Delhi MLA Report Card 2017 A Comprehensive ... - Praja Foundation

A comprehensive & objective rating of the Elected Representatives’ performance

DELHI M L A R AT I N G S 2 0 1 7

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

i

Ta b le o f C o ntents

Praja is a non-partisan organisation working towards enabling accountable governance since 1999. Praja empowers citizens to participate in governance by providing knowledge and perspective so that they can become politically active and involved beyond the ballot box. It undertakes extensive research and highlights civic issues to build the awareness of, and mobilize action by the government and elected representatives. THE PROBLEM

PRAJA's RESPONSE

Praja believes that uninformed and disengaged elected representatives and administration, rather than existing systems or policies, are responsible for the lack of good governance. Additionally, there is a paucity of tools to facilitate effective interaction between citizens and the local government.

Praja conducts data driven research and provides information on civic issues to citizens, media, and government administration and works with elected representatives to identify and address inefficiencies in their work processes, bridge the information gaps, and aid them in taking corrective measures.

HOW DID IT EVOLVE? 1999

2003

2005

2008

2014

Praja, along with the Brihan Mumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), created Mumbai's first Citizen Charter

Teamed up with BMC and built its citizen's grievance redressal mechanism, The Online Complaint and Management System (OCMS), and conducted complaint audits in the ensuing years

Published Mumbai Citizen's Handbook to demystify governance in Mumbai; About 2 lakh copies distributed

Initiated Praja Dialogue; launched CityScan, an online collation of extensive data on civic and security Issues In Mumbai; Published Councilor handbook; and annual report cards on MLAs, and Councilors

Conducted workshops with elected representatives, educating them on policies and roles; started the Delhi Chapter to replicate the model developed In Mumbai

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

Chapter

Pg. No.

The Team

2

Why was a Report Card needed and what does it contain?

3

Foreword

4

Acknowledgements

6

Assessing the performance of the MLAs objectively

7

Profiles and Performance of MLAs

8

How to read the Ranking Page

12

Key Analysis

44

The Methodology

53

(1) The Matrix – Scale of Ranking

53

(2) Parameters for Past Records as per Affidavit

56

(3) Parameters for Present Performance in the State Legislature

57

(4) Parameters for People’s Perception as per Opinion Poll

61

(5) Parameters for Negative Marking

67

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

1

W h y was a R e po rt C ard nee d e d an d what d o es it c o ntain ?

T H E T EA M Board of Trustees Nitai Mehta Managing Trustee, Praja Foundation; Entrepreneur Sumangali Gada Founder Trustee, Praja Foundation; Entrepreneur

Vinay Sanghi Entrepreneur

Market Research Agency Hansa Research

Anuj Bhagwati Trustee, Praja Foundation; Entrepreneur

Ashok Das Managing Director, Hansa Research

Iris Madeira Trustee, Praja Foundation; Education Consultant, Board of Advisor’s Centre for Civil Society

Anjan Ghosh Senior Vice President, Hansa Research

Jamal Mecklai Trustee, Praja Foundation; Foreign Exchange Consultant Vivek Asrani Trustee, Praja Foundation; Entrepreneur

Praja Team Priyanka Sharma Sr. Programme Manager

Dr. C. R. Sridhar Market Research Professional

Balwant Kirar Asst. Programme Manager

D. M. Sukhtankar former Municipal Commissioner, Mumbai and former Chief Secretary, Government of Maharashtra Dhruv Mundra Entrepreneur Juju Basu Advertising Professional K. M. S. (Titoo) Ahluwalia Former Chairman & CEO A.C. Nielsen ORG- MARG Mustafa Doctor Advocate Rajan Mehra Entrepreneur D E L H I

And the rest of the Hansa team including Tristan Braganza, Nishant Thakkar, Virat Parekh, Tarun Shroff, Joy Chakraborty, Harish Singh, Vinod Kumar, Pradeep Kumar and Mukund Kumar

Milind Mhaske Project Director

Advisors to Praja

2

Dr. Suma Chitnis Social Scientist & former Vice Chancellor, SNDT University

M L A s

Anjali Srivastava Manager

Asst.

Programme

And rest of the Praja Team including Anubhooti, Akshay Paonaskar, Dakshata Bhosale, Eknath Pawar, Ganesh Jadhav, Ganesh Phulsundar, Geetanjali Jodha, Himanshi, Himani Pant, Mahesh Bhaskar, Nilam Mirashi, Neerad Pandharipande, Nurul Hoda, Neha Kori, Puneet Kaur, Pooja Verma, Pragati Watve, Pradeep Shinde, Rakesh Gaikwad, Rakesh Pote, Rashmi Kapoor, Riddhi Vartak, Ruchita Bait, Rupesh Kumar, Shivali Bagayatkar, Swapneel Thakur, Vipul Gharat and Vibesh Kakapoil. R E P O R T

C A R D

The People of India have had Elected Representatives representing them in various bodies from the parliament to the panchayat for the last 60 years. These representatives have deliberated, debated, questioned, proposed new laws, passed new laws and governed the nation at all levels using the mechanisms given to them by the Constitution of India. The 1950 constitution which we gave to ourselves laid out the way in which we would govern ourselves. In the last three decades we have seen a steady decline in the quality of governance due to various reasons, prime amongst them being commercialisation of politics and criminalisation of politics, this has created a huge governance deficit in our country. The Electorate has remained a silent witness for most part of this and are feeling let down and frustrated by the Government and the elected representatives. The time when the citizen has a ‘real’ say, is during elections which happens once in five years. The elections are the only time when the elected representatives are appraised for their performance in the corresponding term by the electorate. Looking at the growing problems of Governance and the ever increasing needs of the citizens there is a need of a continuous dialogue and appraisal of the working of the elected representatives. It is this need of continuous dialogue and appraisal that made Praja develop this Report Card. Performance Appraisal of Elected Representatives has become the need of the hour. This appraisal has been done keeping in mind the constitutional role and responsibility of the elected representatives and the opinion of their electorate. We firmly believe in receiving every feedback to improve this appraisal system. We believe this Report Card which we will be publishing every year will give to the citizens, elected representatives, political parties and the government valuable feedback on the functioning of the elected representatives. We also hope that it will set standards and bench marks of the performance of the elected representatives not only in Delhi but across the country. D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

3

Foreword Delhi is the only one out of the four megacities of India to have a long history preceding the British era. The city has been destroyed and rebuilt several times, and each time it has emerged a different entity. Even in the present day, it is undergoing major changes. Whether it will emerge out of this churn as a more efficient and prosperous metropolis depends on the will of its elected representatives. On account of being the capital city, Delhi assumes special importance in the national consciousness. Thus, the work done by its members of legislative assembly (MLAs) regularly finds space in the national headlines, much more so than other major cities. The city’s diverse demographics, muddled power structures and constant presence in the national spotlight mean that it can be a political representative’s dream as well as nightmare. Through our MLA report card, we have sought to provide an objective analysis of the complex task that these elected representatives face. Our attempt is to shed light on various aspects of their performance. In this year’s report card, possibly the most worrying finding is the huge increase in the number of people’s representatives with criminal records. In February 2015, 8 MLAs had FIRs (under sections with 2 or more years' of imprisonment) registered against them, as per their affidavits. However, as on 31st December, 2016, FIRs had been registered against as many as 26 MLAs. Also, by the end of 2016, one-third of MLAs (20 out of 59) had chargesheets filed against them, indicating that the law enforcement authorities found prima facie evidence of their involvement in the crime. Elected representatives facing accusations of breaking the law is particularly unfortunate, as they are expected to be custodians of the Constitution and exemplars of good conduct. This statistic is merely one part of the extensive data collected by us for this report card. Our major findings are as follows – •

4

•

As many as 7 MLAs did not raise even a single issue in the assembly in 2017.

•

31% MLAs (18 out of 59) raised 5 issues or less in 2017.

•

hile the percentage with respect to ‘issues raised’ reduced from 49.88% W in 2016 to 48.26% in 2017, the percentage with respect to ‘quality of issues raised’ reduced from 39.04% to 35.76% in the same period. When we speak of quality of issues raised, we assess the extent to which MLAs raise issues which directly pertain to their own area of responsibility.

Thus, it is clear that Delhi’s MLA need to be much more proactive in voicing people’s concerns in the legislative assembly. They also need to have their ear to the ground and understand what the priorities of the people are. For instance, even though 19,152 citizen complaints were filed on ‘drainage chokes, blockages and cleaning and overflowing manholes’ in 2016, MLAs raised only 2 issues on it in the same year. If MLAs are not performing their primary function of giving a voice to people’s concerns in the legislative assembly, then it is a cause for worry. It is important to note that 67 out the 70 MLAs of Delhi are from the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP). The AAP, a relatively new entrant to politics, had been voted to power with an overwhelming mandate as it promised transparent and accountable governance. If it is to follow up on its promise of governing on principles of swaraj, its MLAs must use the legislative forum to hold the government accountable. However, as things stand as of now, its performance on this front is actually deteriorating instead of improving. For this situation to improve, an objective and fact-based assessment of the performance of these elected representatives is needed. Praja’s second Delhi MLA report card is a step in this direction. If the report is able to act as a mirror for the MLAs to assess their own work, it will have achieved its objective.

he average score of MLAs on several major parameters such as T attendance, issues raised, quality of issues raised, perception of public services and corruption saw a reduction. With respect to ‘perception on accessibility’, the performance of the MLAs improved from 63.98% in 2016 to 64.91% in 2017.

