The number of subjects listed for devolution is less important than securing effective devolution

The number of subjects listed for devolution is less important than securing effective devolution of fund related to these subjects. States may, therefore, prepare a five-year plan for effective devolution; ail at accomplishing full devolution of functions, functionaries and finances for all devolved subjects in determined annual stages over the next five years.

For devolution to the PRIs, there should be a clear demarcation subject-wise of functions dew to each of the three tiers of the PRIs. Such demarcation would be essential to determining the devolution of functionaries and finances to each of the three tiers of the system.

Technically, this] called ‘activity mapping’. A working group of the Union Ministry of Rural Development has undertaken detailed illustrative exercise in activity mapping. Based on that model, States should initiate mapping within this calendar year with the aim of completing the exercise as soon as possible.

Devolution should be based on the principle of “Subsidiarity”, that is, whatever can be accomplishing at a lower level should be entrusted to that level. Only that which cannot be effectively implemented a lower tier might be taken to a higher tier.

Devolution may also be made irreversible: a function once devolved should not be arbitrarily! Back. Therefore, it would be preferable to make provision for devolution through legislation rather the administrative orders.