2.

Evolution of Local Self-government in India

The term Panchayat literally means an assembly of five elders elected by villagers. Panchayati Raj is a
system and process of governance. The term was coined by Jawaharlal Nehru. It is distinct from
Panchayat, which connotes government of a local body limited to a geographical area.

Jawaharlal Nehru did not like the phrase democratic decentralisation for, according to him:Democracy
means power springing from the people. By Panchayati Raj what was being envisaged was not a
territorial government or administration; but rather an approach to administration guided by and vested
in the people themselves".

There is still truth in the saying that India lives in her villages. Therefore, in the Indian context true
democracy that can sustain itself and function effectively, is democracy at the village level itself. This is
because village communities have been the basic units wherein individual's happiness, fieedom and
independence were realised since ancient times. In the words of S. K .Dey, "If we were to rebuild India
work must start from the villages.

Villages have always been the basic units of administration in India since ancient times. Their
importance was naturally very great when communications were slow. The question now rises, what will
be the form of that society in which it will be possible for the people to run their affairs directly and
develop all those values of life that characterise a socialist society, co-operation, self-discipline, sense of
responsibility? The answer will be the 'Panchayats'.

Panchayati Raj Institutions in Ancient India

The word panchayat is derived from the word pancha panchasvanusthitah, has references in to the
existence of Grama Sanghas or rural communities. The institution of Panchayati Raj is as old as Indian
civilization itself. It was in existence since ancient periods, having an effective control over civil and
judicial matters in the village community. The Rigveda, Manusamhita, Dharmashastras, Upanishads,
Jatakas and others, refer extensively to local administration, i.e. the panchayat system of administration.
In the Manusmriti and Shantiparva of Mahabharata, there are many references to the existence of
Grama Sanghas or village councils.

The earliest reference to panchayat is derived from the word Pancha, that refers to an institution of the
five (pancha panchasvanusthitah) is found in the Shanti-Parva of Mahabaratha, pancha and
panchavanustitah are semantically close to panchayat. A description of these village councils are also
found in Arthashastra of Kautilya who lived in 400 B.C. Arthashstra gives a comprehensive account of
the system of village administration prevailing in his time.

During this period, the village administration was carried under the supervision and control of
Adyaksha or headman. There were other officials such as Samkhyaka [accountant], Anikitsaka
(veterinary doctor), Jamgh karmika (village couriers), Chikitsaka [physitian]. The village headman was
responsible for ensuring the collection of state dues and controlling the activities of the offenders. In
Ramayana of Valmiki, there are references to the Ganapada (village federation) which was perhaps a
kind of federation of village republics.

Self-governing village communities characterized by agrarian economies existed in India from the
earliest times. It is mentioned in Rigveda that dates from approximately 200 B.C. The village was the
basic unit of administration in the Vedic period. The most remarkable feature of the early Vedic polity
consisted in the institution of popular assemblies of which two namely 'Sabha', and the 'Samiti' deserve
special mention.

A Samiti was the Vedic Folk Assembly that in some cases enjoyed the right of electing a king while the
Sabha exercised some judicial functions. Both the Samiti and Sabha enjoyed the rights to debate, a
privilege unknown to the popular assemblies of other ancient people. The office of the village head man
(Gramani) indicates the emergence of the village as a unit of administration. In the later Vedic period,
the Samiti disappeared as a popular assembly while the Sabha sank into a narrow body corresponding to
the kings Privy Council.
In the course of time, village bodies took the form of panchayats that looked into the affairs of the
village. They had the powers to enforce law and order. Customs and religion elevated them to the
sacred position of authority.

In the Mouryan period, the village was the basic unit of administration. Villagers used to organize works
of public utility and recreation, settle disputes, and act as trustees for the property of minors. But, they
had not yet evolved regular councils. The village council appeared to have evolved into regular bodies in
the Gupta period. They were known as Panchamandalas in central India and Gramajanapadas in Bihar.