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

NITAI MEHTA, Managing Trustee, Praja Foundation

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

5

Assessing the perf o rmance o f M LAs o b j ecti v ely

A cknowled gements Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has. – Margaret Mead

The change comes when people stand up and demand for it, and then strive to get it. Today we are at that juncture of history where time demands that we stand up and demand that change and go and get it. Individuals involved in developing this report card strongly believe that they cannot just wait and remain mute spectators when time is demanding action from them. All of them have come together to develop this report card with a over-arching belief in the Constitution of India and the opportunity it creates for improved and efficient governance – the mean towards achieving the high ideals of the constitution – Justice, Liberty, Equality and Fraternity. This book is a compilation of sincere, concerned efforts of the Core Praja Team. We would like to particularly appreciate the guidance of: Dr. C R Sridhar, KMS (Titoo) Ahluwalia and Dr. Suma Chitnis. And also to Praja’s Advisors for their active support. We would like to thank our partner organisation, Initiatives of Change (IC) Centre for Governance, a prominent organisation working on improving governance structures. It is important here to acknowledge Hansa Research for conducting the opinion poll. It is also very important to acknowledge the support of Vakils for doing a splendid publishing work. Praja has obtained much of the data used in compiling this report card through Right to Information Act, 2005; without which sourcing information on the MLAs would have been very difficult. Hence it is very important to acknowledge the RTI Act and everyone involved, especially from the civil society, in bringing such a strong legislation. Also to those government officials who believe in the RTI Act and strive for its effective implementation. Very importantly, Praja Foundation appreciates the support given by:

The air in India is thick with criticism of politicians. The question that arises is: how can the performance of our elected representatives be assessed objectively? Surely the right way cannot be by asking them for their opinion of themselves. Nor is it adequate to get a few political pundits (who may have their own angles) to evaluate them. The only way such an assessment can be done in a manner that is, and is seen to be, unbiased and credible, is through a systematic and transparent study undertaken independently by respected professionals. That is precisely what The Praja Report Card seeks to accomplish. The ratings of the MLA’s are based on: (a) Data accessed through RTI on attendance of Assembly sessions, number and type of issues raised, use of discretionary funds, etc. (b) Personal interviews with 24,301 citizens of Delhi conducted by a reputed survey research organisation, to investigate the views of citizens on their elected representatives. We believe the Report Card is an important step forward in promoting accountability and transparency in the political governance of the country. K.M.S. (Titoo) Ahluwalia, Formerly Chairman & CEO of A.C. Nielsen ORG-MARG

The content of the report is the sole responsibility of Praja Foundation. 6

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

7

Details o f M LAs wh o hav e n o t b een co nsi d ere d in this R e po rt C ard

PROFILES AND PERFORMANCE OF MLAs

Name

Party

Details

Reasons

Born: 16th August, 1968

Chief Minister (from 16/2/2015 to till date)

Birth Place: Village Siwani, Distt. Bhiwani (Haryana) AAP

Education: B.Tech Mechanical Engineering Profession: Political Activist (Ex- Chief Minister of Delhi) Constituency: 40 (Area: New Delhi)

Arvind Kejriwal

Born: 10th May, 1975 Birth Place: Gobardih, Mau (U.P.) AAP

Education: Post Graduate

Minister (from 16/2/2015 to till date)

Profession: Social Worker Zone: Shahdara North Constituency: 67 (Area: Babarpur)

Gopal Rai

Born: 21st May, 1981 Birth Place: Delhi AAP

Education: Bachelor of Business Studies


Profession: Business Of the total 70 MLAs from the city, the overall scaling is done for 59; while nine MLAs who are ministers, Speaker & Deputy Speaker (hence do not ask any questions to the government or raise any issues in the house), one MLA representing Cantonment Board (where survey was not conducted) and one MLA who was suspended (from 9th June 2016 to 10th March 2017), were not ranked.

Zone: Sadar Paharganj Constituency: 22 (Area: Ballimaran)

Imran Hussain

MLAs' education, profession, constituency details, date of birth, age & birth place have been taken from the affidavit submitted by the candidate during the election and/or from Delhi assembly website. For understanding details on the ranking and scales of the marking kindly go to the section on methodology.

8

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

9

Name

Party

Details

Reasons

Born: 13th November, 1980 Birth Place: Delhi AAP

Education: M.A. (Social Work)

Party

AAP

Education: B.A.

Zone: Shahdara North

Zone: Shahdara South Constituency: 62 (Area: Shahdara)

Ram Niwas Goel

Born: 12th July, 1980

Deputy Chief Minister Education: Diploma In Journalism (from Profession: Social Service & 16/2/2015 Political Activist to till date)

Birth Place: Delhi AAP

Education: B.A., L.L.B. Zone: Rohini

Constituency: 57 (Area: Patparganj)

Constituency: 10 (Area: Sultan Pur Majra (SC))

Sandeep Kumar

Profession: Business

Age: 51

Suspended (from 9/6/2016 to 10/3/2017)

Education: B. Arch AAP


Profession: Advocate

Zone: Shahdara South

Education: Graduate

Profession: Self Employed (Architect)

Zone: Shahdara South

Zone: Rohini

Constituency: 59 (Area: Vishwas Nagar)

Constituency: 15 (Area: Shakurbasti)


Satyendar Kumar Jain

Om Prakash Sharma Born: 10th June, 1987 Birth Place: Delhi AAP

Rakhi Birla D E L H I

Speaker (from 16/2/2015 to till date)

Profession: Retired Business Man

Age: 63

10

Born: 5 January, 1948

Profession: Social Work

Manish Sisodia

BJP

Reasons

Birth Place: Safidon Mandi, Haryana

Age: 43

AAP

Details th


Constituency: 70 (Area: Karawal Nagar)

Kapil Mishra

Name

M L A s

Education: M.A.

Born: 5th January, 1978

Deputy Speaker (from 7/6/2016 to till date)

Birth Place: Village Chhara, Distt. Jhajjar (Haryana) AAP

Profession: Social Worker

Education: B.A.

Zone: Rohini

Profession: Retired Government Servant, Ex. MLA

Constituency: 12 (Area: Mangol Puri (SC))

Constituency: 38 (Area: Delhi Cantt.)

R E P O R T

C A R D

Surender Singh D E L H I

M L A s

Cantonment Board

R E P O R T

C A R D

11

HO W TO R E A D T H E R A N KING PAG E : Overall Rank for the current year (2017) is given after summation of all the weightages. The top three ranks are awarded a trophy - The Torch. The First gets gold, the second silver and the third bronze.

MLA

PARTY

GRADE

TOTAL SCORE %

RANK

75.46

3

ATTENDANCE

NO. OF ISSUES RAISED

QUALITY OF LEAST CRIMINAL PERCEIVED ISSUES RAISED RECORD PERFORMANCE

Grade

Score out of 10

Grade

Score out of 10

Grade

Score out of 27

Grade

Score out of 5

Grade

Score out of 40

A

12.02

A

8.69

B

22.38

A

5

C

26.21

MS/MR

POPULAR

B

Personal details

MS/MR COMMITTED

A

Total Scores

Areas for ranking: 1. Attendance 2. Issues Raised 3. Quality of Issues Raised 4. Criminal Record (including the negative marking for criminal records) 5. Perceived Performance (Perception of Public Services + Perceived as Accessible + Perceived Least Corrupt)

Badges for high ranks in individual areas MS/MR POPULAR

DELHI’S MLAs AND THEIR RANKINGS

PERCEPTION OF PUBLIC SERVICES + PERCEIVED AS ACCESSIBLE

QUALITY OF ISSUES RAISED + NO. OF ISSUES RAISED

B

C

E

F

D

Colour Coding: Grade ‘A’ – 100% to 80% marks Grade ‘B’ – Less than 80% to 70% marks Grade ‘C’ – Less than 70% to 60% marks

MS/MR CLEAN

12

CLEAN CRIMINAL RECORD + PERCEIVED LEAST CORRUPT

D E L H I

Grade ‘D’ – Less than 60% to 50% marks Grade ‘E’ – Less than 50% to 35% marks Grade ‘F’ – Less than 35% marks

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

13

14

2017

67.14

M L A s

LEAST CRIMINAL PERCEIVED RECORD PERFORMANCE

Grade

Actual out of 10

Grade

Actual out of 27

Grade

Actual out of 5

Grade

Actual out of 40

38

F

0

E

4.13

F

9.28

A

5

C

25.78

14

A

8

A

8.90

D

16.03

A

5

C

26.21

2017

Shift: Attendance; No. of issues raised; Quality of issues raised

55.13

27

A

8

D

5

F

9.25

A

5

D

22.12

2016

Zone: Najafgarh, Constituency No.: 33, (Area: Dwarka)

D C

67.20

13

A

10

D

5.63

E

12.23

A

5

B

28.35

2017

Shift: Attendance; Quality of issues raised; Perceived performance

51.63

35

A

8

F

1.89

F

6.05

A

5

C

25.10

2016

Zone: South, Constituency No.: 48, (Area: Ambedkar Nagar)

D D

58.79

27

A

10

F

1.81

F

7.07

A

5

C

27.91

Shift: Attendance; Quality of issues raised; Perceived performance

2017

Zone: Civil Line, Constituency No.: 5, (Area: Badli)

D

51.97

34

A

8

B

7.93

D

13.97

F

-10

C

26.48

E

43.47

55

C

6

E

4.54

F

9.30

F

-10

C

26.64

Age: 32, Edu.: M.A., Profession: Social Worker

D E L H I

Quality of Question

Actual out of 10

Date of Birth: 15th July, 1967, Birth Place: Libaspur Village, Delhi, Edu.: B.A.(P), Profession: Business

AAP Akhilesh Pati Tripathi

C

No. of Question

Grade

Date of Birth: 14th July, 1975, Birth Place: New Delhi, Edu.: M.B.A. (Executive), Profession: Self Employed

AAP Ajesh Yadav

49.67

GRADE

Date of Birth: 16th October, 1973, Birth Place: New Delhi, Edu.: Post Graduate, Profession: Public Service & Social Worker

AAP Ajay Dutt

E

2016

AAP Adarsh Shastri

RANK

PARTY

ATTENDANCE

2016

MLA

TOTAL SCORE %

R E P O R T

Zone: Civil Line, Constituency No.: 18, (Area: Model Town)

C A R D

D E L H I


M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

15

RANK

2017

C

60.53

2016

MLA

TOTAL SCORE %

C

68.76

PARTY

GRADE

ATTENDANCE

No. of Question

Quality of Question


Grade

Actual out of 10

Grade

Actual out of 10

Grade

Actual out of 27

Grade

Actual out of 5

Grade

Actual out of 40

17

A

10

A

9.65

C

16.75

F

-5

D

23.10

10

A

10

A

9.63

C

16.74

F

0

C

25.40

MS

COMMITTED

AAP

39.22

54

C

6

E

3.62

F

7.39

F

-2

E

19.25

D

51.38

49

C

6

F

1.81

F

5.69

C

3

C

27.88

Date of Birth: 10th January, 1974, Birth Place: Vill. Aghwan Pur, Distt. Meerut U.P., Edu.: HSC, Profession: Business

AAP

63.45

11

A

10

C

6.89

E

12.30

A

5

D

23.08

B

70.40

6

A

10

B

7.63

D

14.41

A

5

C

26.37

F

0

A

5

C

26.64

Date of Birth: 2nd July, 1957, Birth Place: Distt, Farrukhabad (UP), Edu.: B.A., Profession: Self Employed (Business)

Asim Ahmed Khan

16

2016

AAP

E

46.99

M L A s

Zone: Shahdara South, Constituency No.: 61, (Area: Gandhi Nagar)

46

A

10

F

0

Note : Was Minister (from 16/2/2015 to 31/8/2015), hence not ranked.

