Public discontent, summers in the vortex of grievances. As grievances breed, discontent grows too, Public grievances, therefore, present the most domineering challenge before any government.  But this challenges is complex and its resolution requires multi-dimensional focus and multi-layered interventions necessitating

(a) Timely capture of grievances by creating spaces for their expression

(b) Effective redressal of existing grievances by creating robust redress mechanism; and

(c) Accomplishing grievance free governance by addressing the root cause working on alternate policies or institutional reforms, where necessary.

Evolution of Public Grievance Redressal of Mechanisms:

 Administrative reforms to reduce public grievances became a significant element of political discourse by the mid-sixties. However, the drive to set up public grievance redressal mechanisms gained momentum following the Chief Ministers’ Conference in 1987 and the adoption of Action Plan for responsive and citizen-centric administration. What followed was a concerted effort to put in place three key mechanisms – citizen charters, information and facilitation counters and public grievance redressal machinery in all ministries, departments and organisations of government of India and state governments.

The Emerging Scenario:

 On account of rapid spread of information technology, growing internet access and increasing awareness about the mechanism, the utilisation of CPGRAMS has grown manifold. There is a renewed interest in strengthening the technology interface, through other support mechanisms like PRAGATI. Besides DARPG and DPG, PMO has also become an important nodal agency for receiving grievances. The overall disposal rate has been quite high though there is some variation in respect of overall disposal rate as well as the duration taken for disposal across various Departments. An analysis of this variation and its reasons can throw light on many possibilities for reform.

Redressal versus Disposal:

 In their eagerness to comply with these instructions, grievances are increasingly being disposed by some departments or organisations simply with the suggestion to approach another office.  In some cases, the grievance is being re-sent to the agency against which the complaint is made and in some others, the online grievance is being disposed with the advice to take the grievance to the portal of the agency or some complaint committee. Departments and organisations need to address the real issues involved in redressal. It needs to be ascertained whether redressal was to the satisfaction of the aggrieved or it was a mere reiteration of the official position. It also issued instructions to give valid reasons for closure.

Recent analysis of some grievances received n CPGRAMS revealed that in several of these cases, the petitioner was asked to approach the State government and the grievance was disposed rather than forwarded. There was no redressal. It is important to ensure that CPGRAMS plays the facilitator role for the public without impinging on the nature of federalism.

Private Provision of Public Service:

Where service delivery has moved to the private providers on account of changing perspective on governance accountability mechanisms need to be put in place to ensure that rights of service users are not at stake and grievances can be addressed at appropriate level to offer effective redressal to the aggrieved.

Accountability Issues:

 Many of the grievances also involve complex issues and overlapping jurisdictions, necessitating disentanglement and clarity over rules, regulations, processes, jurisdictions and appropriate mechanisms for redress. There is the issue of coordination across multiple authorities in case of many grievances. Rather than letting these issues and the aggrieved be kept revolving between multiple authorities, creation of appropriate mechanisms for such ordinated responses is desirable. It is important that mechanisms for grievance redressal are created at appropriate levels so that access and effectiveness issues are addressed appropriately. The centralised online mechanism can address this challenge and reduce the plight of the citizen to run back and forth between different authorities, while facilitating transparency and enabling the monitoring. Its effectiveness, however, is still conditioned on (a) how the issues of access to technology and ability to read and write are addressed (b) how accountability mechanisms can be built in to ensure that disposal of public grievance is not simply presumed to imply redressal. There is need, therefore, to simultaneously utilise other mechanisms like lok adalats, jan sunwais, social audit mobile apps etc to ensure inclusion of those who may not have access to CPGRAMS

It is important to also take note of grievances received through informal channels of communications which can also help arrive at a better state of governance.

Ultimate challenge is to work towards a state of governance, which does not deliver grievances, it is important to ensure the institution of multiple mechanisms for the timely capture and effective redressal of the grievances that may emerge and the course correction that may result after careful analysis of their reasons and possible remedies or prevention strategies.