These bodies negotiated with the government for concessions and settlement of disputes. The
inscription of Chola dynasty shows the construction and functions of the village assembly and their
executive committees. The village administrations were performed by the elected representatives
forming village council.

During the medieval and Mughal periods, village bodies were the pivot of administration. In the Mughal
period, particularly in the regime of Sher Shah, the villages were governed by their own panchyats. Each
panchayat comprised of village elders who looked after the interest of the people and administered
justice and imposed punishment on defaulters. The headman of the village, a semi government official,
acted as a coordinator between the village panchayat and the higher administrative hierarchy.

Akbar accepted this system and made it an indispensable part of civil administration. In this period, each
village had its own panchayat of elders. It was autonomous in its own sphere and exercised powers of
local taxation, administrative control, justice and punishment.

The Mughals introduced elaborate administrative machinery with a hierarchy of officials, particularly in
the field of revenue. The Mughal local administrative system lasted over centuries. It was with the
collapse of the Mughal strong hold, the British established their hegemony in India.

British Period

The British came to India as traders, and before long established an inroad into the cultural nexuses of
the land. The primary focus of the British Raj was much to do with trade and little to do with governance
and development. The local governments were hardly their first priority. In fact till the advent of the
British rule in India, the rural republic had flourished and thrived.

With the emergence of the British Raj in India, panchayats ceased to play a role that it once played. But,
local self-government as a representative institution was the creation of the British. In the initial days,
the interest of the British was limited to the creation of local bodies with nominated members. These
bodies were built around trading centres.

Thus in the year 1687, a municipal corporation came to be formed in Madras. Set up on the British
model of town council, this body was empowered to levy taxes for building guild halls and schools. As
time passed, similar bodies were set up in other major towns and this model became prevalent, helping
the British widen their taxation power. This model continued to comprise nominated members with no
elected elements what so ever.

It was Lord Mayo, the then viceroy of India (1869 to 1872), who felt the need to decentralize powers in
order to bring about administrative efficiency and in the year 1870 introduced the concept of elected
representatives in the urban municipalities. The revolt of 1857 that had put the imperial finances under
considerable strain and it was found necessary to finance local service out of local taxation. Therefore it
was out of fiscal compulsion that Lord Mayo's resolution on decentralization came to be adopted.

The Bengal Chowkidar Act of 1870

The Bengal Chowkidar Act of 1870 marked the beginning of the revival of the traditional village
panchayati system in Bengal. The Chowkidar Act empowered district magistrates to set up panchayats of
nominated members in the villages to collect taxes to pay the chowkidars or watchmen engaged by
them.[9]
Ripon Resolution (1882)

Lord Ripon made remarkable contribution to the development of Local Government. In 1882, he
abandoned the existing system of local government by the officially nominated people. According to his
local self-government plan, the local boards were split into smaller units to achieve greater efficiency. In
order to ensure popular participation, he introduced an election system for the local boards.

The government resolution of 18th, May, 1882, stands as a landmark in the structural evolution of local
governments. It provided for local boards consisting of a large majority of elected non-official members
and presided over by a non-official chairperson. This is considered to be the Magna Carta of local
democracy in India. This resolution proposed the establishment of rural local boards where 2/3rd of
whose membership was composed of elected representatives.

He brought in the concept of self-government in urban municipalities. He is treated as the founding

father of urban local government. Ripon's resolutions followed a series of Committees, Commissions
and Acts in this line. The Royal Commission on Decentralization in 1909 elaborated further the principles
of Ripon resolution. But this remained merely on paper. Ripon's scheme did not make much progress in
the development of local self-government institutions.

Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms of 1919

In this backdrop, Montagu Chelmsford reforms were passed in the year 1919. This reform transferred
the subject of local government to the domain of provinces. The reform also recommended that as far
as possible there should be a complete popular control in local bodies and the largest possible
independence for them, of outside control. By 1925, eight provinces had passed village panchayat acts.
However, these panchayats covered only a limited number of villages with limited functions.[11] But this
reform could not get much result as far as democratization of panchayats was concerned and lead to a
lot of organizational and fiscal constraints.