Date of Birth: 20th March, 1976, Birth Place: Delhi, Edu.: B.A., Profession: Business

D E L H I

Zone: Central, Constituency No.: 54, (Area: Okhla)

C

2017

Anil Kumar Bajpai

E

2017

Amanatullah Khan

Shift: Chargesheet filed

2017

AAP

Zone: Civil Line, Constituency No.: 20, (Area: Chandi Chowk)

2016

Date of Birth: 21st September, 1975, Birth Place: Delhi, Edu.: M.Sc., M.Ed, Profession: Politician

2016

Alka Lamba

R E P O R T

C A R D

Zone: City Constituency No.: 21, (Area: Matia Mahal)

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

17

RANK

2017

D

55.81

2016

MLA

TOTAL SCORE %

C

66.61

PARTY

GRADE

ATTENDANCE

No. of Question

Quality of Question


Grade

Actual out of 10

Grade

Actual out of 10

Grade

Actual out of 27

Grade

Actual out of 5

Grade

Actual out of 40

26

A

10

F

1.37

F

6.85

A

5

C

27.80

16

A

10

B

7.81

E

13.29

A

5

C

26.50

MR

POPULAR

AAP

Date of Birth: 18th February, 1963, Birth Place: New Delhi, Edu.: Under Matric, Profession: Contractor

AAP

18

33

M L A s

8

F

2.58

F

8.78

A

5

D

22.24

2017

B

72.38

2

A

10

A

9.13

C

16.84

A

5

C

24.80

2016

Zone: Rohini, Constituency No.: 14, (Area: Shalimar Bagh)

B

70.27

7

A

10

A

9.27

C

16.44

A

5

C

26.55

2017

Zone: Najafgarh, Constituency No.: 37, (Area: Palam)

E

44.85

51

F

0

F

2.58

F

6.98

A

5

C

25.04

C

63.92

22

A

10

C

6.36

E

12.55

A

5

C

27.01

Date of Birth: 30th October, 1965, Birth Place: Delhi, Edu.: B.Sc., M.Sc., Business MGT (IIM-A), Profession: Social Activist

D E L H I

A

Shift: No. of issues raised; Quality of issues raised

Note : Was Deputy Speaker (from 16/2/2015 to 10/6/2016), hence not ranked.

Date of Birth: 2nd December, 1970, Birth Place: Palam, New Delhi, Edu.: B.Ed., Profession: Self Employed

AAP Devinder Kumar Sehrawat

52.22

Date of Birth: 11th March, 1974, Birth Place: Samastipur, Bihar, Edu.: B.A., Profession: Ex. MLA

AAP Bhavna Gaur

D

Zone: Central, Constituency No.: 51, (Area: Kalkaji)

2016

Bandana Kumari

2016

2017

Avtar Singh

R E P O R T

C A R D

Zone: Najafgarh, Constituency No.: 36, (Area: Bijwasan)

D E L H I


M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

19

RANK

2017

F

29.17

2016

MLA

TOTAL SCORE %

D

53.53

PARTY

GRADE

AAP

ATTENDANCE Actual out of 10

Grade

Actual out of 10

Grade

Actual out of 27

Grade

Actual out of 5

Grade

Actual out of 40

57

A

10

F

0

F

0

F

-5

E

19.71

39

A

10

F

0.54

F

7.23

A

5

C

27.76

Shift: No. of issues raised; Quality of issues raised, New FIR & chargesheet register, Perceived performance

2017

Zone: Central, Constituency No.: 49, (Area: Sangam Vihar)

D

58.63

20

A

8

D

5.17

E

11.06

A

5

D

23.48

C

66.79

15

A

10

C

6.36

E

12.65

A

5

C

24.78

Date of Birth: 30th December, 1963, Birth Place: Village Bhikan Pur Distt. Gaziabad, Edu.: B.A., Profession: Material Dealer

Fateh Singh


2016

AAP

Quality of Question

Grade

Date of Birth: 31st December, 1977, Birth Place: Delhi, Edu.: HSC, Profession: Self Employed

Dinesh Mohaniya

No. of Question

Zone: Shahdara North, Constituency No.: 68, (Area: Gokalpur)

MR

2017

AAP

D

58.13

22

A

10

E

4.13

F

8.48

A

5

C

24.61

2016

CLEAN

D

57.63

29

A

10

E

3.81

F

9

A

5

C

24.82

Date of Birth: 3 December, 1963, Birth Place: Delhi, Edu.: SSC, I.T.I Refrigeration & Air-conditioning, Profession: Self Manufacturing & Trading of Leather Goods rd

Gulab Singh

20

E

46.95

47

F

0

D

5.86

E

11.58

F

0

C

24.17

C

63.64

23

A

10

A

8.90

D

16.03

F

0

D

23.71

Date of Birth: 30th October, 1978, Birth Place: Ghuman Hera, Delhi, Edu.: HSC, Profession: Self Employed

D E L H I

M L A s

Shift: No. of issues raised

2017

AAP

Zone: West, Constituency No.: 26, (Area: Madipur)

2016

Girish Soni

R E P O R T

C A R D

Zone: Najafgarh, Constituency No.: 34, (Area: Matiala)

D E L H I


M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

21

RANK

2017

D

52.82

2016

MLA

TOTAL SCORE %

D

51.41

PARTY

AAP Hazari Lal Chauhan

GRADE

ATTENDANCE


Actual out of 10

Grade

Actual out of 10

Grade

Actual out of 27

Grade

Actual out of 5

Grade

Actual out of 40

30

A

10

F

1.37

F

4.60

A

5

C

27.21

48

A

10

F

0.72

F

7.47

A

5

C

24.22

2017

Shift: No. of issues raised; Perceived performance;

D

54.36

28

A

10

B

7.93

D

14.31

F

-10

C

26.40

2016

Zone: Karol Bagh, Constituency No.: 24, (Area: Patel Nagar (SC))

D

53.35

40

E

4

A

8.36

D

13.86

F

-5

C

25.13

Date of Birth: 31st May, 1971, Birth Place: Ambala Cantt., Edu.: HSC, Profession: Self Employed (Ex. MLA)

Jagdeep Singh

Quality of Question

Grade

Date of Birth: 10th May, 1948, Birth Place: Karol Bagh, Delhi, Edu.: Ninth, Profession: Business, Social Worker

AAP

No. of Question

Zone: West, Constituency No.: 28, (Area: Hari Nagar)

Shift: Attendance; Quality of issues raised

MR

22

3

A

10

A

9.82

C

16.79

A

5

D

22.39

B

71.87

2

A

10

A

10

C

17.71

A

5

D

22.17

D

58.18

21

E

4

B

7.06

E

12.43

A

5

D

23.78

C

65.66

20

A

10

C

6.18

E

11.56

A

5

C

26.92

Date of Birth: 16th February, 1973, Birth Place: Delhi, Edu.: Master of Arts, Profession: Writer

D E L H I

M L A s

Zone: Shahdara North, Constituency No.: 69, (Area: Mustafabad)

2017

Date of Birth: 4th July, 1953, Birth Place: Vill. Karawal Nagar, Delhi, Edu.: SSC, Profession: Business

AAP Jarnail Singh

70.52

2016

Jagdish Pradhan

2017

BJP

B

2016

COMMITTED

R E P O R T

C A R D

Zone: West, Constituency No.: 27, (Area: Rajouri Garden)

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

23

2017

E

47.87

D

52.94

PARTY

AAP

GRADE

24

56.16

M L A s


Grade

Actual out of 10

Grade

Actual out of 27

Grade

Actual out of 5

Grade

Actual out of 40

40

A

10

D

5.86

E

11.04

F

-10

C

25.57

41

A

10

E

4.54

E

9.85

F

-5

C

25.55

E

11.61

F

0

C

24.88

Zone: West, Constituency No.: 29, (Area: Tilak Nagar)

24

A

8

D

5.86

Note : Was Minister (from 16/2/2015 to 31/8/2015), hence not ranked.

2017

51.49

37

A

8

F

1.20

F

5.12

A

5

C

26.59

2016

Zone: Civil Line, Constituency No.: 16, (Area: Tri Nagar)

D D

57.37

31

A

10

E

3.81

F

9.29

A

5

C

26.27

2017


51.55

36

A

8

F

1.89

F

6.80

A

5

C

24.28

2016

Zone: Najafgarh, Constituency No.: 35, (Area: Najafgarh)

D D

52.06

46

A

10

F

2.36

F

6.09

A

5

C

25.62

Date of Birth: 12th December, 1962, Birth Place: Delhi, Edu.: HSC, Diploma in Civil Engineering, Profession: Self Employed

D E L H I

Quality of Question

Actual out of 10

Date of Birth: 22nd July, 1974, Birth Place: Najafgarh, New Delhi, Edu.: LLM, Profession: Lawyer

AAP Kartar Singh Tanwar

D

No. of Question

Grade

Date of Birth: 12th April, 1966, Birth Place: Uttar Pradesh, Edu.: L.L.B, Profession: Self Employed

AAP Kailash Gahlot

2016

AAP Jitender Singh Tomar

ATTENDANCE

Date of Birth: 15th March, 1981, Birth Place: Rampur (U.P.), Edu.: HSC, Profession: Business (Ex. MLA)

2017

Jarnail Singh

RANK

2016

MLA

TOTAL SCORE %

R E P O R T

C A R D

Zone: South, Constituency No.: 46, (Area: Chhatarpur)

D E L H I

Shift: Other MLAs movement

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

25

26

2017

55.22

M L A s


Grade

Actual out of 10

Grade

Actual out of 27

Grade

Actual out of 5

Grade

Actual out of 40

23

A

10

F

3.10

F

7.27

A

5

C

25.67

37

A

10

F

2.36

F

6.09

A

5

C

25.77

2017


30.60

56

A

8

F

0

F

0

F

-5

D

23.07

2016

Zone: Central, Constituency No.: 42, (Area: Kasturba Nagar)

F E

47.06

53

A

8

F

0.72

F

3.47

A

5

D

23.87

2017

E

47.26

43

A

10

E

4.13

F

8.63

F

-5

C

24.14

2016

Zone: West, Constituency No.: 31, (Area: Vikaspuri)

D

50.31

50

A

10

E

4.90

E

9.93

F

-5

C

24.47

Zone: Shahdara South, Constituency No.: 56, (Area: Kondli)

2017

Shift: Other MLAs movement

E

41.16

53

A

10

F

0

F

0

A

5

D

22.10

D

52.65

44

A

10

F

0

F

0

A

5

B

30.65

Date of Birth: 14th July, 1961, Birth Place: Village Palwara, Distt. Hapur, U.P., Edu.: Primary School, Profession: Social Worker

D E L H I

Quality of Question

Actual out of 10

Date of Birth: 6th September, 1978, Birth Place: Delhi, Edu.: SSC, Profession: Politician & Social Worker

AAP Mohd. Ishraque

D

No. of Question

Grade

Date of Birth: 5th May, 1963, Birth Place: New Delhi, Edu.: SSC, Profession: Self employed (Ex. MLA)

AAP Manoj Kumar

56.89

GRADE

Date of Birth: 7th August, 1956, Birth Place: Kotla Mubarak Pur, New Delhi, Edu.: M.A., L.L.B., Profession: Advocate

