Panchayati Raj System and Community Development in India

Dr. Anand Kumar1

ABSTRACT

The Panchayati Raj in India generally refers to the system introduced by

constitutional amendment in 1992, although it is based upon the traditional

panchayat system of South Asia. The modern panchayati raj and its gram

panchayats are not to be confused with the extra-constitutional khap

panchayats (or caste panchayats) found in some parts of northern India.

While the panchayati raj system was formalized in 1992, leading up to that

change, a number of Indian committees studied various ways of

implementing more decentralized administration. Mahatma Gandhi

advocated panchayati raj as the foundation of India's political system, it

would have been a decentralized form of government where each village

would be responsible for its own affairs. The term for such a vision was

Gram Swaraj ("village self-governance"). Instead India developed a

highly centralized form of government. However, this has been moderated

1
Assistant Professor in Law, Chhotu Ram Institute of Law, Rohtak-
124001

1
by the delegation of several administrative functions to the local level,

empowering elected gram panchayats. There are significant differences

between (1) the traditional panchayati raj system, (2) that envisioned by

Gandhi, and (3) the system formalized in India in 1992.

KEYWORDS : Panchayati Raj, Self Government, 73rd Amendment of

Constitution.

INTRODUCTION
The Institution of Panchayats in India dates back to ancient history
when it performed the role of a village government. During British
regime, these Panchayats were relegated a sub-servient position as the
foreign rulers set up local self governments on the pattern of their own
country. Mahatma Gandhi, Father of the Nation, conceived village
Panchayats as a potential instrument for the socio-economic and political
transformation of the rural society and cultivation of democratic way of
life at the grass-root level. Accordingly, the directive principles of state
policy in our Indian Constitution enjoin the State to take steps to organize
village Panchayats and endow them with such powers and authority as
may be necessary to enable them to function as units of self-government. 1
Pursuant to this Constitutional provisions many States enacted suitable
legislation for setting up village Panchayats, while others amended the
already existing law with a view to promoting quicker development of
Panchayats and giving them a larger role than before. The community
development projects, started by the Government of India on October 2,

2
1952, imparted a momentum to the movement of Panchayats. In 1958,
Balwant Rai Mehta Committee recommended a three-tier Panchayat
system: Gram Panchayat at the lowest level, that is, the village; the
Panchayat Samiti at the Community Development Block Level; and the
Zila Parishad at the District level. These recommendations were endorsed
by the National Development Council and consequently the Government
of India’s policy was based on these recommendations.2
It is to be noted that Panchayat Raj was not introduced all over the
Country on a particular day. Being State subject it was introduced
according to their own policy and convenience. Rajasthan state was the
first State to introduce Panchayat Raj on October 2, 1959 by giving effect
to the Rajasthan Panchayat Samitis and Zila Parishad Act, 1959. It was
followed by Andhra Pradesh3 which set up 235 Panchayat Samitis and 20
Zial Parishads in the same year i.e. 1959. The Mysore Village Panchayats
and Local Board Act, 1959 envisages a three-tier system in the Panchayats
at Village Level, Taluka-Board at Taluk level, and Development Council at
District level.4 In Assam, Panchayats used to exist under the Assam
Panchayat Act, 1958. Under the new “Assam Panchayat Act, 1959” the
State has adopted a three-tier structure of local-governing institutions. In
Madras, the Madras Panchayat Act, 1958, which came into force on
January 1, 1960 provides for Panchayats at village level, and Panchayat
Union Council at the Block level. In Orissa, the State has introduced a
three-tier system of Panchayat Raj under the Orissa Zila Parishad Act,
1959. The Act has been given effect to by constituting Panchayat Samitis
all over the State on January 26, 1962. In Punjab, the Punjab Panchayat
Simitis and Zila Parishad Act, 1960 contemplates Panchayat Samitis at the

