Dynamics of Panchayati Raj Institutions – Problems and

Prospects

By

Dr. Vipin Kumar Singhal*

Abstract: Panchayati Raj institutions have been playing an important role in order to

monitor these rural development programmes. These institutions have been helpful in

identifying real beneficiaries in order to get maximum benefits out of these schemes.

Under these schemes priority has been given to scheduled castes and scheduled tribes,

women, weaker sections and the upliftment of backward areas. A number of hurdles

and constraints and deficiencies are also responsible for failure of these rural

development programmes. In this paper, an attempt has been made to examine various

issues, aspects and dimensions related to Panchayati Raj Institutions in Ghaziabad

district of Western Uttar Pradesh. It has been sought to analyze changes in the rural

society and its impact on socio-economic transformation due to panchayat, political

participation, and political mobilization etc. There are number of factors responsible for

created hurdles in performing the role of PRIs. These are castism, groupism and

factionalism, which resulting to bitter infightings, allegations and counter-allegations,

mutual suspicions and rivalries etc.

The study indicated that women did not get more opportunities in developmental

activities in PRIs due to the major role played by husband. The study concluded that

*Dr. Vipin Kumar Singhal, Member of Governing Board, Socio-Economic Development Research

Foundation, Sahiababad, Ghaziabad (U.P.)

Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2692119

Panchayati Raj System has been playing an important role for rural development in

general and upliftment of SC/ST and down trodden people in the society in particular.

1. Introduction

Panchayats have been the backbone of Indian villages since the beginning of

recorded history. Panchayati Raj Institutions in India is a homogenous effort for capacity

building of rural people to promote greater participation of them in their own

governance. The concern of the government for the life, liberty, and prosperity of the

rural masses, soon after independence, was reflected in various measures adopted by it

to better their lot. A number of prominent leaders such as: Mahatma Gandhi, Jawahar

Lal Nehru and Jai Prakash Narain indicated that the major task of independent India

would be to take democracy to the grass roots level and involve the rural masses in the

task of national reconstruction. According to Mahatma Gandhi, true democracy could

not be worked by twenty men sitting at the centre. It has to be worked out from below by

the people of every village.

The restoration of democracy in 1977 once again revived the hopes for the

revitalization of decentralized governance in the wake of the recommendations of Ashok

Mehta Committee (1978) for strengthening Panchayati Raj Institutions. But these were

ignored by the Government of India and the political leadership of most of the states as

they had no faith in decentralized governance. However, these recommendations were

implemented in a modified from in Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and West Bengal where

the Panchayati Raj Institutions were strengthened and made effective. After the Ashok

Mehta Committee followed by G.V.K. Rao Committee (1985), L.N. Singhvi Committee

(1986) and Sarkaria Commission (1988) have been constituted to make PRls more
2

Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2692119

functional and effective. Since 1989 there have also been three serious attempts to

accord constitutional status of PRls. Unfortunately 64th (1989) and 74th (1990)

Constitution Amendment Bill could not be translated into Act.

In the context of the changed scenario related to Panchayati Raj, it is essential to

assess the impact of the above political innovations on the nature and pattern of grass

roots politics in Western Uttar Pradesh. The major portion of population of Western

Uttar Pradesh, as elsewhere in India, live in the villages and the working of panchayati

raj institutions in this state has affected the life of the rural masses and they have

realized a sense of participation in the democratic functioning of the government. It is

true that a plethora of studies exist, regarding the various aspects of Panchayati Raj

Institutions. But very few systematic studies have been conducted with specific

reference to, rural factionalism, groupism, secret leadership, struggle and impact of

reservation of seats for the women, SCs/STs and OBCs etc. It can fairly be assumed

that this innovative and radical step must have influenced the process and pattern of

grass roots politics.

2. Objectives of the Study

i. To examine various issues, aspects and dimensions related to Panchayati Raj

Institutions.

i. To analyze changes in the rural society and its impact on socio-economic

transformation due to panchayat, political participation, socio-economic

development, and political mobilization etc.

3
3. Hypothesis of the Study

i. Number of factors such as groupism, caste system, local politics, education,

occupation, election and socialization etc. are responsible to determine the

effectiveness of Panchayati Raj Institutions.

