British Period
Post-Independence Period
Local governments in India have a long historical background. The Rigveda, the oldest of four vedas, mentioned two institutions namely, Sabha and Samithi which-performed several administrative and political functions at community level. They were the effective administrative state structures at local levels in ancient period. They relate to village panchayats and caste panchayat which managed the administrative and judicial affairs of a village community. These institutions continued for several years even without the effective support of the ruling classes of the time. Many eminent writers like Megasthanes, Kautilya and Fahien have cited the existence of these bodies in their writings. In medieval period, village panchayats flourished during the chola dynasty in South India. The cholas were renowned for their patronage of the local bodies
Local institutions during the British were more a creation of the government from whom they derived their autonomy rather than a process of spontaneous growth No attempts were made to build up the system on indigenous foundations, although a good deal of indigenous taxation was retained in local finance. The Chungi of muslims, the Sikh ‘dharat’, the muhtarafa of Maratha towns have a resemblance to todays octrol. The history of local self-government in India Under. British rule can be conveniently divided into 4 phases. The first phase may be assumed to have ended in 1882, when Lord Ripon issued his well-known resolution on local self-government. The resolution (passed on 18 May 1882) embodying this doctrine has been hailed as the Magna Carta and Lord Rippon, its author as the father of local self government in India. Lord Rippon’s resolution enunciated the following principles which were hence forth to inform and guide local government in India:
The village should be regarded as the’basic unit of local self-government institutions and every village should have a panchayat. Municipalities should be constituted in urban areas. There should be a substantial majority of elected members in the local bodies, The municipality should electits own President, but the District Collector should continue to be the president of the district local board. Municipalities should be given necessary authority to determine the taxes and to prepare their budgets after keeping a minimum reserve fund. The government should give grants for public works like water supply, drainage schemes, etc. Bigger cities should have the services of full-time nominated officer. Local bodies should enjoy full control over their employees subject, of certain safeguards for the security of service Outside control over the local bodies should be restricted to advice, suggestions and audit The government control over the municipal of raising local loans should continue and the prior sanction of the government should be obtaine for lease or sale of municipal properties. The responsibility for primary education should rest with the municipality and, if it so desires and resources permit, it may spend some amoun secondary schools also The third phase extended to 1935, during which the Indian Taxation Enquiry committee (1925) considered the problems oflocal taxation, along with central and provincial finances. In 1918, Govt of India issued the resolution reaffirming “The object of self-govt is to train the people in the management of their own local affairs and the political education.
Panchayats should be revived in the villages. Local bodies should contain a large elective majority Local govt should be made broad-based by suitably extending the franchise The President of the local body should be a member of the public and elected, rather than nominated. Local bodies should be allowed freedom in the preparation of the budget, the imposition of taxes and sanction of works. But however the Simon Commission of 1930, reversed the process of decentralisation, by recommending strict control of the State over local bodies
The first organized effort to solve the problem o made through the Community rural India was Development Programme in the year 1952 and National Extension Service in 1953. On the completion of first five years of the CDP. the planning Commission appointed a high-ranking study committee headed by Balwant Raj Mehta Chief Minister of Gujarat. This team pointed out both positive results and inadequacies in the implementation of the programme. This committee recommended Panchayati Raj . The study team made a significant recommendation with implementation of a programme. According to it there should be effective administrative decentralization for the implementation of the programme. The decentralized administration was to be placed under the control of selected and integrated local self-government system ordinarily of 3 levels bodies from village level to block level and then to district level This democratic decentralized system was named as “Panchayat Raj” The state of Madras tried this as a pilot project as early as 1957. In 1958, Andhra Pradesh state had twenty such pilot projects. Based on the success in these it was the state of Rajasthan which became the pioneer to bring the whole state under democratic decentralization on October 2, 1959. It was implemented in Gujarat on April 1, 1963
1. Panch: An assembly of elders who settled the disputes within the limit of castelcustoms
1. Assistance to the economically weaker sections of the community
The independence of the country in 1947 ushered in a new period in the history of local government in India In 1948 the ministers of local self-govt in the provinces met under the chairmanship of the central minister for Health. This was the first meeting of its kind In compliance with the provisions of the Directive Principles of State Policy pertaining to establishment of village panchayats as units of self govt, an ambitious rural sector initiative, the Community Development Programme, was launched on October 2, 1952. Its main thrust was on securing socio economic transformation of village life through people’s own democratic and corporative organisations with govt providing technical services, supply and credit.
The above objectives could not be realized to the desired extent, specially the people’s co-operation could not be achieved in the developmental This programme could not reduce the gap between the people and the administration. The reason that the role of administrative machinery was emphasised at the cost of people’s cooperation. The Programme was not designed to initiate people awareness and participation. However, its biggest success was in the sense that it provided the necessary background for the action of Panchayati Raj bodies.
Leave a Comment