There is a lot of difference between hype and truth
There have been a high pitched publicity campaign and a grand inauguration of the “Make in Odisha” Conclave. Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik calls it a “juggernaut” of sorts. Technology and related business have made publicity budget heavy.
However, taking an optimistic and positive view of such conclaves, one has to see and evaluate the situation at the ground level in terms of the translation of the proposals into actions. In this arena, as past experience indicates, there is a lot of difference between the hype and the truth.
An evaluation of eighteen years brings one to the inevitable conclusion that the metal industries which came and have survived to exist had their origin in the period of the metal boom. Implementation of government policies have been completely controlled by the bureaucratic machinery. There are allegations of a wide hiatus between the professed propaganda and the actual reality.
The quantum of litigation an investor has to suffer is solely on account of cussed decisions in the hierarchy of the government machinery. Most matters that land up in courts need not travel that far. Negative decision-making and inadequately-informed decision-making makes departments sometimes go autocratic.
Industrial policy resolutions are announced amidst fanfare, but the implementation thereof becomes the painful process for the investors.
There have been instances of writ applications occasioned by the requirement for a direction for transmission of certain set of papers from one department to another department of the Government to enable an adequate decision in a particular matter.
Such illustrations indicate the extreme weakness of the system as it stands now. Such instances are plenty and paucity of space restrains one from narrating many more of them. Just to cite another example. By a particular order, an industrial unit was entitled not to pay the sales tax “payable” for a certain number of years (and pay the same in a stipulated manner). The Government had a scheme of deferment of sales tax “collected”. The order in favour of the particular unit was under a law supervening all other laws in India, viz., BIFR provisions.
The so-called industrial policy was exercised through executive powers whereas the order meant for the unit was under a supervening statute. It required a Division Bench of the High Court presided over by the then Chief Justice to say and direct that the meaning of the expression “payable” is clear.
The amount “payable” would relate to the amount assessed and the same shall acquire a finality only when a redressal of grievances as permissible under law are over. These instances may sound mundane but involve crores of rupees, which are very vital to a nascent or for a sick industry.
The significant and vital role played by the MSME sector has not been adequately appreciated and covered by the Make in Odisha Conclave. This sector, though vital to local employment, has not received adequate attention.
Announcement by the Prime Minister that a 59-minute loan of Rs one crore could be sanctioned to this sector is only conditioned by window-dressing.
The available information in the system is again offered to you within an hour of being approached as held out by the highest. Processing a loan and getting it sanctioned is as difficult as it was.
Another aspect that should be dovetailed into the industrial proposals is their proper location so as to ensure optimum utilisation of our resources. This “juggernaut” has to follow the Rule of Law and cannot run amok. But to maintain the Rule of Law and cause the necessary structural challenges pose the challenge.
For converting “Make in Odisha” to “Made in Odisha”, a reorientation of the mindset and a less feudal attitude are expected out of the government machinery. The manner in which the government machinery handled land acquisitions in case of very large industries has had its own sad stories to tell.
Decision-making in the public domain must be informed, reasoned and rational. It must subserve public interest as envisaged by the scheme or programme under which the steps are being taken.
The “ease of doing business” has to be restructured and made more responsive. It is still painful to see instances of a government officer saying it with pride that he made an important industrialist wait for hours without any legitimate public cause being subserved. I was told by the officer concerned that he made Murthy wait for three hours to see him.
There are so many Murthys in Odisha that it did not dawn on me for some time that the Murthy referred to was Narayan Murthy of the Infosys fame.
The expression of the officer was an indicator of the personal value patterns of the officer and his attitude towards the society. The colonial mindset does not replace itself by a proactive and positive orientation. There is a certain mismatch between the political executive and the bureaucratic executive in our State. A political executive is by and large happy to be ignored. It is a government run by officials; and in the initial years, they gave a reasonable account of themselves.
As things settled down and there is consolidation of power, they are structured into coteries which at times work at cross purposes.
The responsibilities of the leader of the ruling party are the highest at this moment when he seeks for a vote for the third decade of unquestioned power.
The efficacy of the party structure is beginning to be energised in the last few months. That is true of almost all the political parties. But the ruling party is showing signs of being structured for an election year. In these attempts at structural stratification, one has to look for the input and initiative of several competent retired government servants joining the BJD. But a smooth, harmonious and progressive government calls for a lot of rethinking, readjustments and reorientation of the feudal mindset.
It has been alleged that the Supreme Court directed deposit of the royalty, penalty, etc., imposed under MMDR Act, 1957 be made by a certain date and it became a condition precedent to allowing any further mining operation within the parameters of law.
It has been alleged that a significant party, which owes a few hundred of crores to the government, has been allowed to submit an “undertaking” to pay the same and his mining operations have remained uninterrupted contrary to law and contrary to the directives issued under law. One only hopes this is untrue.
A monolithic party has many undemocratic tendencies which are inherent in its actions and decisions. But in an election year, one has to accept that the plate is full in so far as the ruling party is concerned. But let not be the enthusiasm of the election year be expressed through violent and criminal manifestations.
That becomes a concern for all of us. It is the future of the growing generation that demands high expectations and aspirations.
Any element of insensitivity causes ruptures and expresses itself through behavioural aberrations.
The manner in which the present movement is being handled at the level of the government is not indicative of an early solution satisfying the mass of agitating farmers.
The “Make in Odisha” will depend for its success on what is already “Made in Odisha”. Arbitrary exercise of power and indifferent exercise of power can be costly in an election year.
(The writer, a Senior Advocate, is a former All India Service officer, a former diplomat, a former editor, a former President of Orissa High Court Bar Association and a former Advocate General of Odisha. jayantdas@hotmail.com )