AAP Mahinder Yadav

D

2016

AAP Madan Lal

RANK

PARTY

ATTENDANCE

2016

MLA

TOTAL SCORE %

R E P O R T

C A R D

Zone: Shahdara North, Constituency No.: 65, (Area: Seelampur)

D E L H I

Shift: Perceived Performance

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

27

RANK

2017

B

75.04

2016

MLA

TOTAL SCORE %

C

69.54

PARTY

GRADE

ATTENDANCE

No. of Question

Quality of Question


Grade

Actual out of 10

Grade

Actual out of 10

Grade

Actual out of 27

Grade

Actual out of 5

Grade

Actual out of 40

1

A

10

A

9.13

C

16.43

A

5

C

27.73

9

A

8

A

8.18

D

15.26

A

5

C

26.10

MR

POPULAR

AAP

28

15

A

10

D

5.17

E

10.59

A

5

C

24.28

D

56.46

33

A

10

F

2.36

F

7.19

A

5

C

25.91

M L A s

2017

49

C

6

E

3.96

E

9.51

F

0

D

22.42

2016


46.20

D

57.19

32

A

8

E

4.90

E

10.12

A

5

C

25.18

Zone: West, Constituency No.: 32, (Area: Uttam Nagar)

Shift: Attendance; New FIR register; Perceived Performance

E

47.20

44

A

10

F

3.10

F

7.69

F

-5

C

26.05

D

53.97

38

A

10

F

2.36

F

7.89

A

5

C

25.73

Date of Birth: 5th February, 1972, Birth Place: Kapashera, New Delhi, Edu.: B.Com., L.L.B , Profession: Advocate

D E L H I

Zone: Central, Constituency No.: 53, (Area: Badarpur)

E

Date of Birth: 22nd November, 1976, Birth Place: Delhi, Edu.: Ninth, Profession: Social Worker

AAP Naresh Yadav

61.10

Date of Birth: 15th December, 1972, Birth Place: Village Kotvan, Distt. Mathura, U.P., Edu.: HSC, Profession: Self employed

AAP Naresh Balyan

C

2017

Narayan Dutt Sharma

2017

AAP

Shift: Attendance; No. of issues raised; Quality of issues raised; Perceived Performance

Zone: Rohini, Constituency No.: 6, (Area: Rithala)

2016

Date of Birth: 6th November, 1963, Birth Place: Kaithal, Haryana, Edu.: SSC, Profession: Business - Property dealing

2016

Mohinder Goyal

R E P O R T

C A R D

Zone: South, Constituency No.: 45, (Area: Mehrauli)

D E L H I

Shift: New FIR & Chargesheet register

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

29

30

2017

71.30

M L A s


Grade

Actual out of 10

Grade

Actual out of 27

Grade

Actual out of 5

Grade

Actual out of 40

7

A

10

B

7.41

E

13.27

A

5

C

24.23

3

A

10

B

7.27

E

13.26

A

5

C

27.77

2017

64.13

9

C

6

A

8.27

D

14.46

A

5

C

24.19

2016

Zone: Shahdara South, Constituency No.: 58, (Area: Laxmi Nagar)

C C

69.70

8

A

10

B

7.27

D

13.65

A

5

C

25.78

2017

D

56.04

25

A

8

A

8.27

D

15.60

F

-5

D

23.37

2016

Zone: Civil Line, Constituency No.: 3, (Area: Timarpur)

D

51.71

47

A

8

F

2.36

F

8.79

F

0

B

29.56


2017

Zone: South, Constituency No.: 44, (Area: R K Puram)

D

52.24

32

A

8

D

5.51

E

11.15

F

-2

D

23.96

D

52.39

45

A

8

F

3.45

F

8.91

F

-2

C

27.03

Date of Birth: 30th March, 1970, Birth Place: Bass, Distt. Hissar, Haryana, Edu.: HSC, Profession: Business

D E L H I

Quality of Question

Actual out of 10

Date of Birth: 4th June, 1977, Birth Place: Delhi, Edu.: HSC, Profession: Business

AAP Pawan Kumar Sharma

B

No. of Question

Grade

Date of Birth: 4th May, 1972, Birth Place: Gajraula, Uttar Pradesh, Edu.: M.A. Political Science, Profession: Politician

AAP Parmila Tokas

66.22

GRADE

Date of Birth: 16th June, 1973, Birth Place: Meerut, Edu.: Post Graduate Diploma in Business Management, Profession: Business

AAP Pankaj Kant Singhal

C

2016

AAP Nitin Tyagi

RANK

PARTY

ATTENDANCE

2016

MLA

TOTAL SCORE %

R E P O R T

C A R D

Zone: Civil Line, Constituency No.: 4, (Area: Adarsh Nagar)

D E L H I


M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

31

RANK

2017

E

46.68

2016

MLA

TOTAL SCORE %

E

43.04

PARTY

AAP

GRADE

ATTENDANCE

Quality of Question


Grade

Actual out of 10

Grade

Actual out of 10

Grade

Actual out of 27

Grade

Actual out of 5

Grade

Actual out of 40

48

A

10

E

4.13

E

10.88

F

-5

D

21.34

56

A

10

F

0

F

0

C

3

C

27.04

Date of Birth: 1st April, 1988, Birth Place: New Delhi, Edu.: M.Com, Profession: Politician (Ex. MLA)

Prakash

No. of Question

Zone: South, Constituency No.: 47, (Area: Deoli (SC))


MR

32

A

8

B

7.75

D

13.80

A

5

C

27.40

C

66.18

17

A

10

E

4.90

E

10.25

A

5

B

29.02

2017

E

39.18

55

A

8

F

0

F

0

F

0

C

26.22

E

41.96

57

C

6

F

0

F

0

F

0

C

27.96

M L A s

2017

Zone: Rohini, Constituency No.: 11, (Area: Nangloi Jat)

C

67.87

4

A

10

A

8.96

D

15.35

A

5

D

22.17

B

70.47

5

A

10

A

9.45

D

15.75

A

5

D

22.27

Date of Birth: 26th April, 1968, Birth Place: Ghonda, Delhi, Edu.: B.A., L.L.B., Profession: Advocate

D E L H I


2016

Zone: Central, Constituency No.: 41, (Area: Jangpura)

Date of Birth: 18th December, 1966, Birth Place: Delhi, Edu.: B.Sc. Engineering

AAP Rajendra Pal Gautam

5

Date of Birth: 21st December, 1984, Birth Place: Bhopal, Edu.: M.B.A, Profession: Social Worker

AAP Raghuvinder Shokeen

67.32

2016

Praveen Kumar

2017

AAP

C

2016

POPULAR

R E P O R T

C A R D

Zone: Shahdara North, Constituency No.: 63, (Area: Seemapuri)

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

33

34

2017

65.86

M L A s


Grade

Actual out of 10

Grade

Actual out of 27

Grade

Actual out of 5

Grade

Actual out of 40

12

A

8

B

7.06

D

13.61

A

5

D

22.65

18

A

10

C

6.90

E

13

A

5

D

22.96

2017

E

47.81

41

A

10

F

1.89

F

4.43

F

0

C

26.10

2016

Zone: Civil Line, Constituency No.: 17, (Area: Wazirpur)

C

64.48

21

A

10

C

6.36

E

12.49

A

5

C

27.63

2017

Shift: No. of issues raised; Quality of issues raised; New FIR register

E

47.28

42

A

10

F

1.37

F

4.60

A

5

D

22.95

2016

Zone: West, Constituency No.: 30, (Area: Janakpuri)

D

57.59

30

A

10

E

3.81

F

9.14

A

5

D

23.64


2017

Zone: Shahdara South, Constituency No.: 55, (Area: Trilokpuri)

F

29.10

58

A

8

F

0

F

0

F

-5

D

21.65

E

48.68

51

A

10

F

0.72

F

5.22

F

0

C

24.73

Date of Birth: 13th August, 1988, Birth Place: Samastipur (Bihar), Edu.: Advance Diploma in Hotel Management, Profession: Social Worker

D E L H I

Quality of Question

Actual out of 10

Date of Birth: 25th July, 1973, Birth Place: Delhi, Edu.: Ninth, Profession: Politician (Ex. MLA)

AAP Rituraj Govind

C

No. of Question

Grade

Date of Birth: 18th October, 1964, Birth Place: Jalandhar (Punjab), Edu.: B.Sc., Profession: Self Employed

AAP Raju Dhingan

62.44

GRADE

Date of Birth: 2nd November, 1978, Birth Place: Delhi, Edu.: HSC, Profession: Business

AAP Rajesh Rishi

C

2016

AAP Rajesh Gupta

RANK

PARTY

ATTENDANCE

2016

MLA

TOTAL SCORE %

R E P O R T

C A R D

Zone: Rohini, Constituency No.: 9, (Area: Kirari)

D E L H I

Shift: Attendance; Quality of issues raised; Chargesheet filed

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

35

RANK

2017

C

65.41

2016

MLA

TOTAL SCORE %

B

72.86

PARTY

GRADE

ATTENDANCE

No. of Question

Quality of Question


Grade

Actual out of 10

Grade

Actual out of 10

Grade

Actual out of 27

Grade

Actual out of 5

Grade

Actual out of 40

8

A

10

C

6.37

E

12.91

A

5

C

24.85

1

A

10

A

8.36

C

16.56

A

5

C

24.93

MR

CLEAN

AAP

36

59

A

8

F

0

F

0

F

-10

C

24.90

E

40.29

58

A

10

F

1.45

F

6.96

F

-5

D

23.89

2017

D

58.74

19

A

10

C

6.72

D

13.63

F

0

D

22.45

2016

Zone: Central, Constituency No.: 52, (Area: Tuglakabad)

D

58.79

28

A

8

D

5.63

E

11.43

F

0

C

25.72

Date of Birth: 1st May, 1979, Birth Place: Madhubani (Bihar), Edu.: B.A. (Hon), Profession: Social Worker

AAP Sarita Singh

27.26

Date of Birth: 10th October, 1959, Birth Place: Delhi, Edu.: Eleventh, Profession: Social Worker

AAP Sanjeev Jha

F

M L A s


E

47.07

45

A

8

F

3.44

F

7.72

F

0

D

23.56

C

60.74

25

A

8

E

4.90

E

9.75

A

5

B

28.09

Date of Birth: 20th March, 1986, Birth Place: Rai Brailly, Edu.: M.A. (Sociology), Profession: Social Worker

D E L H I

Zone: Civil Line, Constituency No.: 2, (Area: Burari)

2017

Sahi Ram


2017

AAP

Zone: Shahdara South, Constituency No.: 60, (Area: Krishna Nagar)

2016

Date of Birth: 7th February, 1954, Birth Place: Kashi Pur (UP), Edu.: M.Com., L.L.B, Profession: Advocate