4. Review of Literature

B.S. Bhargava (1979)1 discussed issues and problems in regard to panchayati

raj movement in the country in general and Karnataka in particular. Efforts have been

made to discuss major recommendations of the Asoka Mehta Committee with a view to

highlight issues and problems of great significance in reforming panchayati raj. Finally,

he suggested that there is a need for rural development to strengthen the rural

infrastructure for development, faith in panchayati raj and timely elections to these

bodies.

S.P. Jain (1999)2 emphasized the need for action plan for awareness generation

about working of Gram Sabha. He stated: “It has been observed over the years that the

performance of the Gram Sabha has suffered due to lack of awareness among the

people about the concept and utility of the institution of Gram Sabha, and their own role

in making it successful. Any effort directed towards strengthening this institution,

therefore, requires a very serious action plan for awareness generation about various

aspects of working of Gram Sabhas among the people”.

S.N. Chaudhary (2004)3 depicted that today due to reservation facility under the

73rd Constitutional amendment there are thousands of Dalit and Tribal leaders in

panchayats at all the three levels. Some of them have done wonderful work. But many

4
of them are the first generation entrant in politics, they are from lower socio-economic

status and they are notionally capacitated to understand their rights and duties.

Manjusha Sharma (2005)4 emphasized about Karnataka experiences which

indicate that women in the younger generation show an interest in the PRIs. The

majority of them are married but the significance attached to marital status seems to be

declining. Illiteracy among female members is higher at the gram panchayat level, while

female members at the zilla panchayat level were graduates. The women members had

a little exposure to mass media compared to men, particularly in newspaper reading,

perhaps due to lower literacy rates among rural women.

G. Palanithwai (2005)5 depicted that the elected women and Dalit leaders are

interested in taking up the issues of women, Dalits and children. To some extent they

have in this succeeded. They will show the way to others. But it is all through a

prolonged struggle. Apart from the assigned responsibilities and functions the

Panchayat leaders who found the Panchayat a space for development activities assume

several responsibilities and work on them to bring development to their Panchayat

areas.

M. George (2007)6 emphasized that while analysing of cases in the study area,

such incidences happened only when Dalits began to assert their political rights through

Panchayat Institution. It is evident that the upper castes controlled the affairs of the

village cannot tolerate the changes being brought about by the decentralized

democratic institutions. In the backdrop of such incidences an array of question raises

with reference to Panchayat Raj vis-à-vis Dalits.

5
 C. Ram Reddy et. al. (2009)7 revealed that the process of emergence of

backward caste women leaders is the same as in the case of men. The channels of

emergence of rural leadership through caste, family status are widely operational even

in the case of emergence of backward caste women leaders. Most of the women are

from families with second and third generation of political participation therefore they

must have had adequate political socialization.

Sarathi Banarjee (2010)8 depicted that the sacrosanct institutions of Panchayat

have turned into tools in the hands of the power-managers to mobilize rural people in

their quest for more power and ultimate supremacy in the state politics. Notwithstanding

the process of democratization in rural society initiated by the PRIs, these institutions

seem too vulnerable to fall victims to party bias (in some other state it may be caste or

class bias), apart from personal corruption. The political usurpation of panchayat power

by the party may be more fatal than the economic usurpation of panchayat funds as

evident in the case of West Bengal.

Chetama Singh (2012)9 emphasized that there are enormous hopes as

Panchayat Institutions under the Act have established their significance in sharing of the

power among the larger community, in managing the local resources otherwise ignored,

in providing a large number of talents in political works and in protecting the socio-

economic and political interests of the marginal sections of the Indian society.

Nirmala Buch (2012)10 emphasized that Gram Sabha has been described as the

institution to direct democracy for participation of the local community in decisions on

their concerns, programmes and projects, fixing priorities, selecting beneficiaries,

receiving annual reports and accounts, approving the coming year's programmes,

6
conducting social audit etc. But the enthusiasm of scholars and policy makers has not

caught the imagination of the local citizens and the extent of participation has remained

a matter of concern.

Prabhat Kumar Datta (2013)11 revealed that the constitutional provisions have

laid the foundation stone of local government the superstructures of which have to be

built up for which what is urgently needed is spontaneous initiative on the part of the

people. There is some ray of hope following the rise and growth of the civil society

organization in India working for democratization of governance.

V.N. Alok (2013)12 conducted that Karnataka has done the best. Rajasthan and

Maharashtra follow in this regard. Other significant scores are Odisha, Madhya Pradesh

and Chhattisgarh. Jammu & Kashmir for the first time came forward under this

parameter along with other states. The initiatives undertaken only since April 2011 till

December 2012 have been considered.