Government of India Act (1935)

This is considered as another important stage in the evolution of panchayats in British India. With
popularly elected government in the provinces, almost all provincial administrations felt duty bound to
enact legislations for further democratization of local self-government institutions, including village
panchayats.

Although the popular government in the provinces governed by the Congress vacated office following
the declaration of Second World War in 1939, the position as regards local government institutions
remained unchanged till August 1947, when the country attained independence.

Even though the British government did not have interest in the village autonomy, they were forced to
do so, in order to continue their rule in India and moreover to meet financial necessities. The Indian
rural republic had flourished till the advent of British. It received a set back during the British rule. Self-
contained village communities and their panchayats ceased to get substance. They were replaced by
formally constituted institutions of village administration. In the highly centralized system of British rule,
village autonomy seems to have lost.

Panchayati Raj in Independent India

The task of strengthening panchayati raj system fell on the Indian government formed after
independence. It was clear that India a country of villages had to strengthen village panchayats to
strengthen democracy. Mahatma Gandhi who strongly believed in Ggrama Swaraj pleaded for the
transfer of power to the rural masses. According to him the villages should govern themselves through
elected panchayats to become self-sufficient.

But surprisingly, the draft Constitution prepared in 1948 had no place for Panchayati Raj Institutions.
Gandhi severely criticized this and called for immediate attention. It is thus, that panchayat finds a place
in the Directive Principles of the State Policy.
Article 40 of the Directive Principles of the State Policy states that 'the states shall take steps to organize
village panchayats and endow them with such powers and authority as may be necessary to enable
them function as units of self-governments'.[12] The most important aspect to strengthen grass root
democracy was neglected by the Constitution makers as Directive Principle of State Policy is not legally
binding on the governments.

The first organized effort to tackle the problem of rural India was made through Community
Development Programme in 1952 and National Extension Service in 1953. The programme was based on
an integrated approach to the various aspects of rural development.
The objectives were to promote self-help and self-reliance among the rural people, to generate a
process of integrated social, economic and cultural change with the aim of transforming social and
political life of the villagers. Community Development Programme was launched in 55 selected blocks.

The programme was based on an integrated approach to the various aspects of rural development. The
programme made provisions for appointing Block Development Officers (BDO) and Village Level
Workers (V.L.W). This programme was intended to bring socio economic development of the rural
masses on democratic lines, but failed to take off along the expected lines due to the absence of an
effective instrument for people's participation.

Balwantrai Mehta Commission

The first was the Balwantrai Mehta Commission in 1957. The committee believed that community
development would only be effective when the community was involved in the planning, decision, and
implementation process. The committee suggested that the basic unit of democratic decentralization
was to be at the block (samiti) level since the area of jurisdiction of the local body should neither be too
large nor too small.

The block was large enough for efficiency and economy of administration, and small enough for
sustaining a sense of involvement in the citizens. Further, the Zilla Parishad (ZP) should play an advisory
role. The committee focused on the rural sector and recommended that the functions of PRIs should
cover the development of agriculture in all its aspects, the promotion of local industries and other
services such as drinking water, road building, etc.

The committee laid down five fundamental principles:

1.There should be three tier structures of local self-government bodies from village to the district level
and these bodies should be linked together.

2.There should be genuine transfer of power and responsibility to these bodies to enable them to
discharge their responsibility

3.Adequate resources should be transferred to these bodies to enable them to discharge their
responsibilities.

4.All welfare and developmental schemes and programmes at all three levels should be channeled
through these bodies, and

5.The three tier system should facilitate further devolution and disposal of power and responsibility in
future. The committee envisaged three tire system of panchayats known as Zilla Parishad, Panchayat
Samiti and Gram Panchayat and recommended encouragement of peoples' participation in community
work, promotion of agriculture and animal husbandry, promoting the welfare of the weaker sections
and women through the panchayats.