3
Block or Tehsil level and Zila Parishads at the District level. In the State
of Maharashtra, a uniform system of Panchayat Raj has been introduced in
the entire State under the Bombay Panchayat Act, 1958. In Bihar,
Panchayats exist under the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 1947, as amended by
the Bihar Panchayat Raj (Amendment and Validating) Act, 1959. The
State of Jammu & Kashmir has also introduced Panchayat system on a
two-tier level namely, Gram Panchayats at Village level and Block
Panchayats at Block Level.5 In Kerala, the Kerala Panchayat Act, 1960 has
brought the whole State under a uniform legislation on Panchayats. In
Madhya Pradesh, the Panchayat system was introduced from the year
1962.6 In other States as well as in the Union territories, Panchayats are
functioning under their respective legislative enactments. The State of
Haryana has adopted the Panchayat system under the Punjab Gram
Panchayat (Haryana Amendment) Act, 1972. In Himachala Pradesh, the
Panchayats are functioning under the Himachal Pradesh Panchayat Raj
Act, 1968.
A potentially viable and useful structure of the Panchayat Raj, thus,
exists in form, but its effectiveness has been limited in practice. There has
been considerable erosion in the powers and functions of these institutions
in many states. They suffer from inadequacy of financial resources. The
external sources in the form of aid or assistance from the State
Governments have been found inadequate to meet the rural requirements.
For raising internal sources in the form of “local taxes, fees etc. the
Panchayats have shown little inclination. Thus, starved of financial
resources, the Panchayats cannot deliver appropriate results, as required.

4
 The crucial question is: how to rejuvenate the Panchayat
institutions and to activate the dormant dynamism of the people in rural
areas in order to bring about development of democratic methods. In 1977,
the Janata Government appointed a high powered Committee under the
Chairmanship of Ashok Mehta to examine the functioning of Panchayat
Raj, to review its present status and to suggest ways for its involvement in
the planning and implementation of programs of rural development. The
Committee submitted its report in 1978, which was considered by a
conference of Chief Ministers in May, 1979. Besides suggesting larger
devolution of funds and functions to these bodies, the Committee had
recommended in favor of making Zila Parishad as the principal executive
organ of Panchayat Raj with the Block Panchayat Samiti being converted
in effect to a Block level Committee of the Zila Parishad. In regard to the
lowest level unit, the Panchayat, the Committee recommended the concept
of Mandal Panchayats comprising of 15,000 to 20,000 population and 10
to 15 villages, with a somewhat smaller size in tribal and other sparsely
populated areas.7 There was general agreement in the Chief Ministers
Conference to the need for increased devolution of functions and funds to
be given to these institutions. The idea of setting of Mandal Panchayats
was however disfavored. As regards Zila Parishad vis-à-vis Block
Development Samiti, it was found very difficult to recommend this
structure which was indeed, an impossible task. The Conference, however,
agreed on preparing a Model Bill which the States could consider in their
own context and adopt the same with such modifications as it considered
necessary.8 With the expansion of antipoverty programs9 in the 1980s and
the creation of district rural development agencies (DRDA) and other

5
similar organizations10 at lower levels, it was necessary to integrate the PR
system with these programs. The C.H. Hanumath Rao Working Group on
District Planning was set up in 198311 and then the G.V.K. Rao Committee
in 1985 to review the existing administrative arrangements for rural
development and poverty alleviation programs.12 The latter recommended
strengthening the Zila Parishad-level, endorsed the recommendations for
district-level planning of C.H.H. Rao's working group, and suggested
better integration of block and lower-level planning with lower-level PR
councils. Another committee headed by L.M. Singhvi in 1986 prepared the
concept paper on Panchayati Raj13 that said PR institutions should be
closely involved in the planning and implementation of rural development
programs at lower levels, and recommended that the Panchayats should be
made financially viable by combining two or three villages in one Mandal
Panchayat. It also supported the recommendations of the G.V.K. Rao
Committee for integration of the Government's administrative structures
with the PR institution.14
The Constitutional base for PR was required because State
Governments were not enthusiastic about the creation of PR bodies and
having to share power with them. In fact, some States have taken power
back from PR bodies. Status and dignity are essential to make these bodies
viable and responsive institutions, and this requires Constitutional support.
In India's Constitution, local self-government and Panchayati Raj was a
State subject, and the Central Government could not pass any legislation
concerning them. Hence, the 73rd Constitutional Amendment Act has been
passed in 1993.15

