Devendra Fadnavis, Maharashtra’s tech-savvy Chief Minister, has championed the integration of technology across the state’s excise and revenue departments. His latest proposals — from faceless registration of revenue documents to GIS-based land measurements — signal a promising leap into the digital age. However, as the corridors of power embrace digital transformation, it is crucial not to overlook the fundamental purpose of the Mantralaya as a bastion of accessibility for the common man.
Fadnavis’s reforms, while commendable, walk a fine line. The push for ‘One State, One Registration’ and drone-assisted land surveys underscores the CM’s vision for streamlining governance and increasing transparency. In theory, these measures reduce bureaucracy and create a more citizen-friendly environment. Allowing people to register documents remotely or access precise land records will save countless hours otherwise wasted in government offices. However, technology’s allure should not eclipse the irreplaceable value of human connection.
There is a latent danger in equating technological solutions with the complete resolution of governance challenges. A case in point is the envisioned security system at the Mantralaya, incorporating Artificial Intelligence (AI) for tighter access control. Fadnavis rightly aims to tackle security issues and eliminate presence of brokers by mandating online registrations and tracking entries and exits. At the same time, the introduction of rigid access controls might inadvertently deter genuine petitioners, particularly those from rural or marginalized backgrounds who often lack the digital literacy or resources to navigate these systems. The Mantralaya has been a physical and symbolic space where citizens could voice grievances and seek direct redressal from state’s highest echelons.
Fadnavis’s observation that 70 percent of complaints could be resolved at the district level is valid and underscores the inefficiencies of the current grievance redressal system. However, the solution lies in improving district-level governance, not limiting access to the Mantralaya. Citizens flock to the state capital not out of choice but out of frustration with lower-level bureaucratic inertia.
Fadnavis’s administration must avoid the trap of over-reliance on technology. Digital solutions are tools to enhance governance, not barriers that distance citizens from decision-makers. Moreover, while AI systems at the Mantralaya’s gates might weed out brokers, they cannot replace the accountability and trust that personal interactions foster. Fadnavis’s emphasis on modernizing Maharashtra’s governance is undoubtedly forward-thinking. However, technology must be an enabler, not an isolator. The Mantralaya’s role as a haven for the common man must be preserved, even as the state embraces digitization. Striking this balance will determine whether governance model becomes a national benchmark or a cautionary tale of technological overreach. The CM would do well to remember that a human connection is not just a sentimental relic of the past but an essential ingredient for effective governance. In his pursuit of a digitally empowered Maharashtra, Fadnavis must ensure that Mantralaya remains a symbol of accessibility, not fortress of exclusivity.
Comentarios