2016

S. K. Bagga

R E P O R T

C A R D

Zone: Shahdara North, Constituency No.: 64, (Area: Rohtas Nagar)

D E L H I

M L A s

Shift: Quality of issues raised; Chargesheet filed; Perceived Performance

R E P O R T

C A R D

37

RANK

2017

C

62.05

2016

MLA

TOTAL SCORE %

D

52.80

PARTY

GRADE

ATTENDANCE

No. of Question

Quality of Question


Grade

Actual out of 10

Grade

Actual out of 10

Grade

Actual out of 27

Grade

Actual out of 5

Grade

Actual out of 40

14

C

6

B

7.41

D

13.53

A

5

C

24.01

42

A

10

F

1.81

F

5.69

A

5

C

27.30

MR

CLEAN

AAP

38

39

A

10

E

4.13

E

9.98

F

-5

C

24.79

D

55.62

34

A

10

F

0.72

F

7.47

A

5

C

26.43

2017

D

53.86

29

A

8

F

2.58

F

5.98

A

5

C

26.60

2016

Zone: Narela, Constituency No.: 1, (Area: Narela)

D

59.42

26

A

10

E

4.36

E

9.57

A

5

C

24.48

Date of Birth: 6th February, 1962, Birth Place: Delhi, Edu.: HSC, Profession: Businessman

AAP Shri Dutt Sharma

49.37

Date of Birth: 29th June, 1975, Birth Place: Village Bakoli, Delhi, Edu.: SSC, Profession: Farmer

AAP Shiv Charan Goel

E

C

63.86

10

A

10

A

8.79

D

15.08

F

0

D

23.80

C

61.70

24

A

10

C

6

E

11.56

A

5

D

22.13

Date of Birth: 1st July, 1960, Birth Place: Delhi, Edu.: HSC, Profession: Social Activist

D E L H I

M L A s

Zone: Karol Bagh, Constituency No.: 25, (Area: Moti Nagar)

2017

Sharad Kumar


2017

AAP

Zone: South, Constituency No.: 50, (Area: Greater Kailash)

2016

Age: Not given, Edu.: B. Tech Computer Sc., L.L.B., Profession: Software Engineer (Ex. MLA)

2016

Saurabh Bharadwaj

R E P O R T

C A R D

Zone: Shahdara North, Constituency No.: 66, (Area: Ghonda)

D E L H I


M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

39

40

2017

52.70

M L A s


Grade

Actual out of 10

Grade

Actual out of 27

Grade

Actual out of 5

Grade

Actual out of 40

52

A

8

E

3.62

F

8.76

F

-5

D

23.01

43

A

10

F

3.45

E

9.66

F

-5

C

27.59

2017

Shift: Attendance; Quality of issues raised; Perceived Performance

60.54

16

A

10

A

9.48

D

15.91

F

-7

C

26.12

2016

Zone: Sadar Paharganj, Constituency No.: 19, (Area: Sadar Bazar)

C D

55.57

35

A

10

A

8.72

D

15.06

F

-7

C

25.80

2017

Shift: No. of issues raised; Perceived Performance

D

52.40

31

A

10

D

5.51

E

10.62

F

-5

C

25.66

2016

Zone: South, Constituency No.: 43, (Area: Malviya Nagar)

E

47.22

52

A

8

F

1.45

F

6.96

F

0

D

22.82

Shift: Attendance; No. of issues raised; Quality of issues raised; Perceived Performance

2017

Zone: Narela, Constituency No.: 8, (Area: Mundka)

D

58.96

18

A

10

A

8.27

D

14.71

F

-5

C

25.04

C

68.08

11

A

10

A

8.54

C

16.44

F

0

C

25.10

Date of Birth: 22nd May, 1973, Birth Place: Bawana, Delhi, Edu.: B.A., Profession: Business

D E L H I

Quality of Question

Actual out of 10

Date of Birth: 1st July, 1957, Birth Place: Village Hiran Kudna, Delhi, Edu.: M.A. (Eco), Profession: Retired Govt. Servant

AAP Ved Parkash

D

No. of Question

Grade

Age: 42, Edu.: M.Sc. (Maths), Profession: Advocate

AAP Sukhvir Singh

43.57

GRADE

Date of Birth: 17th February, 1977, Birth Place: Delhi, Edu.: B.A., Profession: Social Service

AAP Somnath Bharti

E

2016

AAP Som Dutt

RANK

PARTY

ATTENDANCE

2016

MLA

TOTAL SCORE %

R E P O R T

C A R D

Zone: Rohini, Constituency No.: 7, (Area: Bawana (SC))

D E L H I

Shift: Quality of issues raised; Chargesheet filed

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

41

RANK

2017

C

66.75

2016

MLA

TOTAL SCORE %

C

65.79

PARTY

AAP Vijender Garg Vijay

GRADE

ATTENDANCE

No. of Question

Quality of Question


Grade

Actual out of 10

Grade

Actual out of 10

Grade

Actual out of 27

Grade

Actual out of 5

Grade

Actual out of 40

6

A

10

C

6.37

E

12.16

A

5

C

26.88

19

A

10

B

7.81

D

14.54

A

5

C

25.44

Date of Birth: 3rd March, 1963, Birth Place: Delhi, Edu.: B.Com., Profession: Self Employed

Zone: Karol Bagh, Constituency No.: 39, (Area: Rajinder Nagar)

Shift: Perceived Performance; Other MLAs movement

MR

42

13

A

10

A

10

C

17.14

F

-5

D

23.91

D

55.51

36

C

6

A

9.79

C

17.24

F

-5

C

24.49

M L A s

Shift: Attendance; Other MLAs movement

E

45.78

50

A

10

F

1.89

F

6.05

F

0

D

22.55

C

67.52

12

A

10

C

6.90

E

12.63

A

5

C

26

Date of Birth: 19th May, 1983, Birth Place: Delhi, Edu.: B.A. (Prog.), Profession: Business

D E L H I

Zone: Rohini, Constituency No.: 13, (Area: Rohini)

2017

Date of Birth: 14th August, 1963, Birth Place: Delhi, Edu.: M.Com, Profession: Business

AAP Vishesh Ravi

62.16

2016

Vijender Kumar

2017

BJP

C

2016

COMMITTED

R E P O R T

C A R D

Shift: No. of issues raised; Quality of issues raised; New FIR register; Perceived Performance

Zone: Sadar Paharganj, Constituency No.: 23, (Area: Karol Bagh)

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

43

Ke y A nalysis Note: Number of MLAs who were ranked in 2016 are 58 (55 MLAs from AAP and 3 MLAs from BJP), in 2017 are 59 (57 MLAs from AAP and 2 MLAs from BJP).

Overall Grade 25

25 Avg. Score 58.8% in 2016 & 53.4% in 2017

15 10

18

100% to 80% marks Less than 80% to 70% marks Less than 70% to 60% marks Less than 60% to 50% marks Less than 50% to 35% marks Less than 35% marks

18

2016

8

0 0 0

B

C

Grade

D

E

14

2016 2017

14

14

10

Total No. Issues Raised: 951 in 2016 & 926 in 2017

Avg. Score 49.9% in 2016 & 48.3% in 2017

6

0

10

8

7

8

3

2

F

11

11

12

4

0

A

16

16

4

3

5

18 18

2017

14

7

No. of Issues Raised

No. of MLAs(59)

No. of MLAs(59)

20

20

ABCDEF-

0

1 to 5

3

6 to 10

11 to 20

21 to 50

2

Above 50

Issues Raised

Quality of Issues Raised

Attendance 30

52 51

ABCDEF-

No. of MLAs(59)

50 Avg. Score 92.4% in 2016 & 84.7% in 2017

40 30


25 No. of MLAs(59)

60

2016 2017

20 10

0 0 0

A

B

5 4 C

0 0

1 1

0

D

E

F

3

20

2016

ABCDEF-

15

100% to 80% marks Less than 80% to 70% marks Less than 70% to 60% marks Less than 60% to 50% marks Less than 50% to 35% marks Less than 35% marks Avg. Score 39% in 2016 & 35.8% in 2017

10

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

27 24

18 15 12

7

9 5

5 0

0 0

0 0

A

B

Grade

44

2017

D E L H I

M L A s

C

Grade

D

R E P O R T

E

C A R D

F

45

Perceived Least Corrupt

No. of MLAs(59)

30

Avg. Score 67.8% in 2016 & 60.9% in 2017

25 20

A - 100% to 80% marks B - Less than 80% to 70% marks C - Less than 70% to 60% marks D - Less than 60% to 50% marks E - Less than 50% to 35% marks F - Less than 35% marks

28

20

2016

15

2017

15

20

6

5

5

5

0

0

A

B

C

D

Grade

0

0 0

E

F

12 8

30

35 No. of MLAs (59)

Avg. Score 51.7% in 2016 & 11.5% in 2017

30 25

5

0

0 A

B

15 10

(*)

46

29

8

New FIRs Registered as on 31 December 2016

26*

Charge sheeted as on 31st December 2016

20

st

2

5 0

Good - above 70% Average - 70% to 50% Poor - below 50%

Number of MLAs with: FIR as per Affidavit February 2015

Good

Grade

M L A s

R E P O R T

2016 2017

70

58.44

60

D

E

F

66.04 66.34 52.92

2016 2017

50 40 30 20

0

AAP (57)

Poor

Includes 6 MLAs had FIRs before elections as declared in their affidavit.

D E L H I

Grade

10

0

Average

C

1

Party-wise Average Score

18

20

8 8

Avg. Score 64% in 2016 & 64.9% in 2017

2

Average Score (in %)

38


9

8

Criminal Record 40

14

13

14

4

5

16

15

10

ABCDEF-

2017

2016

16

6

10

20

18 No. of MLAs(59)

33

35

Perceived Accesibility

C A R D

BJP (2)

Political Party (No. of MLAs) Note: In 2016, 55 MLAs from AAP and 3 from BJP were ranked. In 2017, 57 MLAs from AAP and 2 from BJP were ranked.

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

47

T o p 5 M L A s in O v erall

Average Score for Diﬀerent Parameters 100.00 90.00

92.41 84.75

Overall Rank

Zone

Assembly Constituency No.