P.P. Satyendra Tripathi (2013)13 depicted that despite their responsibility for

water collection and sanitation management, women rarely participate in decision-

making when the construction of facilities is planned. All too often they have no say

about the location of a pump or the design of latrines. It is now recognized that the

exclusion of women from the planning of water supply and sanitation schemes is a

major cause of their high rate of failure.

Vikas Nandal (2013)14 dealt with the awareness and constitutional knowledge of

women in Panchayati Raj Institutions. The study has been conducted on 50 women

respondents in village Anwali District Sonipat Haryana. The study indicated that

7
participation of women in the affairs of Panchayat Elections is not up to mark. They

have less awareness about the Panchayati Raj Act 73 rd Constitutional Amendment and

the working of gram Panchayats.

M. Venkat Reddy (2014)15 emphasized that the task before the country to put

back Panchayat Raj on the track is a Herculean one. The 73 rd Constitutional

Amendment has brought about a structural change. To make this functional there is a

need to strengthen various aspects of PRIs. To a large extent this will depand upon

whether we are able to provide the human resources for the purpose. More rules,

regulations, procedures would not facilitate empowerment of the people.

G.R. Jayanandam & Panjala Narasaiah (2014)16 emphasized that political will

and wisdom of the politicians are required to take necessary measures to protect the

interest of the weaker sections that are prevented from enjoying their constitutional

rights. It is learnt that Atrocities on SCs & STs prevention Act is going to be amended to

include prevention of filing a nomination, holding office etc by the reserved candidates

as an offence under this Act.

5. Methodology:

The present study has been conducted in Ghaziabad District of Western Uttar

Pradesh. It is mainly based on primary source of information and data. The sample size

is 505.

6. Results and Discussions:

Results of the collected data from the study area have been discussed as follows:

6.1 Political Participation:

8
 In this section, an attempt has been made to analyze political participation of

rural people including role perception at grass roots level in the study area. Further, it

has sought to examine issues, dimensions, and aspects related to political participation

of rural people at the grass roots level.

Table – 1 depicted that 87.52 per cent of the respondents agreed with follow-up

panchayati raj system in the village, and 12.47 per cent of the respondents felt against

about it. Further, 76.83 per cent of the respondents were found to be member of various

political parties, out of which 40.72 per cent of the respondents were member of the

BSP, 31.95 per cent of the respondents supported to SP, 11.34 per cent of the

respondents were members of Congress, 9.53 per cent of the respondents were

members of the BJP, 3.6 per cent of the respondents felt communist party and 2.83 per

cent of the respondents were found with other political parties for membership. Thus,

majority of the respondents were attached with regional political parties.

Table – 2 revealed that 62.62 per cent of the respondents were actively

participated in political activities and 37.37 per cent of the respondents did not

participate actively in political activities. Further, that 62.57 per cent of the respondents

attended party meetings regularly, 22.77 per cent of the respondents did not attend any

party meeting and 14.65 per cent of the respondents rarely attended party meetings.

Out of which (who attend the party meeting regularly), about the issues regarding

discussion in party meeting, 25.94 per cent of the respondents were felt about

increasing of member, 28.16 per cent of the respondents were agreed with to work

according to party meeting, 23.73 per cent of the respondents felt priority to panchayat

work, 12.65 per cent of the respondents felt about reservation in panchayat and only

9
9.49 per cent of the respondents were found agreed with encouraging to dalits &

minorities class about the issues discussion in party meetings. Thus, majority of the

respondents actively participated in political activities and the take part in political

meetings.

Table – 3 revealed that 66.13 per cent of the respondents participated in an

election campaign, out of which 33.66 per cent of the respondents participated in

panchayat elections campaign, 7.72 per cent of the respondents were participated in

state legislative elections campaign and 6.13 per cent of the respondents were actively

participated in Lok Sabha election campaign. Thus, majority of the respondents had

participated at grass roots level elections campaign.

Table – 4 described that 51.88 per cent of the respondents were given donation

to their political parties. 28.91 per cent of the respondents did not given any donation to

the party, and 19.20 per cent of the respondents were rarely given donation to the party,

76.63 per cent of the respondents were felt with people participation to

complementation the works in panchayats and 23.36 per cent of the respondents were

agreed cooperation with govt. servants/police to completion the work in panchayats.