The PRI structure was introduced in most parts of the country as a result of the Balwantrai Mehta
Report. However, it did not develop the requisite democratic momentum and failed to cater to the
needs of rural development. Reasons for this were:

I)Political and bureaucratic resistance at the state level to sharing of power and resources with the local
level institutions,
II) the takeover of these institutions by the rural elite who cornered a major share of the benefits of the
various welfare schemes,

III) the lack of capability at the local level, and (iv) the absence of political will of the grassroots leaders.

. Santhanam Committee

The K.Santhanam Committee in 1963 was appointed to look solely at the issue of PRI finances.

Its recommendations have influenced the thinking and the debate to date on this issue:

I) The Panchayats should have special powers to levy special tax on land revenues, home tax, etc;

II) all grants and subventions at the state level should be consolidated and untied; and

III) A Panchayat Raj Finance Corporation should be set up which would look into the financial resources
of PRIs at all three levels, provide loans and financial assistance to these grassroots level governments
and also provide support for non-financial requirements of villages.

Ashok Mehta Committee (1977)

In this backdrop in 1977, the Janata government appointed a Committee with Ashok Mehta as chairman
and was entrusted with the task of enquiring into the causes responsible for the poor performance of
Panchayati Raj Institutions. It was also asked to suggest measures to strengthen Panchayati Raj
Institutions.

The committee suggested two tire system of Panchayati Raj consisting of Zilla Parishads at the district
level and Mandal Panchayats at the grass root level as against three tier system suggested by the
Balwantrai Mehta Committee. The committee recommended constitutional protection to the
Panchayati Raj Institutions and further decentralization of power at all levels.

A noteworthy feature of the report is that it recommended regular elections to these bodies and open
participation of political parties.

The Ashok Mehta Committee Suggested:

1. Reservation of seats for the weaker sections

2. Two seats for women

3. Adequate financial resources for the panchayats

4. Requirement of Constitutional sanctions

5. To extend people's participation in developmental activities.

Due to the fall of the Janata government, the Ashok Mehta Committee recommendations were not
implemented. Few states including Karnataka formulated new legislation on the basis of the
recommendations of this Committee. Both the Committees overlooked the importance of panchayats as
units of self-government.

GVK Rao Committee

The GVK Rao Committee was appointed in 1985 to again revisit the obstacles in the way of effective
PRIs. It recommended that PRIs at the district level and below be assigned responsibilities for planning,
monitoring and implementation of rural development programs and that the block development office
should be the spinal cord of rural development.

L.M.Singhvi Committee

More thinking on PRIs was initiated by the L.M.Singhvi Committee in 1986. The Gram Sabha (village
assembly) was considered the base of decentralized democracy. The PRIs were to be viewed as
institutions of self- government which would facilitate the participation of the people in the process of
planning and development. It recommended that local self- government should be constitutionally
recognized, protected and preserved by the inclusion of a new chapter in the Constitution.

It also viewed with dismay the irregularity of elections and engaged with the issue of the role of political
parties in Panchayat elections, stating that a non- involvement should be consensual rather than
through legislative fiat. The role of political parties in Panchayats has since then divided the advocates of
PRI into two camps.

On the one side are those such as Jayaprakash Narayan, writing within the Gandhian tradition of
partyless democracy, who saw 'selfgovernment through faction-fighting will not be self-government but
self-ruination', and on the other are those such as Asoka Mehta who support the involvement of
political parties since it enables candidates, from weak economic backgrounds, to effectively compete
with the backing of a strong organization.

Sarkaria Commission

Constitutional status for PRIs was opposed by the Sarkaria Commission. But the idea gained momentum
in the late 1980s especially because of the endorsement by the late Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi who
introduced the 64th Constitutional Amendment Bill in 1989. Rajiv Gandhi's commitment to the PRI route
to rural development seems to have emerged through a series of workshops he had as Prime Minister
with District Collectors, where he got a sense of the insensitivity of District Administration and of
wastage of funds for rural development. The 64th Amendment Bill caused much anxiety among
opposition parties because they perceived it to support the partisan agenda of Rajiv Gandhi and it was
defeated in the Rajya Sabha.

