🔊 Listen to this article

Scheduled Caste Sub Plan (SCSP) and Tribal Sub Plan (TSP) were introduced in the 1970s for the specific purpose of the socio-economic development of the Scheduled Castes (SCs) and the Scheduled Tribes (STs) and to bring them at par with other social groups. They were not just regular schemes, but ‘plans’ for holistic development of these groups, keeping in mind their additional / specific needs.  Here were the strategies that aimed for an inclusive growth by earmarking population-equivalent proportion of ‘plan’ outlays for SCs and STs. While they were not legal entitlements, they were obligations on part of the government, which the government had taken upon itself. Given the importance of these funds for the development of SCs and STs, they were made non-lapsable and non-divertible by the Union Government in 2006.

However, following the merger of the plan and non-plan budgets in 2017-18, the sub-plans suffered a serious setback. The SCSP and TSP are now referred to as Allocation for Welfare of SCs (AWSC) and Allocation for Welfare of STs (AWST) respectively. It has been more than a year since the plan and non-plan budgets were merged by the Union Government, yet no new formula for earmarking of SCSP/TSP has been introduced. And there are no indications that a new formula will be introduced in the near future. The allocations are now supposed to be made from existing schemes by the line departments, such that they should not be less than the levels provisioned in the budgets of 2015-16 and 2016-17. This is a major departure from the ‘rights-based’ system of proportionate allocations, which gave departments space to plan specific schemes / interventions for addressing needs of SCs and STs in their respective sectors. The system has been replaced with a ‘welfare oriented’ approach, thereby depriving SCs and STs an appropriate share in the resources of the country and a voice in using those resources as per their own need. Specifically for STs, the power granted to them over local plans and resources through Section 4m (vii) of the PESA Act, 1996, seems to stand withdrawn in the absence of TSP.

The dilution of the strategies had started from Fiscal Year (FY) 2015-16 itself, when the funds for the twin sub-plans were reduced drastically. The allocations for SCSP came down from Rs. 43,208 crore in FY 2014-15 to Rs. 30,851 crore in FY 2015-16 in the Union Budgets. Similarly for TSP, the allocations in the Union Budgets were reduced by almost 40%, from Rs. 32,387 crore to Rs. 19,980 crore, during the same period. While the budgets were restored in FY 2017-18, the increase seems to be illusive in the light of the fact that the allocations in the new scenario do not ensure ‘direct benefits’ for the two social groups. In fact allocations for AWSC and AWST now include administrative expenditure such as salaries, pension, etc., which were earlier included in the non-plan component of the schemes and hence were not part of the sub-plan budgets. Apart from that there are schemes like exploration of coal and lignite, optical fibre cable based network for defence, that are reported under the two heads, which are not even remotely connected with the development of SCs/STs. Alongside, there have been issues regarding the monitoring of these strategies, which was earlier within the mandate of the Planning Commission. In early 2017, after a lapse of almost two years, monitoring of the two strategies was transferred to their respective Ministry / Department, viz. the Ministry of Tribal Affairs and the Department of Social Justice and Empowerment. However, given the lack of transparency in allocation of funds for SCs and STs, real-time monitoring is not likely to achieve much.

In the context of the above mentioned developments, the SCSP and TSP have been substantially subverted and the current system is not designed to empower SCs and STs or to address development deficits experienced by them. While a group of parliamentarians had written to the Prime Minister in February 2017 to reinstate the strategies of SCSP and TSP, it doesn’t seem to have had an impact. It is now for the civil society to persevere for a new strategy or formula for earmarking funds for SCs/STs to ensure a more inclusive growth process. A ray of hope is being shown by states like Karnataka and Telangana. Both the states have passed legislations guaranteeing population-share based earmarking funds for SCSP and TSP. The Karnataka government is earmarking 24.1% (proportion of their SCs/STs population) of its ‘allocable’ budget for SCSP and TSP, which is the total state budget minus the exempted expenditure (like salary, grants-in-aid, pension, administrative expenditure, etc.). Telangana, on the other hand, will earmark it from the ‘development fund’ of the state. The same can be emulated by the Union government, and other states, if they so choose.

 

The views expressed in this piece are those of the author, and don’t necessarily reflect the position of CBGA. You can reach Chandrika Singh at chandrika@cbgaindia.org.