Further, table revealed that 70.89 per cent of the respondents were agreed with

problems faced by panchayat to completion the work and 29.10 per cent of the

respondents were against it. Thus, majority of the respondents had given donation to

the party, completed work of panchayats with people participation and various problems

faced by panchayat to completing the work.

10
 Table – 5 depicted that 18.43 per cent of the respondents felt corruptions is

responsible for completion the work. 16.75 per cent of the respondents favored

factionalism in this regard. 16.20 per cent of the respondents agreed with lack of

money, 15.08 per cent of the respondents supported to disharmony is main problem.

14.52 per cent of the respondents indicated as lack of cooperation in this regard. 10.05

per cent of the respondents felt that regional political parties were barrier to completion

the work and 8.93 per cent of the respondents agreed with lack of participation is main

problem to completion the work of panchayat.

Further, the table revealed that 70.49 per cent of the respondents felt that

cooperation of people is the main factor responsible for success of panchayats, 17.42

per cent of the respondents agreed with completion the aim in this regard and 12.07 per

cent of the respondents were felt that motivation by the government is main factor

responsible for success of panchayat. Thus, these factors are considered as the main

problems faced by panchayat to completion the work and the responsible for their

success.

6.2 Factors Related to Rural Development

Table – 6 revealed that 74.65 per cent of the respondents felt that gram sabha

has been playing an important role in rural development programmes in the village.

24.66 per cent of the respondents supported the programmes i.e. construction of roads

and sanitation works. 29.44 per cent of the respondents supported another programmes

on health and education. 25.19 per cent of the respondents felt that panchayat has

started small saving schemes for the rural people. 20.68 per cent of the respondents

supported the programmes of hand pumps.

11
 Table – 1

Views of the Respondents About Political Awareness According to age groups

Age of the Do you follow- Are you If yes, tell name of political party
Respondents up Panchayati member of any
(in completed Raj System in political party?
years) your village?
Yes No Yes No Congress BJP Samajwadi Bahujan Commu- Others
Party Samaj nist Party
Party
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
18-25 35 08 32 11 03 02 10 16 01 00
(6.93) (1.58) (6.33) (2.17) (0.77) (0.51) (2.57) (4.12) (0.25) (0.0)
26-45 176 22 152 46 16 14 48 61 07 06
(34.85) (4.35) (30.09) (9.10) (4.12) (3.60) (12.37) (15.72) (1.80) (1.54)
46-60 180 21 158 43 19 16 52 62 05 04
(35.64) (4.15) (31.28) (8.51) (4.89) (4.12) (13.40) (15.97) (1.28) (1.03)
61 and above 51 12 46 17 06 05 14 19 01 01
(10.09) (2.37) (9.10) (3.36) (1.54) (1.28) (3.60) (4.89) (0.25) (0.25)
Total 442 63 388 117 44 37 124 158 14 11
(87.52) (12.47) (76.83) (23.16) (11.34) (9.53) (31.95) (40.72) (3.60) (2.83)
Note: Percentage Indicated in the parenthesis.

12
 Table – 2

Views of the Respondents About Political Awareness and Activities in Political Parties According to Age Groups

Age of the If you are Do you go to party If yes, tell issues regarding discussion in party meeting
Responde- member of any meeting?
nts (in political party,
tell nature of
completed
participation
years) Active Passive Yes No Rare Increasing Priority to Encouraging To work Reservat-
of panchayat to dalits & according ion in
membership work minorities to party panchayat
class manifesto
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
18-25 18 14 24 11 08 06 05 02 07 04
(4.63) (3.60) (4.75) (2.17) (1.58) (1.89) (1.58) (0.63) (2.21) (1.26)
26-45 96 56 124 46 28 32 30 12 36 14
(24.74) (14.43) (24.55) (9.10) (5.54) (10.12) (9.49) (3.79) (11.39) (4.43)
46-60 99 59 129 47 25 34 29 14 35 17
(25.51) (15.20) (25.54) (9.30) (4.95) (10.75) (9.17) (4.43) (11.07) (5.37)
61 and 30 16 39 11 13 10 11 02 11 05
above (7.73) (4.12) (7.72) (2.17) (2.57) (3.16) (3.48) (0.63) (3.48) (1.58)
Total 243 145 316 115 74 82 75 30 89 40
(62.62) (37.37) (62.57) (22.77) (14.65) (25.94) (23.73) (9.49) (28.16) (12.65)
Note: Percentage Indicated in the parenthesis.