6
 The changes made by the 73rd and 74th Amendments in the
Constitution are innovative and have given a new dimension to the system
of governance at the local level in the country.16 However, the changes
made in the Constitution do not create any new set of institutions but
recognize afresh the role that these bodies can play in promoting economic
development and social justice in urban areas and in the villages, and in
improving services essential for better community life. The inclusion of
the two new Schedules 11th and 12th has added a new dimension to local
governance and has raised hopes that these bodies will be entrusted with
the implementation of schemes on subjects included therein. 17 This would
be accompanied by consequential transfer of funds and staff. A few states
like Kerala, Karnataka and West Bengal did much to devolve 3Fs (Funds,
Functions and Functionaries) at the grass root level. But in most of the
States a great deal of confusion as regards the nature of the transfer itself
prevailed, as there has been a clamor for the transfer of functions, finances
and functionaries to these bodies related, at least, to the subjects
enumerated in the 11th and 12th Schedules.
The 73rd and 74th Amendments to the Constitution are only an
expression of intention rather than a mandate to the States to transfer the
functions and schemes relating to the subjects given in the Schedules,
accompanied by funds and staff. The implications of the Constitutional
changes brought out by these amendments have not been understood
properly, leading to expectations which do not emanate from it. No
wonder the States have not been highly enthusiastic in parting with
powers, functions and finances for matters which are essentially of a local
nature.18

7
 The Constitution defines the Panchayats and the municipalities as
institutions of 'self government’ and has given a frame-work for fresh
legislative action by the States. The State legislatures were and are
competent to vest the rural and urban local bodies with powers, functions
and responsibilities under Entry 5 of List II- State List of the Seventh
Schedule of the Constitution. In fact, all the States had, as stated earlier,
enacted legislations for the establishment of these bodies. Powers,
functions and responsibilities, including the power to raise resources, were
given to them in these legislations. However, the amendment has given
emphasis to the theme of economic development and social justice. All
States have either enacted new legislation or made the requisite
amendments in the Panchayat and municipal laws; the subjects listed in
the 11th and the 12th Schedules have been duly incorporated in the list of
functions obligatory and optional for transfer to rural and urban local
bodies. Powers for raising resources through tax, duties, toll and fees have
also been conferred on these bodies subject to rates, instructions and rules
to be framed by the State Government, but 'self government’ has not been
defined in the Constitution. There is no clear delineation of
responsibilities, powers, and functions to be performed by the urban and
rural local bodies on the one hand, and by the State Government on the
other, in Part IX and IXA of the Constitution. In the absence of any clarity
on what is meant by 'self' government, the State Finance Commissions
(SFCs), constituted under Article 243 I of the Constitution have had
problems in determining the needs of urban and rural bodies and in
making recommendations for devolution on that basis. The first reports of
the SFCs, now available, for most States, covered by the 73 rd and 74th

8
Amendments reflect this position; the devolutions have been suggested on
the basis of what these bodies have been doing, and in some cases, the
reports indicate only a percentage or amount from the State's resources for
transfer to these bodies without any assessment of their needs or functions
performed, or the resources generated by them.19
A clear definition of the term 'self government’, used in the
Constitution, is necessary before any exercise for devolution of 'powers,
authority and responsibilities' could be meaningful. Any assessment of
their requirement of funds and functionaries is possible only when there is
a clear understanding of this term, accompanied by delineation of
responsibilities between the various tiers of Panchayats in rural areas and
levels of municipalities in urban areas. This will help to avoid duplication
of efforts between the two levels of governance at the State and local level
and will remove the confusion that prevails at the district and sub-district
level. People would know where to look for the performance of specific
public duties, and organize themselves to ensure that these are available.20
In India constitutionally mandated PRIs have moved into the
second stage so need is to set in motion second-generation reforms.
Elections have been held (thrice in most places) and the relevant functions
have also been devolved, as intended, in most States. However, there has
been much less action in devolving funds and functionaries, which are the
other two legs on which the structure much rest. The extent of financial
devolution varies from State to State. While some have devolved a
significant proportion of the State budget to the PRIs, many others have
not yet done so. It was expected that local bodies would become
financially independent along with a Constitutional guarantee of existence

