Evolution of Panchayati Raj

📔Introduction to Panchayati Raj

🌾 Meaning of Panchayati Raj

Let’s begin with the basics.

The term Panchayati Raj literally means rule by the Panchayats — that is, rural local self-government.
In other words, it is a system of local governance in rural areas, where people themselves participate in decision-making and development of their villages.

Now, remember:
India is a representative democracy — people elect representatives who govern them. But if democracy remains only at the level of Parliament and State Legislatures, it stays top-down.
Hence, the idea of “democracy at the grass-root level” was born — and that is what Panchayati Raj is all about.

To give it a permanent, legal foundation, it was constitutionalised through the 73rd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1992, which came into force in 1993.

⚖️ Constitutional Position

In our federal system, the Constitution divides powers between the Centre and the States through the Seventh Schedule.
The subject of ‘Local Government’ — that is, governance at local levels, both rural and urban — is placed in the State List, Entry 5.

👉 So, it is the states which have the power and responsibility to create and regulate Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs).
That’s why you’ll find that Panchayati Raj laws vary from state to state, even though their basic framework is uniform.

🧩 Evolution of Panchayati Raj in India

Now let’s travel through history — how did this idea evolve?

After independence, India launched many rural development programmes, like:

• Community Development Programme (1952), and
• National Extension Service (1953).

But these programmes didn’t achieve the desired success. So, the government thought: “Perhaps we need people’s participation in planning and execution.”
This led to the formation of the first major committee on this subject — the Balwantrai Mehta Committee.

🧱 Balwantrai Mehta Committee (1957)

Purpose:
To examine why the earlier community development programmes failed and to suggest a system that could involve people directly in governance and development.

Chairman: Balwantrai G. Mehta

Report Submitted: November 1957

And this committee is often called the Father of Panchayati Raj System in India, because it gave the first clear blueprint for democratic decentralisation.

📋 Major Recommendations

Let’s summarise its key points logically:

1. Three-Tier Structure
   • Suggested a three-tier Panchayati Raj system:
     1. Gram Panchayat at the village level
     2. Panchayat Samiti at the block level
     3. Zila Parishad at the district level
   • These tiers should be organically linked — that means, connected through a chain of indirect elections.
2. Election Method
   • Members of Gram Panchayat → directly elected by people.
   • Members of Panchayat Samiti and Zila Parishad → indirectly elected (from among members of the lower bodies).
3. Functions
   • All planning and development activities should be entrusted to these Panchayati bodies.
4. Division of Roles
   • Panchayat Samiti → Executive body (actual implementation).
   • Zila Parishad → Advisory, coordinating and supervisory body.
5. District Collector
   • Should act as the Chairman of Zila Parishad (since administration was still bureaucratic at that time).
6. Transfer of Power
   • There should be a real transfer of authority and adequate financial resources to make them effective.
7. Future Vision
   • System should be designed to allow further devolution of power over time.

🏁 Implementation

These recommendations were accepted by the National Development Council (NDC) in 1958.
But — and this is important — the NDC said, don’t make it rigid; allow states to adapt according to local conditions.

👉 Hence, different states followed different patterns.

• Rajasthan was the first state to introduce Panchayati Raj — inaugurated by the Prime Minister on 2 October 1959 at Nagaur district.
• Andhra Pradesh followed soon after in the same year.

By mid-1960s, almost all states had adopted some form of Panchayati Raj — but with variations:

State	Pattern	Remark
Rajasthan	3-tier	Gram → Samiti → Parishad
Tamil Nadu	2-tier	Gram → Parishad
West Bengal	4-tier	Unique structure
Maharashtra–Gujarat	Zila Parishad strong (district-based planning)
Rajasthan–Andhra Pradesh	Panchayat Samiti strong (block-based planning)

Some states even created Nyaya Panchayats — small judicial bodies for minor civil and criminal cases.

So you can see — the system grew, but not uniformly. Still, this was a huge step in democratising development.

🏗️ Ashok Mehta Committee (1977–78)

By the mid-1970s, the Panchayati Raj system began to weaken.
Political interference, lack of funds, and bureaucratic dominance reduced their effectiveness.
So, the Janata Government set up another high-level committee to reform and revitalise the system.

Chairman: Ashok Mehta
Appointed: December 1977
Report Submitted: August 1978

This committee gave 132 recommendations — and marked a shift from “development administration” to “democratic decentralisation.”