73rd Amendment Act, 1992

Following these circumstances, Rajiv Gandhi the then Prime Minister of India, introduced the 64th
Amendment bill on local government on the 15th May, 1989 in the Parliament, but it failed to get the
required support. A second attempt was made in September 1990 to pass the bill in the Parliament. The
bill however was not even taken up for consideration. In September 1991, a fresh bill on Panchayati Raj
was introduced by the Congress government under P. V Narasimha Rao, the then Prime Minister. It was
passed in 1992 as the 73rd Amendment Act 1992 with minor modifications and came into force on 24th
April 1993.

The Salient Features of the Act are:

The Act provided for the establishment of grama sabha in each village. It will be a body comprising of all
the adult members registered as voters in the panchayat area. Three shall be a three-tier system of
panchayat at village, intermediate and district levels. Smaller states with population below 20 Lakes will
have option not to have intermediate level panchayat. Seats in panchayats at all three level shall be
filled by direct election. In addition, the chairperson of the village panchayat can be made member of
the panchayat at the intermediate level. MP, MLA, MLC, could also be member of panchayat at the
intermediate and the district level.

In all the panchayats, seats should be reserved for SCs and STs in proportion to their population and 1/3
of the total number of seats will be reserved for women. Offices of the chairperson of the panchayat at
all levels shall be reserved in favour of SCs and STs in proportion in the state. One-third of the offices of
chairperson of panchayats at all levels shall also be reserved for women.

Legislature of the state shall be at liberty to provide reservation of seats and office of chairperson in
panchayat in favour of backward class citizens. Panchayats shall have a uniform five year term and
elections to constitute new bodies shall be completed before the expiry of term. In the event of
dissolution, election will be compulsorily held within six months. The reconstituted panchayat will serve
for remaining period of five year term. It will not be possible to dissolve the existing panchayats by
amendment of any Act before the expiry of its duration.

A person who is disqualified under any law, election to the legislature of the state or under any of the
state will not be entitled to become a member of a panchayat. Independent election commission will be
established in the state to superintendence, direction, and control of the electoral process and
preparation of electoral rolls. Specific responsibilities will be entrusted to the panchayats to prepare
plans for economic development and social justice in respect of matters listed in XI Schedule. For the
implementation of development schemes, main responsibility will be entrusted to the panchayats.

The panchayats will receive adequate funds for carrying out their plans. Grants from state government
will constitute an important source of funding but state government is also expected to assign the
revenue of certain taxes to the panchayats. In some cases, panchayat will also be permitted to collect
and retain revenue it raises.

In each state, finance commission will be established within one year and after every five years to
determine principles on the basis of which adequate financial resource would be entrusted for
panchayats. Panchayats existing on the 24th April 1993 will be allowed to complete their full term
except when they are dissolved by the house by resolution.[15]

The 73rd Amendment Act is an attempt to restructure the Panchayati Raj to reach the grassroot level.
The bill for the first time gave constitutional status to Panchayati Raj institutions and it became
mandatory on all state governments to implement it. This Amendment brought about uniformity in
structure, composition, powers and functions of panchayats. It gave impetus to Panchayati Raj to
promote social and economic development and improvement in living condition of rural India. The main
criticism leveled against the Act is that these institutions are viewed as implementing agencies for
developmental activities and that they are not given the status of decentralized political institutions.

Criticism apart, the Act fulfilled the dream of constitutional status to Panchayati Raj Institutions and the
state governments brought new legislations to implement it. It has been explained as the beginning of
silent revolution. This Amendment for the first time in the history of Panchayati Raj Institutions gave
opportunities for women in large numbers to enter local administration.