9
breathed through five yearly elections. But there are doubts and financially
local governments are largely dependent on State Governments. State
Governments have a large number of powers to inspect, dissolve, remove
and audit the functioning of local governments. Bureaucratic stranglehold
may not be absolute but functioning of local government has been
restricted.21
By contesting and getting elected to Panchayati Raj Institutions,
women have shattered the myth of their own passivity that women are not
willing to enter politics. For women, successful grassroots experience has
meant a chance to form coherent voice, to be heard and to make a
difference in their communities. However, women’s representation in the
decision-making positions with monitoring power is still negligible. The
present rules of the game and decision-making procedure do not allow a
greater participation of women and in the absence of women, there is no
effort to recognize or change the game. The very absence of women at
these levels thus leads to preservation and reinforcement of male-oriented
and male benefiting types of decisions. The reservation in Panchayats has
provided for the erosion of the traditional gender, caste, class roles and
hierarchy but it has still to cover a long and difficult process.22 Women not
only have to fight for their right to be more than proxy members but also
to break the barriers of gender division of labour, illiteracy, low level of
mobility, seclusion, lack of training and information, which still continue
to exist without enough support from the power structure. Women’s low
self-esteem at the household level and their new role in local politics
where they are now expected to function as leader creates a contradiction
between women’s role at home and in local government. The fact that the

10
participation of women could be better if they had functional education
and also training on the various intricacies involved in the political field.23
There is much importance of Information Computer Technology
(ICT) in enhancing Panchayat capacity so that they can perform their
constitutionally and legislatively mandated functions better. When it
comes to e-goverance Gram Panchayat has unique importance for the
reasons of Primacy of Gram Sabha and its impact on the Gram Panchayat
and requirement of keeping the Gram Sabha (the citizenry) well informed,
by the GP. E-governance can help in dissemination of internal processes of
Gram Panchyats: (agendas, resolutions, voting record); Proceedings of
Gram Sabhaa and action taken, Progress reports, Dissemination of data
(family surveys, property lists, BPL lists, pensions, censuses), Service
data: (education, health, water and sanitation), Natural Resources and
biodiversity data, Databases on Panchayat members and staffing details.24
Panchayati Raj is a silent revolution and most importantly, this
system has included the marginalized sections, in the process of
governance and these groups have found a place in Indian Polity and a
new broad-based political leadership and wisdom is emerging. A large
number of women and other marginalized classes have came to power as a
consequence of reservation provided to them in Panchayats and it has
rekindled the hopes of the local citizenry. The Constitutional specification
of the role of Panchayats in ‘planning for economic development and
social justice’ and ‘implementation of schemes’ towards these ends, and
further, the critical role assigned to the ‘gram sabha’ and district planning
are but the buildings blocks for creating a more just, equitable and vibrant
society. It is here, in imaging the locality where lives and lived and

11
everyday experience are produced and reproduced, that the conceptions of
State, civil society and market must intersect privileging the democratic.25
We can conclude that the present pattern of growth has the
potential of widening the inequality. Such unequal opportunity structure
weakens the positive role of growth, in reducing poverty and making
growth inclusive. If this inequality increases further, social displacement
will result and it will be a major obstruction to higher growth. To achieve
inclusive growth, it is crucial that the poor are integrated with the dynamic
sectors of growth. We cannot overlook the fact that being closet to the
people, the Panchayats and their elected representative have the feel of the
pulse, the sufferings of the people and local conditions. The effectiveness
of providing services through local bodies cannot be overemphasized as
they know their real requirements, and are familiar with every nook and
corner of the village and, above all, they are answerable to the people. The
Panchayati Raj institutions are eminently suited for service delivery as
they can ensure equity and equitability in the provision of services (in
view of their nearness to the people), inclusiveness (in view of the assured
representation available to all sections of the society in the Panchayati Raj
Institutions), accessibility, transparency, local participation, accountability
and sustainability of services.26 It was clear in Article 40 of the
Constitution that self-government for Panchayats was the central
objective, but in giving powers to PR bodies, what exactly did State
legislatures mean by "self-government?" With the 73rd Amendment, India
is trying to create a meaningful and viable PR system to serve the cause of
local self-government institutions in the countryside. The States now have

12
no choice but to implement the constitutional provisions or face the wrath
of the Union Government.