📋 Major Recommendations

Let’s understand the main ones:

1. Two-Tier System
   • Replace the old three-tier model with a two-tier system:
     • Zila Parishad at the district level
     • Mandal Panchayat below it, comprising a group of villages (population 15,000–20,000)
2. District as the Key Unit
   • The district should be the first level for decentralisation below the state — that is, the pivot of local planning.
3. Zila Parishad – Executive Authority
   • Should be made the executive and planning body for district-level development.
4. Political Participation
   • Political parties should officially participate in Panchayat elections (to make them more accountable).
5. Financial Autonomy
   • PRIs should have compulsory taxation powers to raise their own revenue.
6. Social Audit
   • A district-level agency and a committee of legislators should regularly audit whether funds meant for weaker sections are properly used.
7. Protection from Supersession
   • State governments should not arbitrarily dissolve PRIs; if dissolved, fresh elections must be held within six months.
8. Separate Nyaya Panchayats
   • Judicial bodies (Nyaya Panchayats) should be kept independent of developmental Panchayats and presided over by qualified judges.
9. Election Management
   • Panchayat elections should be conducted by the State’s Chief Electoral Officer in consultation with the Chief Election Commissioner.
10. Administrative Control
    • Development staff should work under the control of Zila Parishad.
11. Role of Voluntary Agencies
    • NGOs and voluntary groups should help in people’s mobilisation for Panchayati Raj.
12. Minister for Panchayati Raj
    • Each state should appoint a dedicated minister in its council of ministers for Panchayati Raj affairs.
13. Reservation for SCs and STs
    • Seats should be reserved for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in proportion to their population.
14. Constitutional Status
    • Most significant: PRIs should get constitutional recognition — to give them sanctity, stability, and continuity.

🧩 Impact

Unfortunately, the Janata Government collapsed before it could act on these recommendations at the central level.
However, a few progressive states — notably Karnataka, West Bengal, and Andhra Pradesh — implemented reforms inspired by this committee’s ideas.

🧠 Summary Thought

“In short, Balwantrai Mehta laid the foundation of Panchayati Raj,
and Ashok Mehta tried to give it a revival and structure.”

The first phase (1950s–60s) was about introduction and experimentation,
while the second phase (late 1970s onwards) was about reform and consolidation, leading eventually to the constitutionalisation of Panchayati Raj in 1992.

🧩 G.V.K. Rao Committee (1985)

Context

By the mid-1980s, the Planning Commission noticed a serious problem —
that rural development programmes had become bureaucratised, run by officials rather than people’s representatives.

Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs), which were meant to democratise development, had lost their importance.
So, the Planning Commission set up a committee under G.V.K. Rao to review administrative arrangements for rural development and poverty alleviation.

The committee’s diagnosis was sharp and memorable —

“We have grass, but without roots.” 🌱
Meaning: the entire development process was happening for the people but without the people.

Key Recommendations

Let’s understand the essence of what the G.V.K. Rao Committee said:

1. Zila Parishad = Pivot of Decentralisation
   • The district should be the primary unit of planning and development.
   • Zila Parishad should become the principal body managing all development programmes at the district level.
2. Role in Planning and Monitoring
   • PRIs at district and lower levels should have a key role in planning, implementation, and monitoring of rural development schemes.
3. Devolution of State Planning Functions
   • Some planning responsibilities of the State Government should be transferred to district-level planning units — a big step toward true decentralisation.
4. Creation of District Development Commissioner
   • A new post called District Development Commissioner (DDC) should be created as the Chief Executive Officer of the Zila Parishad and head of all development departments at the district level.
     (You can think of this as replacing the administrative dominance of the District Collector with a development-oriented officer.)
5. Regular Elections
   • Elections to PRIs should be held regularly, since many states had not held them for years.

Broader Significance

This committee marked a shift back to democratic decentralisation and reduced the excessive bureaucratic control of district administration.

It differed from earlier committees like:

• Dantwala Committee (1978) and
• Hanumantha Rao Committee (1984)

Both these had suggested planning at the district level but under the control of the District Collector or a minister.

In contrast, G.V.K. Rao Committee said — “No, the real power should rest with the elected Panchayati Raj Institutions.”

So, the Rao Committee restored people’s participation as the heart of local governance.