Conclusion

The Panchayati Raj in India is a system established from the time immemorial, from the above research
we see that the traces of the panchayati raj found in the Ramayan and Mahabarta period. We also see
from the Chanakya Arthasastra which mention about the Local Self-government and its functions.
During the British period the first time the three tire system of panchayati raj institution was established
by the lord Repon's.

During the British period the Panchayati Raj institution was created only to collect the revenue and the
power was actually was not transferred to the institution. After independence the draft constitution
assembly was formed for the preparation of the Constitution of India but local self-government did not
find its place in the Constitution. This was criticized by leaders like Mahatma Gandhi and at last there a
provision was inserted under Article 40 of the constitution.

Thereafter also there was no heed was paid regarding the local self-government. In the year 1957
Balwantrai Mehata Committee in its report laid down certain provision regarding the local self-
government. Thereafter on the said recommendation of the Balwantrai Mehata Committee certain state
established the panchayati raj institution in its state but its only works for few years. In 1977 when janta
dal Government comes in power it also formed a committee and the committee recommended the two
tire system but before it was implemented the janta party government was fall and the new
government comes in power and it never thought to implement this programme.

Then after Rajive Gandhi the then prime minister formed a committee which first time in its report
mention that the local self-government given constitutional recognition by inserting the separate
chapter and the Rajive Gandhi government introduce constitutional 64th amendment act and it was
passed in loksabha but due to majority in Rajya sabha the bill fails and the local self-government again
not find its place in the constitution.

But in the year 1992 the Bill was again introduce in Parliament by doing minor amendment and this time
bill was passed and the Panchayati Raj Institution finally find its place in the Constitution of India.
 Gram Swaraj: The Gandhian concept-

GANDHIAN PHILOSOPHY OF GRAM SWARAJ

Gandhi favoured participatory democracy and advocated for 'a village-based

political formation fostered by a stateless, classless society' for the creation of
Gram Swaraj. Gram Swaraj is an ideal non-violent social order, in which self-
sufficient, self-reliant, selfgoverning village-states function independently in vital
matters. It is a total revolution and a complete grassroots democracy in which
people are awakened to their capabilities and are fully empowered. It is founded
on spiritual values such as inner self-rule, love, compassion, service, sacrifice, etc.
Redefinition of development, minimum government, universalism, individual,
national, etc.

Gram Swaraj, as conceived by Gandhiji, is not the resurrection of the old village
Panchayats but the new formation of independent village units of Swaraj in the
context of the present-day world. Gram Swaraj is the practical embodiment of
truth and non-violence in the spheres of politics, economics and sociology. He
considered Gram Swaraj as an ideal society which is a stateless democracy with
liberal governance where social life has become so perfect that it is self-regulated.
"In the ideal state, there is no political power because there is no State" (Young
India, 2-7-1931, p. 162). Mahatma Gandhi being a practical idealist, realised the
practical usefulness of the ideal of stateless democracy and presented Gram
Swaraj as the conception of his ideal of stateless democracy. Gandhiji wanted true
democracy to function in India. He, therefore, observed: "true democracy cannot
be worked by twenty men sitting at the centre. It has to be worked from the
grassroots level, by the people of every village" (Palanithurai, G. (2007). Evolving
Grassroots Democracy. Concept Publishing Company, New Delhi, p. 476.).

Gram Swaraj is different from Panchayat Raj and Decentralization, which are
currently in vogue in India and abroad. A remarkable ideational ascent in respect
of Gram Swaraj has occurred in India during the 20th century through the efforts
and work of the visionaries like Gandhi, and Vinoba.

The concept of Gram Swaraj is not political; it touches all aspects of life: cultural,
social, economic and ecological. Village life should be so organised and managed
that community interests override personal interests, and everyone gets justice
and problems, if any, are resolved locally. It should be economically viable in the
sense that it should be self-reliant and not dependent on others for the basic
needs. Everyone should have access to the natural resources of the community,
and everyone should have employment. Ecological dimension is of special
importance because it affects not only the health and wealth of the community
but also its future existence.