Political Party

Rohini

6

AAP

Najafgarh

37

Shahdara North

Score (out of 100)

2016

Mohinder Goyal

75.04

9

1

AAP

Bhavna Gaur

72.38

7

2

69

BJP

Jagdish Pradhan

70.52

2

3

Shahdara North

63

AAP

Rajendra Pal Gautam

67.87

5

4

Central

41

AAP

Praveen Kumar

67.32

17

5

MLAs Name

2017

Average Score (in %)

80.00 70.00

63.98

62.94

64.91

67.84 60.92

57.59

60.00 50.00

58.83 53.38

51.72

49.88 48.26

B o tto m 5 M L A s in O v erall

39.04 35.76

40.00 30.00 20.00

11.53

0.00

Overall Score

67.84

Clean Criminal Record 51.72

60.92

11.53

53.38

Perceived Accessibility

Perceived Least Corrupt

39.04

Perception of Public Services 62.94

63.98

35.76

57.59

64.91

Attendance

Issues Raised

Quality of Issues Raised

2016

92.41

49.88

2017

84.75

48.26

Political Party

Central

52

AAP

Rohini

9

Central

Score (out of 100)

2016

2017

Sahi Ram

27.26

58

59

AAP

Rituraj Govind

29.10

51

58

49

AAP

Dinesh Mohaniya

29.17

39

57

West

31

AAP

Mahinder Yadav

30.60

53

56

Rohini

11

AAP

Raghuvinder Shokeen

39.18

57

55

Zone

10.00

58.83

Overall Rank


MLAs Name

B o tto m 4 M L A s in Attend ance Political Party

Najafgarh

33

AAP

Najafgarh

34

Najafgarh

36

West

27

Zone

48

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

Overall Rank


Score (out of 10)

2016

2017

Adarsh Shastri

0

14

38

AAP

Gulab Singh

0

23

47

AAP

Devinder Kumar Sehrawat

0

22

51

AAP

Jarnail Singh

4

20

21

D E L H I

MLAs Name

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

49

Bottom 7 MLAs in Quality Issues Raised

Top 5 MLAs in Quality Issues Raised Overall Rank

Zone


Political Party

Rohini

13

BJP

Shahdara North

69

Najafgarh

Score (out of 27)

2016

Vijender Kumar

17.14

36

13

BJP

Jagdish Pradhan

16.79

2

3

37

AAP

Bhavna Gaur

16.78

7

2

Civil Line

20

AAP

Alka Lamba

16.75

10

17

Rohini

6

AAP

Mohinder Goyal

16.43

9

1

MLAs Name

2017

Political Party

Central

52

AAP

Rohini

9

Central West

Score (out of 27)

2016

2017

Sahi Ram

0

58

59

AAP

Rituraj Govind

0

51

58

49

AAP

Dinesh Mohaniya

0

39

57

31

AAP

Mahinder Yadav

0

53

56

Rohini

11

AAP

Raghuvinder Shokeen

0

57

55

Shahdara North

65

AAP

Mohd. Ishraque

0

44

53

City

21

AAP

Asim Ahmed Khan

0

NA

46

Zone

Top 5 MLAs in Accessibility Political Party

Civil Line

18

AAP

South

43

Central

Zone

Political Party

34

West

31

AAP

35

16

Sadar Paharganj

23

5.28

58

59

Shahdara North

Mohinder Goyal

5.27

9

1

Avtar Singh

5.21

16

26

2016

Akhilesh Pati Tripathi

5.62

55

AAP

Somnath Bharti

5.28

52

AAP

Sahi Ram

Rohini

6

AAP

Central

51

AAP

MLAs Name

2017

Score (out of 6)

2016

2017

Mahinder Yadav

1.80

53

56

AAP

Vishesh Ravi

2.18

12

50

65

AAP

Mohd. Ishraque

2.37

44

53

Rohini

14

AAP

Bandana Kumari

2.46

NA

33

Central

54

AAP

Amanatullah Khan

2.48

49

54

Top 5 MLAs in Perceived Least Corrupt Political Party

Civil Line

16

AAP

West

29

West

50

Political Party

Shahdara North

64

AAP

40

Civil Line

18

32

49

Sadar Paharganj

7.14

42

14

7.06

47

25

2016

Jitender Singh Tomar

7.85

NA

24

AAP

Jarnail Singh

7.24

41

32

AAP

Naresh Balyan

7.20

South

50

AAP

Saurabh Bharadwaj

South

44

AAP

Parmila Tokas

D E L H I

MLAs Name

M L A s

R E P O R T

Overall Rank


Score (out of 10)

Zone

C A R D

MLAs Name

Bottom 5 MLAs in Perceived Least Corrupt

Overall Rank


Overall Rank


Score (out of 6)

Zone

MLAs Name

Bottom 5 MLAs in Accessibility Overall Rank


Overall Rank


2017

Score (out of 10)

2016

2017

Sarita Singh

4.37

25

45

AAP

Akhilesh Pati Tripathi

4.51

55

34

19

AAP

Som Dutt

4.68

43

52

Central

52

AAP

Sahi Ram

4.89

58

59

Civil Line

3

AAP

Pankaj Kant Singhal

4.89

8

9

Zone

D E L H I

MLAs Name

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

51

T op 6 MLA s in Issues Raise d

T H E metho d o l o g y Overall Rank

Zone


Political Party

Rohini

13

BJP

Shahdara North

69

Civil Line

Score (out of 10)

2016

Vijender Kumar

10

36

13

BJP

Jagdish Pradhan

9.82

2

3

20

AAP

Alka Lamba

9.65

10

17

South

43

AAP

Somnath Bharti

9.48

35

16

In order to design the research and get the desired output, it was important to answer the following two questions:

Najafgarh

37

AAP

Bhavna Gaur

9.13

7

2

a. On what parameters should the performance of MLAs be evaluated?

Rohini

6

AAP

Mohinder Goyal

9.13

9

1

b. How should the research be designed in order to represent areas of each MLA and meet the right people?

MLAs Name

1. The Matrix – Scale of Ranking

2017

Bottom MLAs - Issues Raised in 2017 (0 to 5 Issues Raised) Assembly Constituency No.

Political Party

No. of Issues Raised

Rank

Central

52

AAP

Sahi Ram

0

59

Rohini

9

AAP

Rituraj Govind

0

58

Central

49

AAP

Dinesh Mohaniya

0

57

West

31

AAP

Mahinder Yadav

0

56

Rohini

11

AAP

Raghuvinder Shokeen

0

55

Shahdara North

65

AAP

Mohd. Ishraque

0

53

Najafgarh

36

AAP

Devinder Kumar Sehrawat

5

51

Sadar Paharganj

23

AAP

Vishesh Ravi

4

50

City

21

AAP

Asim Ahmed Khan

0

46

Shahdara South

55

AAP

Raju Dhingan

2

42

West

30

AAP

Rajesh Rishi

4

41

Najafgarh

35

AAP

Kailash Gahlot

1

37

South

46

AAP

Kartar Singh Tanwar

4

36

Civil Line

5

AAP

Ajesh Yadav

4

35

Rohini

14

AAP

Bandana Kumari

5

33

Karol Bagh

24

AAP

Hazari Lal Chauhan

2

30

Karol Bagh

25

AAP

Shiv Charan Goel

5

29

Central

51

AAP

Avtar Singh

2

26

D E L H I

M L A s

Zone

52

Name of the MLA

R E P O R T

C A R D

The Matrix for measuring the functioning of the MLAs has been designed by Praja with inputs from reputed people with sectoral knowledge in governance, political science, market research, media.

For the first question; The Indian Democracy functions on rules and strictures laid down in The Constitution of India adopted on 26th November, 1949. The Constitution has been amended on numerous occasions and various acts have been passed and adopted by subsequent assemblies to strengthen the functioning of centre, state and local self government institutions. All these acts/legislations with their base in the Constitution give our elected representatives needed powers for functioning; have built the needed checks and balances; and serve as the source of the terms of reference for the elected representatives on all aspects of their conduct as the people’s representatives. Hence the first parameter for evaluating the performance of MLAs is based solely in the mechanisms and instruments, and duties and responsibilities as led in The Constitution of India. However; The Constitution itself derives its power from the free will of its citizens as also the document itself states that it has been adopted, enacted and given to themselves by the people. Hence the perceptions of the people who are represented by the elected representatives are the other important, necessary parameter for evaluating the performance of the elected representatives (the MLAs). Thus, to answer the second question it is necessary to study people’s perceptions of the MLAs' performance, in their respective constituencies. The next few pages will elaborate the study design and details of the study conducted to judge the performance of MLAs in Delhi; but before we get into details, it is important to understand the sources of data and its broad usage in the ranking matrix. D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

53

The following information was required to judge the performance of each MLA in the city: 1. Some of the tangible parameters like an elected MLAs attendance in the assembly, the number of issues raised she/he has raised in the house, importance of those issues raised, and utilisation of funds allotted to her/him.

Sr. No.

Indicator

1

Present

2. Some parameters on her/his background such as educational qualification, income tax records and criminal record (if any).

A

Sessions Attended (*)

10

Based on percentage of attendance. 1) 100% to 91%10; 2) 90% to 76% - 8; 3) 75% to 61% -6; 4) 60% to 51% - 4; and 5) below 50% - 0.

B

Number of issues raised

10

Against Group Percentage Rank. 16 being the top most percentile and so on to the lowest.

C

Importance of issues raised (Quality of issues raised)

27

Weightages are given to issues raised through the questions depending on whether they belong to the State List, Central List, are in the domain of Municipal Authority or are in the shared domain of State/ Centre / Municipal. The scale is given in the separate table below.

3. Some soft parameters like the perception/impression of the people in her/his constituency, awareness about them, satisfaction with their work and improvement in the quality of life because of the MLA. Once the areas of evaluation were finalised, it was important to decide upon the methodology which would best provide the required information. Information mentioned in points 1 and 2 above was gathered from RTI and by means of secondary research. MLA Scores have been derived out of maximum 100 marks with 60% weightage given to tangible facts about the MLA. For the Information on the 3rd point a primary survey was conducted amongst the citizens in each constituency to evaluate the perceived performance of the MLA. 40% weightage was given to perceived performance of MLAs in the minds of common man. The data used for points 1 and 2 has been collected from government sources: a. Election Commission of India’s Website.

Scale of Ranking Max Comments

In the aggregate scale (out of 100) the following weightage is given: Centre gets 3; State gets 13; Municipal Corporation Delhi gets 4 and Centre / State / Municipal Corporation Delhi gets 7. D

b. Under Right to Information Act from Vidhan Bhavan. c. Delhi Government Website.

Total Local Area Development Funds Utilised during (April 2016 to March 2017)

5

Total

52

d. Under Right to Information Act from Delhi Police. People’s perception as per point 3 has been mapped through an opinion poll of 24,301 people across the city of Delhi by Hansa Market Research conducted

Calculation for the current financial year is done for the sanctioned fund of Rs. 4 crore approved till March 2017. (1) 100% (or more) to 91%- 5; (2) 90% to 76% 4; (3) 75% to 61% - 3; (4) 60% to 51% - 2; and (5) below 50% - 0. Please refer pg. 60 for more.

2

Past

A

Education Qualification

1

A minimum of 10th Pass - 1; if not - 0

B

Income Tax

2

(1) Possessing PAN Card - 1 (2) Disclosing Income in Affidavit - 1

C

Criminal Record

5

If the candidate has zero cases registered against her/ him, then 5; else as below:

through a structured questionnaire.