⚖️ L.M. Singhvi Committee (1986)

Background

In 1986, the Rajiv Gandhi Government appointed a committee under L.M. Singhvi, a distinguished jurist and parliamentarian.
Its goal was to prepare a concept paper on the revitalisation of Panchayati Raj Institutions for democracy and development.

Key Recommendations

1. Constitutional Recognition
   • PRIs should be constitutionally recognised, protected and preserved.
   • A new chapter should be added to the Constitution for this purpose, ensuring their identity, integrity and continuity.

🗳️ It also called for regular, free and fair elections to PRIs — by constitutional mandate.

2. Nyaya Panchayats
   • Establish Nyaya Panchayats for a cluster of villages to handle minor disputes — strengthening justice delivery at the local level.
3. Reorganisation of Villages
   • Villages should be reorganised to make Gram Panchayats more viable in size and population.
4. Importance of Gram Sabha
   • It called the Gram Sabha (the general assembly of all adult villagers) the embodiment of direct democracy — where people themselves deliberate and decide.
5. Financial Strength
   • Village Panchayats should have adequate financial resources for effective functioning.
6. Judicial Tribunals
   • Establish State-level judicial tribunals to resolve disputes related to Panchayat elections, dissolution, and functioning.

Significance

This committee gave moral and constitutional legitimacy to the demand that Panchayati Raj should be made a part of the Constitution itself.
In fact, the idea of adding a separate chapter (Part IX) to the Constitution later came directly from Singhvi’s recommendation.

🧱 Thungon Committee (1988)

Background

In 1988, a sub-committee of the Consultative Committee of Parliament was formed under P.K. Thungon to examine the political and administrative structure at the district level for district planning.

Major Recommendations

1. Constitutional Status
   • PRIs should be constitutionally recognised — continuing the Singhvi line of thought.
2. Three-Tier Structure
   • A three-tier system at the village, block, and district levels.
3. Zila Parishad as the Pivot
   • The Zila Parishad should act as the planning and development agency at the district level.
4. Fixed Tenure
   • Each PRI should have a fixed tenure of 5 years.
5. Supersession Limit
   • If dissolved, the maximum period of supersession should be 6 months (to prevent prolonged suspension).
6. State-Level Coordination Committee
   • A Planning and Coordination Committee should be set up at the state level, chaired by the Minister for Planning, and include Presidents of all Zila Parishads.
7. List of Subjects
   • A detailed list of subjects for PRIs should be prepared and incorporated in the Constitution (later became the 11th Schedule).
8. Reservation Policy
   • Reservation of seats at all three levels based on population, and also reservation for women.
9. State Finance Commission
   • Each state should have a State Finance Commission (SFC) to recommend principles for devolution of finances to PRIs.
10. District Collector’s Role

• The District Collector should act as the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Zila Parishad.

Significance

The Thungon Committee provided a concrete, operational blueprint — combining constitutional, financial, and administrative reforms.
Most importantly, its ideas directly influenced the structure of the 73rd Amendment.

🏗️ Gadgil Committee (1988)

Background

The Congress Party, in 1988, constituted a Committee on Policy and Programmes under V.N. Gadgil.
Its job was to suggest how to make PRIs more effective — and its report ultimately became the political foundation for constitutional reform.

Key Recommendations

1. Constitutional Status
   • PRIs must be given constitutional recognition (continuing the demand raised since Singhvi).
2. Three-Tier System
   • A three-tier structure — village, block, and district.
3. Fixed Five-Year Term
   • All PRIs should have a five-year term.
4. Direct Elections
   • All members at all three levels should be directly elected by the people.
5. Reservation
   • Reservation for SCs, STs, and women.
6. Socio-Economic Planning
   • PRIs should prepare and implement plans for socio-economic development.
     → A list of subjects should be included in the Constitution itself (which became the 11th Schedule later).
7. Financial Powers
   • PRIs should be empowered to levy, collect, and appropriate taxes and duties.
8. State Finance Commission
   • Each state should establish a State Finance Commission to distribute finances to PRIs.
9. State Election Commission
   • A State Election Commission should conduct elections to PRIs.

Significance

The Gadgil Committee Report (1988) became the immediate basis for drafting the Constitutional Amendment Bill, which later materialised as the 73rd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1992.

So in one line —

“The Gadgil Committee converted the idea of Panchayati Raj into a constitutional proposal.”