Throughout his life, Gandhi used to emphasise the importance of village in India.
To him, for the progress and improvement of India, it was imperative to develop
the condition of Indian villages. Therefore, he prescribed a Panchayati Raj System
for rural administration and rural upliftment. The fact is that no one else
contributed to the theme of Panchayati Raj as much as he did and was able to
present a clear view. He never claimed to be original or innovative, but he was
representing Indian ingenuity in terms of an ideology and a way of life inherited
from India's antiquity. That is why he had an infallible appeal to both the elites
and the masses in the country as a whole. He was only interpreting the Indian
model of thought and practice in the light of modern challenges facing India, in
particular, and other human societies of the globe, in general.

RELEVANCE OF GRAM SWARAJ IN INDIAN DEMOCRACY

Gram Swaraj, as conceived by Gandhiji, is a genuine and virile democracy which

offers a potent cure for many of the political ills of the present political systems.
To Gandhiji political power was not an end in itself, but one of the means for
enabling people to better their condition in every sphere of life. He, therefore,
observed in his famous "Last Will and Testament" that though India has attained
political Independence, she "has still to attain social, moral and economic
independence, in terms of seven hundred thousand villages as distinguished from
the cities and towns" [Gandhi, M.K. (1962). Village Swaraj. Navajivan Publishing
House, Ahmedabad, p. 239]. It exemplified a picture and a programme of Gram
Swaraj or Panchayat Raj which would be a non-violent, self-sufficient, economical
unit with fullest political power. A c c o r d i n g t o Gandhiji, the Gram Swaraj is
mancentred, unlike the Western economy, which is wealth-centred. The former is
the life economy; the latter is the death economy. The economy of Gram Swaraj
will provide full employment to each one of its citizens based on voluntary co-
operation and working for achieving self-sufficiency in its basic requirements of
food, clothing and other necessities of life.

Modern economic systems rooted as they are in self-indulgence, the multiplicity

of wants and divorce of ethics from economics are large-scale mechanised,
centralised, complicated organisations. They are disfigured by unemployment,
under-employment, pauperism, exploitation, a mad race for capturing markets
and conquering lands for raw materials. Competitions, conflicts and class wars
corrode the social fabric. They involve enslavement of the individual, treating man
only as a hand feeding the machine, reducing him to a mere adjunct of the
machine. He loses his fine sensitiveness owing to soul-killing repetitive jobs.
Society is divided into the privileged and the underprivileged, the rich and the
poor. Never before was there such economic inequality as is seen today where
the multimillionaire is living aimlessly in the lap of luxury and the hard-working
toiler has hardly enough to keep his skin and bones together. Gandhiji suggested
Gram Swaraj as an infallible remedy for the ills, not only of India, but, of the
whole world. In a letter to Pandit Nehru dated 5-10-'45, Gandhiji wrote: "I am
convinced that if India is to attain true freedom and through India the world also,
then sooner or later the fact must be recognised that the people will have to live
in villages, not in towns, in huts, not in palaces. Crores of people will never be
able to live in peace with each other in towns and palaces. They will then have no
recourse but to resort to both violence and untruth. I hold that without truth and
non-violence, there can be nothing but destruction for humanity. We can realise
truth and non-violence only in the simplicity of village life" [Gandhi, M.K. (1962).
Village Swaraj. Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad, p. 239].

Gandhiji thus stood for simplicity in life and voluntary poverty. He said that
everyone should have a balanced diet, necessary clothing and shelter. He believed
that every living being has a right to food. He observed: "According to me the
economic Constitution of India and for the matter of that of the world, should be
such that no one under it should suffer from want of food and clothing. In other
words, everybody should be able to get sufficient work to enable him to make the
two ends meet. And this ideal can be universally realised only if the means of
production of the elementary necessaries of life remain in the control of the
masses" [Gandhi, M.K. (1962). Village Swaraj. Navajivan Publishing House,
Ahmedabad, p. 239].