13
 Table – 3

Views of the Respondents About Political Awareness and Activities in Political Parties according to Age Groups
Age of the Did you participate in election If yes, tell which level of participation?
Respondents (in campaign?
completed years) Yes No Rare Lok Sabha State Legislative Municipality Panchayat
Assembly
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
18-25 21 14 08 05 04 04 08
(4.15) (2.77) (1.58) (0.99) (0.79) (0.79) (1.58)
26-45 135 45 18 12 14 39 70
(26.73) (8.91) (3.56) (2.37) (2.77) (7.72) (13.86)
46-60 144 36 21 11 16 41 76
(28.51) (7.12) (4.15) (2.17) (3.16) (8.11) (15.04)
61 and above 34 17 12 03 05 10 16
(6.73) (3.36) (2.37) (0.59) (0.99) (1.98) (3.16)
Total 334 112 59 31 39 94 170
(66.13) (22.17) (11.68) (6.13) (7.72) (18.61) (33.66)
Note: Percentage Indicated in the parenthesis.

14
 Table – 4

Views of the Respondents About Activities in Political Parties and Factors Responsible for Failure/Success
of Panchayats according to Age Groups

Age of the Did you give any Donation to your How the works were completed Have you faced any
Respondents Party? in Panchayats? problem to Completion
(in completed the Work
years)
Yes No Rare With Peoples Cooperation with Yes No
Participation Government
Servants/Police
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
18-25 21 12 10 32 11 29 14
(4.15) (2.37) (1.98) (6.33) (2.17) (5.74) (2.77)
26-45 102 59 37 152 46 141 57
(20.19) (11.68) (7.32) (30.09) (9.10) (27.92) (11.28)
46-60 105 57 39 155 46 145 56
(20.79) (11.28) (7.72) (30.69) (9.10) (28.71) (11.08)
61 and above 34 18 11 48 15 43 20
(6.73) (3.56) (2.17) (9.50) (2.97) (8.51) (3.96)
Total 262 146 97 387 118 358 147
(51.88) (28.91) (19.20) (76.63) (23.36) (70.89) (29.10)
Note: Percentage Indicated in the parenthesis.

15
 Table – 5

Views of the Respondents about Factors Responsible for Failure/Success of Panchayats according to Age
Groups

Age of the If problems faced by panchayat to completion the work, factors Factors responsible for
Respond- responsible for the problems success of panchayat
ents (in Disharmony Corruption
Factiona- Regional Lack of Lack of Lack of Completion Cooper- Motivati-
complete lism political participation cooperation money the aims ation of on by
d years) parties people govern-
ment
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
18-25 05 02 02 04 05 05 06 08 28 07
(1.39) (0.55) (0.55) (1.11) (1.39) (1.39) (1.67) (1.58) (5.54) (1.38)
26-45 25 14 12 20 23 21 26 35 139 24
(6.98) (3.91) (3.35) (5.58) (6.42) (5.86) (7.26) (6.93) (27.52) (4.75)
46-60 23 16 14 22 21 24 25 33 144 24
(6.42) (4.46) (3.91) (6.14) (5.86) (6.70) (6.98) (6.53) (28.51) (4.75)
61 and 07 04 04 06 05 08 09 12 45 06
above (1.95) (1.11) (1.11) (1.67) (1.39) (2.23) (2.51) (2.37) (8.91) (1.18)
Total 60 36 32 52 54 58 66 88 356 61
(16.75) (10.05) (8.93) (14.52) (15.08) (16.20) (18.43) (17.42) (70.49) (12.07)
Note: Percentage Indicated in the parenthesis.

16
 61.58 per cent of the respondents were written to the panchayat to solve

these problems, and 38.41 per cent of the respondents did not write to panchayat

about the same. 43.72 per cent of the respondents agreed with panchayat have

solved these problems and 56.27 per cent of the respondents felt that the

panchayat did not solve their problems. Thus, panchayat has been playing an

immense role to solve their problems of the people.

Table – 7 revealed that 44.55 per cent of the respondents felt that

MNREGA has been implemented by the government. 19.40 per cent of the

respondents agreed with surva shiksha abhiyaan, 15.64 per cent of the

respondents supported to national agriculture development programmes, 11.88

per cent of the respondents agreed with Indira Awas Yojana and 8.51 per cent of

the respondents expressed their opinion that national rural health mission plan

has been implemented by the government.

