Local Governments in India

Dr. Keshab Chandra Mandal

E-Mail: mandalkeshab2013@gmail.com

Since time immemorial, India has developed a number of systems based on community management of local affairs. The community based management of local affairs is called panchayats, which literally means a council of five persons. “The word 'panchayat' is a traditional one, referring to the five elders in a village who mediated conflict and spoke on behalf of all the residents of a village in pre-modern times.”³⁶During that time, participation of common people and especially women in the decision making process was restricted and the functions of the local governance were akin to what was developed in other ancient agrarian phases like the Russian ‘Mir’, German ‘Mark’ and the medieval ‘Manor’ of England. 

    We have already learnt that sabhas were existent in the Rig-Vedic period (1200 BC), which were considered as the village self-governing bodies in ancient India. With the evolution of time, these bodies became panchayats (council of five persons), which had large powers, both executive and judicial. The panchayats used to settle local disputes, distributed land, collected taxes out of the produce and paid the government's share on behalf of the village. “Above a number of these village councils there was a larger panchayat or council to supervise and interfere if necessary.”³⁷ These local governments then were founded mainly on casteism.  Besides, new feudal (mis)chiefs like jaminders, jotedars and revenue collectors emerged between the rulers and the people, which began the stagnation and decline of village panchayats. The reforms brought in the administration by the British Raj like the establishment of local, civil and criminal courts, revenue and police organization, further helped to decline the autonomy of the panchayats and brought down the powers of the local chiefs and revenue collectors. 

Evolution of Local Governments during the British Rule in India

With the establishment of the British Government in India, the stable village government was widely shaken who adopted a policy of centralization and it is a fact that panchayat had never been priority of the British rulers. The British Raj was interested only with safeguarding their economic and political interests – increasing tax collection and strengthening the Raj in India. This was necessitated from the severe financial crisis arisen after the sepoy mutiny in 1857. As a result, the traditional village panchayats were disintegrated, and panchayat functionaries lost their age-old powers and functions and the tehsildars then assumed a new role of village headmen. Thus the government officials turned as spokesmen of the village people and a gulf was created between the rulers and the ruled.

    Lord Mayo is called the forerunner in the establishment of Local self-government in India. In 1870 during the viceroyalty of Lord Mayo, the local government system got its first impetus.  The Famine Commission of 1880 also emphasized the importance of local self-government. Later, Lord Ripon’s resolution of 1882 on local self-government considered it as a means of popular and political education. However, the issue of local self-government in the country was taken up in right earnest in 1907-08 by the Royal Commission on Decentralization. This commission recommended formation of village panchayats so that the local government might be built up from the bottom. The Government of India Act, 1919 made local self-government a transferred subject, which earmarked the growth of these bodies under the patronage of elected ministers. However, the thrust of this 'compelled' decentralization was with respect to municipal administration.

    The Resolution of Lord Mayo for the first time gave the needed impetus to the development of local institutions in India. It was a landmark in the evolution of colonial policy towards local government. The real benchmarking of the government policy on decentralization can, however, be attributed to Lord Ripon who, in his famous resolution on local self-government on May 18, 1882, recognized the twin considerations of local government: (i) administrative efficiency and (ii) political education. The famous “Ripon Resolution’’, which focused on towns, provided for local bodies consisting of a large majority of elected non-official members and presided over by a non-official chairperson. This resolution met with resistance from colonial administrators. The progress of local self-government was tardy with only half-hearted steps taken in setting up municipal bodies. Rural decentralization remained a neglected area of administrative reform.

    In 1907, the Royal Commission on Decentralization under the chairmanship of C.E.H. Hobhouse recognized the importance of panchayats at the village level. The Commission recommended that "it is most desirable, alike in the interests of decentralization and in order to associate the people with the local tasks of administration that an attempt should be made to constitute and develop village panchayats for the administration of local village affairs." On the other hand, the Montague-Chelmsford reforms, 1919 brought local self-government as a provincial transferred subject, under the domain of Indian Ministers in the provinces. The provincial autonomy under the Government of India Act, 1935, introduced popularly elected governments in the provinces and these governments enacted legislations to further democratize institutions of local self government.

    But, the Montague-Chelmsford reform (1919) was unable to make panchayat institutions truly democratic and vibrant. However, the most significant development of this period was the 'establishment of village panchayats in a number of provinces, that were no longer mere ad hoc judicial tribunal, but representative institutions symbolizing the corporate character of the village and having a wide jurisdiction in respect of civic matters'. By 1925, eight provinces had passed panchayat Acts and by 1926, six native states had also passed panchayat laws.

The provincial autonomy under the Government of India Act, 1935, marked the evolution of panchayats in India. Popularly elected governments in provinces enacted legislations to further democratize institutions of local self-government. But the system of responsible government at the grassroots level was least responsible. D.P. Mishra, the then minister for local self-government under the Government of India Act of 1935 in Central Provinces was of the view that 'the working of our local bodies... in our province and perhaps in the whole country presents a tragic picture... 'Inefficiency' and 'local body' have become synonymous terms....'. 

    In spite of various reports, resolutions and committees such as the Royal Commission on Decentralization (1907), the report of Montague and Chelmsford on Constitutional Reform (1919), the Government of India Resolution (1918) etc., a hierarchical administrative structure based on supervision and control was evolved. The administrator became the focal point of rural governance. The British rulers were not in any way concerned with the decentralized democracy but were aiming for colonial objectives. 

    The Indian National Congress, from the 1920s to 1947, emphasized the issue of all-India Swaraj, and organized movements for independence under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi. The task of preparing any sort of blueprint for the local level was neglected as a result. There was no consensus among the top leaders regarding the status and role to be assigned to the institution of rural local self-government; rather there were divergent views on the subject. On the one end Mahatma Gandhi favored village swaraj and strengthening the village panchayat to the fullest extent and on the other end, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar opposed this idea. He believed that the village represented regressive India, a source of oppression. The model state hence had to build safeguards against such social oppression and the only way it could be done was through the adoption of the parliamentary model of politics.