Gandhi was opposed to all types of concentration of power and considered

centralisation of power as a menace and danger to democracy, ultimately leading
to distortion of all democratic values. He affirms that without decentralisation, it
is impossible to ensure individual liberty and mental and moral growth of man.
Similarly, it is equally essential for the realisation of the ideal of democracy, which
is not possible without adequate opportunities for individuals to participate in the
management of their own affairs [ Sharma M.L. (1987). Gandhi and Democratic
Decentralisation in India. (Deep and Deep Publications, New Delhi, pp. 44-45.].

Further, Gandhi does not seek only the decentralisation of political power. He
rather pleads for decentralisation of both economic and political power. For, the
success of political decentralisation, in his view, depends upon economic
decentralisation. He reiterated that a new democratic, equalitarian social-political
order had to be established on firm foundations and decentralisation in
economics must go side by side with decentralisation in politics [Prasad, M.
(1958). Social Philosophy of Mahatma Gandhi. Vishwavidyala Prakashan,
Gorakhpur, p. 107.].

In recent years, decentralisation is the watchword of modern governance

accentuating the relevance of Gandhi's thought. Gandhi's system of Panchayat Raj
was based on the principle of democratic decentralisation. He believed that in
India, power must flow to the masses. He regarded the villages as the basic unit of
administration, and every village must have sufficient power to manage its own
affairs. For him, a decentralised democracy based on nonviolence must consist of
groups settled in small communities or villages in which voluntary co-operation is
the condition of dignified and peaceful existence. For, it is the only way to realise
the values of democracy from the grassroots level as it will enable the people to
participate in taking and implementing decisions without a rigid and strict control
of any higher authority. Moreover, it is the only alternative to reduce the
interference of the state in the day-to-day affairs of the people .

Gandhiji indicated that Western mechanism of democracy was not suitable for
India. Therefore, he favoured India's own institutional framework to realise the
values of democracy. The conception of every village as a small republic was for
him a workable ideal in the Indian situation [Tiwary, KP and Sharma, S (2019).
Major Threats to Indian Democracy and a Gandhian Remedy. Prowess Publishing,
Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India, p. 114.]. He was in favour of a broad-based pyramidal
structure of decentralised power, with numerous village Panchayats at the
bottom as the vibrant sources of power, economic and political, and the National
Panchayat at the apex. He envisaged intermediary levels of district and state
panchayats, with the ultimate power vested in the village Panchayats. While the
village Panchayats would be elected directly by the people, the Panchayats would
elect the intermediary bodies that, in turn, would elect the National Panchayat.
He subscribed to the village-based government with a self-sufficient, autonomous
village economy. Gandhi's faith on Universal Adult Franchise, gender equality, and
participatory democracy can be known from his concept of Panchayat Raj. The
Panchayat of Gandhi's model would be sovereign, legally and politically, and
would be subordinate to none. It would hold legislative, executive and judicial
power – a perfect village government where perfect grassroots democracy would
function to ensure individual freedom, social security and common welfare.

Gandhi thought that for perfect swaraj, all the villages and all the villagers must
be enjoying freedom. So he opined, "Independence must begin at the bottom.
Thus every village will be republic or panchayat having full powers. It follows,
therefore, that every village has to be self-sustained, capable of managing its
affairs, even to the extent of defending itself against the whole world.

CONCLUSION

The preservation and strengthening of village independence will provide the

solution of most of India's socio-economic and political ills, and the village
independence can be maintained only when the Gandhian concept of Gram
Swaraj is followed. Gram Swaraj is not something that can be achieved in a short
time. It is not just a change in the physical look of the village; it involves the total
transformation of the outlook of the people living thereThe concept of Gram
Swaraj is not political; it touches all aspects of life: cultural, social, economic and
ecological. It provides an ideal non-violent social order, in which self-sufficient,
self-reliant and self-governing villages function independently in vital matters
leading to the holistic development of the villages.