It is very important to understand here that the matrix is objectively designed and provides no importance to the political party of the representative or to any personal/political ideology. Criminalisation of politics in the country has been growing since independence and is a phenomenon which if not checked now can destroy the democratic foundations of our nation. Hence personal criminal record related parameters pertaining to the elected representative are taken into consideration such as: their FIR cases registered against them as stated in the election affidavit; new FIR cases registered against them after being elected in the current term; and important pending charge sheets. 54

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

(1) Criminal Cases Registered containing the following charges: Murder, Rape, Molestation, Riot, Extortion - 0 (2) Other criminal cases than the above mentioned - 3 8

Total

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

55

Scale of Ranking Sr. No.

Indicator

Max Comments

3

Perception

A

Perception of Public Services

20

Score on Public Services

B

Awareness & Accessibility

6

Score on Awareness amongst people about their representative, their political party and ease of access to the representative

C

Corruption Index

10

Score on perceived personal corruption of the representative

D

Broad Measures

4

Score on overall satisfaction and improvement in quality of life

Total

40

4

Negative marking for new criminal cases registered during the year

-5

For any new FIR registered during the year.

5

Negative marking for Charge sheet

-5

For any Charge sheet in a criminal case.

6

Negative marking for no annual pro-active disclosures by the elected representatives of Assets and Liabilities and Criminal record

-5

This can be done on own website, newspaper, Praja Website or any other source which should be announced publicly. Also marks would be cut for wrong disclosures in the above mentioned forums. (**)

Based on a opinion poll of 24,301 people spread across different constituencies in the city of Delhi

Total

100

(*) Sessions taken into account for this report card are 22nd March 2016 to 18th January 2017. (**) This negative parameter on proactive disclosures has not been applied. But as one of the primary purpose of the Report Card is to promote transparency amongst elected representatives, it is imperative that they proactively provide personal information on their personal annual economic status and to emphasise their probity in public life, they should share every year their updated criminal record.

2. Parameters for Past Records as per Affidavit Parameters for Past Records are based on information in election affidavit that includes educational, criminal and financial records of MLAs. Total eight Marks out of Maximum 100 marks are allocated for this parameter. a. Education If the elected representative has declared in his affidavit, education qualification as 10th pass or more than that then on the scale one mark is allocated, else zero marks are given. 56

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

As a developing 21st century country, basic modern education is an important criterion for human development. Even at lowest clerical jobs in the government, the government insists on a minimum educational level. Going by the same logic and the times, it is prudent that a similar yardstick be applied to our elected representatives. However, we also believe that the educational parameter should be given a minimal weightage in the overall scheme vis-a-vis other parameters, that are more crucial for judging performance of the elected representatives. b. Income Tax It is widely published and believed in India that annual income levels and wealth of those who are elected sees a manifold increase in the few years when they represent. On this parameter, marks are allocated only for declaring returns (one mark) and for possessing a PAN card (one mark), as per the affidavit. c. Criminal Record Criminalisation of politics is a sad reality. A significant number of elected representatives have a criminal record i.e. 1) they have FIRs registered against them; 2) charge sheets filled; and 3) even convictions given by the courts of law. There is no excuse for not having moral probity in public life. It is the right of the citizens to have people representing them with no criminal records. Hence the scheme of ranking has taken into account marks for people with clean records: i. Those with absolutely no criminal FIRs registered are given five marks. ii. Those with FIRs registered against, with cases containing the following charges: murder, rape, molestation, riot and extortion are given zero marks. iii. Those with other FIRs registered against, other than those mentioned in No. ii above, are given three marks. We have negative markings as explained in No. 5 ahead for other parameters related to crime records like charge sheet. Kindly note that allocating scoring for each individual case would have been complex, instead scoring for cases after them being categorised as above seemed more logical and hence number of individual cases are not that important but the category of case needed for the scoring. 3. Parameters for Present Performance in the State Legislature In an indirect, representative democracy like India’s, citizens elect their representatives so that these representatives can represent them in the houses of legislation and deliberate on issues related to the citizens and form needed legislations under the guidelines of and using the mechanisms of the Constitution. Thus it is very clear that the weightages in the performance scale have to be more biased to these functions of the elected representatives i.e. of Deliberation. D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

57

a. Session Attendance

Weightage to Issues raised

The mandate given by citizens to the representatives is to attend the business of the respective legislative houses. It is hence prudent that the representatives attend 100% or near to 100% sessions of their respective houses. Hence the marking as follows based on percentage of attendance: (1) 100% to 91% - 10 marks; (2) 90% to 76% - eight marks; (3) 75% to 61% - six marks; (4) 60% to 51% - four marks; and (5) below 50% - zero marks. b. Number of Issues Raised There cannot be really a set benchmark for the right number of issues raised that have to be asked by a representative. However given the range and complexity of issues that our country is facing, it is necessary for the representative to raise as many issues as they can, which are necessary for the citizens. Hence to stimulate the representatives to ask maximum number of issues raised the scale uses the percentile system for scoring. Devices used for asking ‘Issues Raised’ that have been considered in the marking as per Delhi Assembly Rules: • • • • • • • • • • • •

Calling Attention (Rule 54) Motion for Adjournment (Rule 59 - 65) Motions (Rule 107 - 117) No Confidence Motions (Rule 251 - 252) Resolutions/Private member Resolution (Rule 89) Short Duration Discussions (Rule 55 - 58) Short Notice Questions (Rule 32) Special Mention (Rule 280) Starred Questions (Rule 33) Unstarred Questions (Rule 33) Questions to private members (Rule - 47) Questions Involving Breach of Privilege and Contempt (Rule 66-83)

The marking for this section is out of a maximum 10 marks that the representative can get for being the person with the maximum number of issues raised. The marking here is done against Group Percentage Rank: 10 being the top most percentile and so on to the lowest. c. Importance of Issues Raised (Quality of Issues Raised) It is not just the number of issues raised that are asked but also the quality of issues raised. The system for weightages here is designed as below: Step 1: Issues are given certain weightages depending on them being prime functions of the State Legislature or of the Municipal bodies or the Centre. As explained ahead in weightages to issues raised. 58

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

Classification

Issues

Social Infrastructure

Physical Infrastructure

Economic Infrastructure

Governance/Policy Making

Agriculture/ Food Infrastructure Other

Weightages

Civic (civic amenities such as roads, sewage, etc.) Community Welfare Crime Education Health Social cultural concerns Energy Transport Forest

8

Financial Institutions

2

Industries

8

Revenue

6

Corruption & Scams

6

Schemes / Policies

6

Irrigation

4

Agriculture

2

Animal Husbandry

3

Other issues related

3

6 5 9 8 5 9 9 1

Total

41

19 10

18

9

3 100

Step 2: Issues are categorised into: n Centre based n State based n Municipal Corporation Delhi [Local Self Government (LSG)] n Centre / State / Municipal Corporation Delhi This Categorisation is based on the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India, the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Act, 1991 and the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957. Overall weightage is given respective in the ratio of 3:13:4:7 in the above categories. Thus after applying weightage for a issue raised under Step 1 for a particular issue (for e.g. 9 for Muncipal Education), weightage under Step 2 (for e.g. 4 for LSG) is applied based on whether the issue is under the domain of state, local self government, centre or jointly under Centre / State / LSG. Formula representation of the calculation done to determine importance of the issue raised by categorisation in seventh schedule D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

59

I -Weightage; Q - No. of Issues Raised on a particular subject; T - Total; C - Category; M - Marks as per categorisation (I1 * Q1)+(I1 * Q1)+.....(Inth * Qnth) = T1; (I2 * Q2)+(I2 * Q2)+.....(Inth * Qnth) = T2 (I3 * Q3)+(I3 * Q3)+.....(Inth * Qnth) = T3; T1+T2+T3 = Tx; (T1 * C1)+(T2 * C2)+(T3 * C3) = TCy TCx / Ty = M

Step 3: The score in step 2 (M) is further weighted by score for Number of Issue Raised (Point C). Illustration for marking Importance of Issues Raised If a MLA has asked a total of 5 issues: 1 related to crime under centre category, 2 related to civic-water supply under state category, 1 related to Drainage under Municipal Corporation Delhi and 1 related to community welfare under joint domain of Centre / State / Municipal; then the marking will be as below: Centre (3) Crime (5)

State (13)

Municipal (1)

C/S/M* (7)

5*1=5

Civic-Water Supply (8)

8*2=16

Civic-Drainage (8)

8*1=8

Community Welfare (6)

6*1=6

Total

5

16

8

6

5+16+8+6=35

Total * Category Weightage

5*3=15

16*13= 208

8*4=32

6*7=42

15+208+32+42 =297

297/35 = 8 Assuming the score for number of issues raised is 3 out of 10.  (((((8/27)×100)+((3/10)×100))/2)×27)/100=8.29 out of maximum 27. So the MLA gets 8.29 Marks. (*) Centre / State / Municipal Corporation Delhi

d. Total Local Area Development Funds Utilised during April 2016 to March 2017 MLAs get a Local Area Development Fund during their tenure. This fund they can spend as per their discretion on certain specified development work in their constituencies. It is necessary that the funds are utilised in a planned phased manner to achieve optimal results. And this can only happen if the representative has a appropriate plan right from the start of their term and that they do not spend the fund in an adhoc manner and that not entirely towards the end of their terms without focus on the needs of their constituency. 60

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

Hence the calculation for the current financial year is done for the sanctioned fund of Rs. 4 crore approved till March 2017. (1) 100% (or more) to 91%- 5; (2) 90% to 76% - 4; (3) 75% to 61% - 3; (4) 60% to 51% - 2; and (5) below 50% - 0. Note: Local Area Development fund for the current year has not been calculated in the scoring because there is discrepancy in the RTI response and the fund utilisation uploaded on the Delhi Government website in some of the cases and also one of the district has not shared any data. Hence to maintain parity in the scoring for this year we have not calculated marks in this section for all the MLAs. 4. Parameters for People’s Perception as per Opinion Poll Since perceived performance was given a weightage of 40 points, we divided it further in to 4 broad areas in order to evaluate the performance in detail. All these four areas were given differential weightage based to the importance in defining the MLAs performance. The weightages were divided in the following scheme: n Perception of Public Services (impression of the people about the facilities in the area) was given a weightage of 20 points, n Awareness & Accessibility of the MLA was given a weightage of 6 points, n Corruption index was given a weightage of 10 points and n Broad overall measures were given a weightage of 4 points The rationale for giving the above scoring points was to give more importance to the key issues like facilities in the area & corruption as compared to MLA being aware and accessible or overall feel of the people being positive. This is because we believe that scoring positively overall or being popular is actually a function of your work in different areas. Hence, these areas should be given more importance than the overall satisfaction. Moreover a blanket overall performance for an individual may be good but when interrogated deeply about different traits the positives and negatives can be clearly pointed. The next step after assigning weightages to four broad areas was to make sure that facilities which come under the state jurisdiction get more importance than the ones which come under the central government’s jurisdiction or the local self government’s jurisdiction. Hence the weightage for Perception of Public Services was further divided into a hierarchy of 3 levels to meet the desired objective. Level 1 included facilities which are more critical to state government whereas Level 3 included facilities that are more critical to central government or the local self government. n Level 1 – This level included areas like Traffic Jams & congestion, Availability/Adequacy of public transport facilities like Auto rickshaw, Taxis, Buses & Local trains, Power Supply, Water Supply, Pollution problems in your area. It was given a weightage of 10 points. D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

61

n Level 2 – This level included areas Condition of roads, Availability of public gardens, Hospitals and other medical facilities, Appropriate schools for availing education facilities, Water logging, Instances of crime, Availability of footpaths and pedestrian walking areas. It was given a weightage of 7 points.

p 2 – 3 prominent areas in the ward were identified and the sample was divided amongst them.

p Respondents were intercepted in households in these areas and the required information was obtained from them.

n Level 3 – This level included areas like Law & Order, Cleanliness & Sanitation facilities. It was given a weightage of 3 points.

n Sample composition of age & gender was corrected to match the universe profile using the baseline data from IRS.

