Government funding if the Committee which has been invested with the obligation to participate in planning is not structured.

8. Further, the Court is fully conscious of the fact that it is not a Man for all Seasons to point absence of or deficiency in the law which should fully take care of grass-root democracy as the Constitution says. The obligation to the Constitution is the duty of the State government concerned. The Court only certifies the situation. But the Court also cannot suffer a situation that for ten years the government of Bihar will not fall in line with the Constitution. This is virtually certifying that the government functions by avoiding the discipline of the Constitution.

9. How will the District Planning Committee be installed? The modalities have not been provided in the enactment when the Constitution says that the State legislature shall enact a law. The law has not been enacted. The only guidance the Court has is the stipulation in the Constitution (Article 243ZD), to the effect, that this Committee must represent the people of the district. If the District has a municipality then the apportionment of the representation from among the elected should be between the rural and the urban population. The representatives of the elected people and amongst them must not be less than 4/5ths.

10. It was encouraging and heartening with two Secretaries present when they requested the Court to spell out