BackA capital idea
For centuries it has been the literal seat of political power. Delhi's role as capital city needs to evolve in a federal India
Premium
For much of the last 1,000 years or so, Delhi has been the capital city of India.
Prithviraj Raso, an epic ballad about the life and conquests of King Prithviraj Chauhan, dates Delhi’s first, historically evidenced use as capital city, to the reign of Anangpal Tomar II. Tomar, a Rajput, and Prithviraj’s ancestor, built his capital in Mihirawali (current day Mehrauli) in the 11th century C.E. (mythological references to the Pandava’s capital, Indraprastha, being located in Delhi are as (yet) unproven).
After Prithviraj Chauhan died in the second Battle of Tarain, Delhi became the capital city of the Delhi Sultanate. For 300 years, the Mamluk, Khilji, Tughlaq, Sayyid and Lodi dynasties ruled north and northwestern India from Delhi. The Moghuls who dislodged the Lodi’s in the 16th century ruled from Agra and Lahore before moving back to Shahjahanabad (present day Old Delhi) in 1649 from where they reigned until their end at the hand of the British in 1857. The British moved their capital back to Delhi from Calcutta in 1912. New Delhi, designed by Edwin Lutyens and Herbert Barker for the Raj, was built just south of Shahjahanbad.
Independent India’s capital, Delhi, was born a “Part-C" state under the new Indian Constitution. The States Reorganization Act, 1956, recast Delhi as a Union Territory (UT) and it remains one to this date. Section 239 of the Indian Constitution that confers this UT status was amended (69th Amendment) in 1991 to create the National Capital Territory (NCT) and allowed for special administrative provisions to govern a fast-growing area. The amendment says that “a legislative assembly for NCT shall be filled by members chosen by direct election from its territorial constituencies". The total number of seats in the assembly, the division into constituencies and all other matters relating to the functioning of the assembly are under the purview of the Union Parliament. The role of the chief minister and the cabinet is to advise the Lieutenant Governor to be able to exercise his functions as the constitutional administrator on behalf of the President of India.
On Saturday, Delhi went to the polls for only the sixth time to elect 70 new legislators from 673 candidates. Approximately 13 million voters were eligible to vote and 67% of them did so using 18,000 voting machines. It was for the second time in 14 months. The total cost for this election is estimated to be about ₹ 1,000 crore. This is an enormous amount of time and money being spent on what is essentially a mayoral election.
Is this unprecedented media circus, political jostling and national preoccupation justified for a city election? What do the Delhi elections mean for the rest of India? Should Delhi become a full-fledged state?
The National Capital Region (NCR), that combines the NCT of Delhi with the adjacent urban districts of nearby states, now represents nearly $180 billion in GDP, which is about 9% of the entire country. Delhi’s elections routinely register a voting percentage (65% plus) that is 10 percentage points more than those of Mumbai or Bengaluru.
In 2013, Delhi served as a beacon, first as a social movement against corruption and high-handedness of the United Progressive Alliance government and subsequently as a political movement to provide an anti-establishment voice. In a city full of migrants, Delhi’s elections have become more about class and public safety and less about caste or state-origin. There is now little doubt that the NCR is the economic and political centre of urban India.
The National Democratic Alliance government in 2003 tabled a Bill (that was not passed) to grant full statehood to Delhi. Instead, as India grows increasingly more federal and urban, I propose that the UT section of the Indian Constitution be amended to reflect a concept of Union and state territories that are large urban agglomerations—Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai, Bengaluru, Kolkata and Hyderabad to start. This will upgrade today’s large municipal corporations to the status of semi-states. This will bring transparency, political democracy and focus to large urban local bodies (ULBs), and will allow India’s super-cities to evolve an effective political and economic governance model over time. The periodic finance commissions can devolve fiscal responsibility directly to these territories (a small beginning was made by the 13th Finance Commission). The states will likely protest this initially, but their objections can be handled by introducing the idea of state territory where the territory chief minister reports to the state chief minister. Delhi will remain a UT with more devolved political and economic power and the other five cities will become state territories broadly akin to Delhi.
Delhi’s role as capital city will need to evolve in a federal India. For centuries it has been the literal seat of political power. With active political participation of its citizenry, it can now show the other large ULBs a decentralized way forward: a path that leads India’s federal political development. That would be a capital idea.
P.S. Soon we will know whether Hazrat Nizamuddin’s famous “hanooz, dilli door ast", (meaning Delhi is far away) still holds for the Bharatiya Janata Party.
Narayan Ramachandran is co-Founder and fellow at the Takshashila Institution.
Comments are welcome at narayan@livemint.com. To read Narayan Ramachandran’s previous columns, go to www.livemint.com/avisiblehand
Follow Mint Opinion on Twitter at https://twitter.com/Mint_Opinion
Unlock a world of Benefits! From insightful newsletters to real-time stock tracking, breaking news and a personalized newsfeed – it's all here, just a click away! Login Now!