Research Design:

n The final sample spread achieved for each assembly constituency is as follows:

n A Member of Legislative Assembly, or MLA, is a representative elected by the voters of an electoral district to the Legislature of a State in the Indian system of Government. An electoral district (also known as a constituency) is a distinct territorial subdivision for holding a separate election for a seat in a legislative body. n Winner of this seat in the constituency is termed as an MLA and has the power to manage the functioning of the constituency. n In Delhi, each constituency has further been divided into councillor constituency wards and a municipal Councillor is elected to oversee the functioning of each ward. Hence, there is a clear delegation of responsibilities at the ground level. n Since, our study focused on evaluating the performance of MLAs it was necessary to cover and represent all the assembly constituencies to which each of these MLAs belonged. n Hence, we decided to cover a sample from each constituency. However, it is also known that constituencies differ in size as calculated in terms of area coverage and population. The number of the wards within each assembly constituency also differs. n The total sample for the study covered for 68 MLA Assembly constituency (Excluding Cantonment and New Delhi Constituency) = 24,301 respondents. n Next step was to define the target group for the study. We finalised on covering within each ward: p Both Males & Females p 18 years and above (eligible to vote) n Once the target group was defined, quotas for representing gender and age groups were set. n The quotas were set on the basis of age and gender split available through Indian Readership Study, a large scale baseline study conducted nationally by Media Research Users Council (MRUC) & Hansa Research group. n The required information was collected through face to face household interviews with the help of structured questionnaire. 62

n In order to meet the respondent, following sampling process was followed:

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

Parameters of Evaluation: While deciding the parameters of evaluation for a MLA, we wanted to make sure that we covered issues at both the state & central level and hence decided to capture the information on four important aspects. These were as follows: n Impression of the people about different facilities in his/her area

p Condition of roads

p Traffic jams & Congestion of roads

p Availability of public gardens/open playgrounds

p Availability/Adequacy of public transport facilities like Auto rickshaw, Taxis, Buses & Local trains

p Hospitals and other medical facilities

p Appropriate schools for availing education facilities

p Power Supply

p Water Supply

p Water logging during rainy season

p Pollution problems

p Instances of Crime

p Law & Order situation

p Cleanliness & Sanitation facilities

p Availability of footpaths and pedestrian walking areas

n Awareness & Accessibility of the MLA n Perception of corruption for MLA n Broad overall measures like overall satisfaction with MLA & improvement in quality of life because of MLA.

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

63

S A MP LE S IZE: BY A SSEMBLY CONSTITUENCY MA P OF DELHI N

Constituency No.

Sample Size

Constituency No.

Area Name

Sample Size

1

Narela

383

35

Najafgarh

345

2

Burari

338

36

Bijwasan

338

3

Timarpur

348

37

Palam

383

4

Adarsh Nagar

352

39

RAJINDER NAGAR

349

5

Badli

351

41

Jangpura

366

6

Rithala

514

42

Kasturba Nagar

383

7

Bawana (SC)

347

43

Malviya Nagar

341

8

Mundka

359

44

R K Puram

335

9

Kirari

385

45

Mehrauli

346

10

Sultan Pur Majra (SC)

333

46

Chhatarpur

367

11

Nangloi Jat

337

47

Deoli (SC)

359

12

Mangol Puri (SC)

349

48

Ambedkar Nagar

347

13

Rohini

344

49

Sangam Vihar

339

14

Shalimar Bagh

342

50

Greater Kailash

363

15

Shakurbasti

345

51

Kalkaji

394

16

Tri nagar

373

52

Tuglakabad Nct

337

17

Wazirpur

379

53

Badapur

317

18

Model Town

340

54

Okhla

337

19

Sadar Bazar

345

55

Trilokpuri

349

20

Chandi Chowk

372

56

Kondli

362

21

Matia Mahal

393

57

Patparganj

342

341

58

Laxmi Nagar

353

414

59

Vishwas Nagar

344

338

60

Krishna Nagar

381

Gandhi Nagar

343

22 23 24

Not to Scale

Area Name

Ballimaran Karol Bagh Patel Nagar (SC)

25

Moti Nagar

350

61

26

Madipur

346

62

Shahdara

336

27

Rajouri Garden

344

63

Seema puri

342

28

Hari Nagar

344

64

Rohtas Nagar

336

29

Tilak Nagar

340

65

Sheelampur

341

Ghonda

342

30

Janakpuri

341

66

31

Vikaspuri

354

67

Babarpur

348

32

Uttam Nagar

402

68

Gokalpur

366

33

Dwarka

346

69

Mustafabad

427

34

Matiala

407

70

Karawal Nagar

347

Note : Survey is not conducted for constituency no. 38 & 40 (Cantonment & New Delhi) 64

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

65

Illustration of Scorecard for an MLA: Sr. Parameters No.

66

Scores of Netted Variables

Broad Groupings

Scores

Maximum Score

Sr. No. 1

1

Recall for party name to which the MLA belongs Awareness & Accessibility

77

100

2

Recall for name of the MLA


76

100

3

Accessibility of the MLA


69

100

4

Satisfaction with the MLA

Broad overall measures

59

100

5

Improvement in Lifestyle

Broad overall measures

69

100

6

Corruption

Corruption Index

72

100

7

Power Supply

Impression of people-Level 1

54

100

8

Instances of Crime


61

100

9

Law & Order situation


59

100

10

Pollution problems


78

100

11

Hospitals and other medical facilities


67

100

12

Appropriate schools for availing education facilities


68

100

13

Condition of Roads


63

100

14

Traffic jams & Congestion of roads


76

100

15

Availability of public gardens/open playgrounds


56

100

16

Availability/Adequacy of Public Transport facilities like Auto rickshaw, Taxis, Buses & Local Trains


65

100

17

Water Supply


77

100

18

Water Logging during rainy season


79

100

19

Cleanliness & Sanitation facilities


66

100

20

Availability of footpaths and pedestrian walking areas


57

100

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

Netted Variables

Weightage Assigned

Scores

Maximum Score


6

74

100

2

Broad Overall Measures

4

64

100

3

Corruption Index

10

72

100

4


10

69

100

5


7

64

100

6


3

63

100

Weighted Final Scores Perceived performance of the MLA = ((6*74)+(4*64)+(10*72)+(10*69)+(7*64)+(3*63))/100 = 27.4 out of 40 This score was further added with the performance on hard parameters and a composite score for each MLA was derived. Weighting the data: When conducting a survey, it is common to compare the figures obtained in a sample with universe or population values. These values may come from the same survey from a different time period or from other sources. In this case, we compared the age & gender compositions achieved in our survey with the similar compositions in IRS study (Indian Readership Survey). In the process, minor deviations for demographics were corrected. Hence, weighting not only helped us to remove the demographic skews from our sample data but also ensured that the representation of demography was correct. 5. Parameters for Negative Marking Negative marking for new FIR cases registered If there has been a new FIR registered against the elected representative after her/his election then this happens to be a matter of concern; and hence out of the marks earned by the representative, five marks would be deducted. Do note that, in the process of allocating marks we did not take into account the number of new criminal FIR cases (as per Representation of the People Act, 1951), but simply takes into account even a single occurrence for allocating marks.

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

67

Negative marking for Charge Sheet registered A charge sheet signifies prima facie evidence in the case. This is again a serious concern for moral probity of the representative. Hence out of the marks earned by the representative, five marks would be deducted for charge sheets in criminal cases (both from the affidavit and from the new FIR cases as per Representation of the People Act, 1951). Negative marking for no annual pro-active disclosures by the elected representatives of Assets and Liabilities and Criminal record As per the election commission norms the candidate standing for elections have to file an affidavit detailing amongst other things, their own assets and liabilities and criminal record. The candidate who gets elected later, does not share this information with her/his constituency or the election commission until and unless she/he stands for re-election or for a new election on different seat or post. However given the need of the time, we feel that it is necessary that the elected representatives proactively make their assets and liabilities (income status) and criminal records available to their constituencies at the end of every financial year when they are representing. This can be done through Newspapers or other Public Medias or through their own Websites or through Praja Website. This will bring larger transparency.

T H E FOU R LIO N T O R C H The four lions of the Ashoka Pillar, symbolizing power, courage, pride and confidence are the ethos behind the Indian Republic as embedded in our Constitution. We salute the top 3 ranking MLAs of Delhi as torch bearers of this idea. They have topped the list on an objective ranking system as explained earlier in this report card, performing more efficiently relative to their peers. Jai Hind.

#1: GOLD #2: SILVER

#3: BRONZE

Trophy 1 – T he Best Elected Representative as per Praja Matrix of Ranking Performance of MLAs. Trophy 2 – T he Second Best Elected Representative as per Praja Matrix of Ranking Performance of MLAs. Trophy 3 – T he Third Best Elected Representative as per Praja Matrix of Ranking Performance of MLAs. 68

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D

69

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, HAVING SOLEMNLY RESOLVED TO CONSTITUTE INDIA INTO A SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC AND TO SECURE TO ALL ITS CITIZENS: JUSTICE, SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL; LIBERTY OF THOUGHT, EXPRESSION, BELIEF, FAITH AND WORSHIP; EQUALITY OF STATUS AND OF OPPORTUNITY; AND TO PROMOTE AMONG THEM ALL FRATERNITY ASSURING THE DIGNITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL AND THE UNITY AND INTEGRITY OF THE NATION.

70

D E L H I

M L A s

R E P O R T

C A R D