References

13
1
Article 40, The Constitution of India.
2
Preface - A Digest on Panchayat Raj (Ministry of Community Development and
cooperation, Government of
India, New Delhi, 1961).
3
Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Samitis and Zila Samitis Act, 1959. Prior to this Panchayats have been functioning in the State
under the Madras Panchayat Act, 1950 in the ex-Madras area and under the Hyderabad Vilage Panchayat Act, 1956 in the rest
of the State.
4
Prior to this, Panchayats used to exist under five different pieces of legislation applicable to five different areas which
constitute the new State. They were: The Mysore Village Panchayat and District Board Act, 1952; The Madras Village
Panchayat Act, 1950; Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1933; The Hydrabad Gram Panchayat Act, 1956 and Coorg
Panchayat Raj Act, 1956. The new Act has brought the whole state uniformly under a single legislation.
5
Jammu and Kashmir Village Panchayat Act, 1959.
6
The Madhya Pradesh Panchayats Act, 1962 as amended by subsequent Acts. The latest being the H.P.
Panchayats (Amendment) Act, 1972.
7
Ibid.
8
Id.
9
The Integrated Rural Development Programs aims at improving the economic conditions of the rural poor who consist
largely of the landless laborers, small marginal farmers, rural artisans and other works. In fact it has been conceived as an
anti-poverty program. Under this program, it is proposed to provide assistance to 3,000 families on an average in each
Block during the sixth plan. Though the nature and scope of development projects for these families will vary from Block
to block depending upon opportunities, it is assumed that of the 3000 families approximately 2,000 could on an average be
covered by schemes broadly falling in the area of agriculture and allied activities, 500 in village and cottage industries and
another 500 in the services sector. (Sixth Plan ) Id. at 171; The National Rural Employment Program has been conceived for
providing wage employment opportunities to the rural poor. Under this program, development projects and target group
oriented employment generation projects will be closely intertwined. The Food for work program which is in operation in
half the States is also a component of N.R.E.P; the Minimum Needs Program was initiated during the Fifth Five Year
Plan and the same has been continued in the Sixth Plan. Under the programs special attention will be given to elementary
education, health care, housing and the needs of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, socially and educationally backward
classes and women.
10
The organization like Mahila Mandals which are mainly associated with the social and economic activities can also
render assistance in the task of development through Panchayats. A large number of such Mahila Mandals had been formed
under the Community Development Program. Their number throughout the country is estimated around 66000.
11
Report of the Working Group on District Planning, Vol. I and 2 (Planning Commission, New Delhi, 1983).
12
Report of the Committee to Review the Existing Administrative Arrangements for Rural Development and Poverty
Alleviation Programmes (CAARD) (Department of Rural Development, New Delhi, 1985).
13
Concept paper on Panchayati Raj, Ministry of Agriculture, New Delhi, 1987.
14
Hoshiar Singh, “Constitutional Base for Panchayati in India: The 73rd Amendment” 34 Asian Survey 819
(1994).
15
Ibid. at 824.
16
Such a detailed arrangement for governance in rural and urban areas does not exist in any Constitution of the
functioning democracy. See M V Pylee, Constitutions of the World (Universal Law Publishing, 2000).
17
Gulati writes, "At a minimum, one hope, the State legislations would not use the authority the new Constitutional
provisions confer on them with regard to the devolution of functions and finances to the local bodies to unduly constrain or
interfere with the autonomous functioning of these elected bodies - not any more than they would like to see the central
government interfere with the functioning of the state governments even though most of the states have depended on
central budgetary transfers of finance half, or even more, of their annual budgets" see I S Gulati, “Financial Devolution to
Local Bodies” 29 Economic and Political Weekly 2622 (1981). The comparison of the scheme of devolution of power and
functions between the central and state government on the one hand, and the state government and the local bodies on the
other, is not apt. as would be shown later in this article.
18
T.N. Srivastava, “Local ‘Self’ Government and the Constitution” 37 Economic and Political Weekly 3190
(2002).
19
Ibid. at 3190.
20
Id.
21
Nupur Tiwari, “Two Decades of Panchayati Raj as Institutions of Local Self-Governments in India” 11 The Grassroots
Governance Journal 62 (2013).
22
Ibid. at 63.
23
Id. at 62.
24
Id.
25
Id. at 68.
26
Id. at 69.