🧠 Final Conceptual Summary

Let’s connect the dots chronologically 👇

Committee	Year	Appointed By	Major Contribution
Balwantrai Mehta	1957	Govt of India	Laid the foundation — 3-tier democratic decentralisation
Ashok Mehta	1977	Janata Govt	Reforms — 2-tier model, district focus, political participation
G.V.K. Rao	1985	Planning Commission	Revived people’s participation — Zila Parishad as pivot
L.M. Singhvi	1986	Rajiv Gandhi Govt	Demanded constitutional status for PRIs
Thungon Committee	1988	Parliament’s Consultative Committee	Concrete framework — 3-tier system, reservation, finance, tenure
Gadgil Committee	1988	Congress Party	Political endorsement — directly inspired 73rd Amendment

🗣️ Let’s summarise this evolution:

“Balwantrai Mehta started Panchayati Raj,
Ashok Mehta reformed it,
G.V.K. Rao revived it,
L.M. Singhvi constitutionalised its idea,
and Gadgil finalised it for constitutional status.”

🇮🇳 Constitutionalisation of Panchayati Raj

Till the 1980s, Panchayati Raj existed across most states — but only through ordinary laws, not through the Constitution.
That meant:

• Their existence depended on the will of the state government.
• Elections were irregular.
• Sometimes PRIs were dissolved for years.
• And most importantly — they lacked constitutional protection and uniformity.

Thus began the movement to constitutionalise Panchayati Raj — i.e., to give it constitutional status, authority, and stability.

🧩 The Rajiv Gandhi Government (1989)

Let’s start with the first concrete attempt to bring Panchayati Raj into the Constitution.

🔹 The 64th Constitutional Amendment Bill, 1989

• Introduced in July 1989 in the Lok Sabha.
• Its aim was clear — to constitutionalise Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) and make them more powerful and broad-based.

🔹 What Happened?

• The Lok Sabha passed the Bill in August 1989.
• But in the Rajya Sabha, it was rejected.

🔹 Why was it Opposed?

Opposition parties argued that the Bill would:

• Lead to centralisation of power,
• Reduce the autonomy of states, and
• Disturb the federal balance.

In other words, while the Bill was meant to strengthen local governments, critics said it allowed the Centre too much say in state-level matters — and hence it failed.

So, Rajiv Gandhi’s effort — though historic — did not succeed legislatively, but it laid the groundwork for future consensus.

🧩 The V.P. Singh Government (1989–1990)

When the National Front Government came to power under Prime Minister V.P. Singh, it promised to revive the process.

🔹 The Chief Ministers’ Conference (June 1990)

A two-day national conference of Chief Ministers was held under V.P. Singh’s chairmanship to discuss how to strengthen Panchayati Raj.

• The conference approved the proposal for a new constitutional amendment.
• Accordingly, a fresh Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha in September 1990.

But again — the government fell before the Bill could pass, and hence, the Bill lapsed.

So, the idea continued to live — but success was still out of reach.

🧩 The P.V. Narasimha Rao Government (1991–92)

Finally, the Congress Government under P.V. Narasimha Rao picked up the issue again.
By now, there was broad national consensus that Panchayati Raj must be given constitutional backing — but with some flexibility for states.

🔹 The Modified Bill

• Introduced in the Lok Sabha in September 1991.
• It removed controversial aspects that earlier bills had — particularly those that seemed to reduce state powers.
• After extensive discussions, it was passed by Parliament in December 1992.

🔹 The Result

It became the 73rd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1992, and came into force on 24 April 1993 — a date celebrated every year as National Panchayati Raj Day.

📘 A Quick Look at Articles Related to Panchayats

Article No.	Subject-Matter
243	Definitions
243A	Gram Sabha
243B	Constitution of Panchayats
243C	Composition of Panchayats
243D	Reservation of Seats
243E	Duration of Panchayats
243F	Disqualifications for Membership
243G	Powers, Authority and Responsibilities of Panchayats
243H	Powers to Impose Taxes by, and Funds of, the Panchayats
243-I	Constitution of Finance Commission to Review Financial Position
243J	Audit of Accounts of Panchayats
243K	Elections to the Panchayats
243L	Application to Union Territories
243M	Part Not to Apply to Certain Areas
243N	Continuance of Existing Laws and Panchayats
243-O	Bar to Interference by Courts in Electoral Matters