Further, the Table depicted that 24.35 per cent of the respondents felt that

these schemes were successfully implemented, 75.64 per cent of the

respondents did not agree about this. Out of which, 35.60 per cent of the

respondents expressed their views castism is the main problem to implement

these schemes. 30.62 per cent of the respondents indicated as lack of

awareness is the main problem in this regard. 14.92 per cent of the respondents

supported to favourism is the main problem. 10.73 per cent of the respondents

agreed with corruption is the main problem and 8.11 per cent of the respondents

felt that red tapism is the main problem. Thus,

17
 Table – 6

Views of the Respondents About the Major Development Programmes According to level of Education

Level of Do you want to If yes, tell about programmes Did you write to If yes, was it solved
give credit about panchayat about by panchayat?
Education
some major problems?
development
programmes to
gram sabha?
Yes No Construc- Health Small Hand Yes No Yes No
tion of and saving pumps
roads and Education schemes
sanitation
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Upto 81 33 20 24 21 16 66 48 28 38
Primary (16.03) (6.53) (5.30) (6.37) (5.57) (4.24) (13.06) (9.50) (9.00) (12.21)
Upto Middle 75 32 18 22 17 18 60 47 25 35
(14.85) (6.33) (4.77) (5.83) (4.50) (4.77) (11.88) (9.30) (8.03) (11.25)
Upto High 92 28 24 27 25 16 72 48 33 39
School (18.21) (5.54) (6.37) (7.16) (6.63) (4.24) (14.25) (9.50) (10.61) (12.54)
Upto 63 19 15 19 13 16 53 29 23 30
Intermediate (12.47) (3.76) (3.97) (5.03) (3.44) (4.24) (10.49) (5.74) (7.39) (9.64)
Graduation 42 11 10 12 12 08 36 17 16 20
(8.31) (2.17) (2.65) (3.18) (3.18) (2.12) (7.12) (3.36) (5.14) (6.43)
P.G. 24 05 06 07 07 04 24 05 11 13
(4.75) (0.99) (1.59) (1.85) (1.85) (1.06) (4.75) (0.99) (3.53) (4.18)
Total 377 128 93 111 95 78 311 194 136 175
(74.65) (25.34) (24.66) (29.44) (25.19) (20.68) (61.58) (38.41) (43.72) (56.27)
Note: Percentage Indicated in the parenthesis.

18
panchayat have been playing an immense role to implement various

programmes provided by the government for rural development, and also

panchayat faced various problems to successfully implement in these

programmes.

Table – 8 revealed that 51.48 per cent of the respondents agreed that

development programmes were not useful to villages. 24.35 per cent of the

respondents did not agree about this statement and 24.15 per cent of the

respondents did not express any opinion in this regard. 57.02 per cent of the

respondents felt that these development programmes are limited to caste,

community and family only. 24.75 per cent of the respondents did not agree

about this statement and 18.21 per cent of the respondents did not express any

opinion about the programmes limited to caste, community and family.

Further, the table revealed that 56.43 per cent of the respondents felt that

these development programmes were limited to influential people. 25.94 per cent

of the respondents were not agreed about this statement and 17.62 per cent of

the respondents did not express any opinion about this statement. 58.01 per cent

of the respondents expressed their views that these programmes are limited on

paper only. 22.77 per cent of the respondents did not agree about this statement.

19.20 per cent of the respondents did not express any opinion in this regard,

45.14 per cent of the respondents felt that these development programmes were

not confined to people welfare, while 36.63 per cent of the respondents did not

agree about the same, and 18.21 per cent of the respondents did not express

19
 Table – 7

Views of the Respondents About Implementation of Development Programmes According to level of Education
Level of Some Major Development Programmes, Successfully If No, What Problems Faced by
Education Implement by Government Implemented Panchayats?
MNREGA Indira Surva National National Yes No Lack of Favou- Red Corr- Casti-
Awaas Shiksha Agriculture Rural rism Tapism uption sm
Awar-
Yojana Abhiyan Development Health
Programme Mishan eness
Plan

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Upto 50 14 21 18 11 27 87 25 14 11 10 27
Primary (9.90) (2.77) (4.15) (3.56) (2.17) (5.34) (17.22) (6.54) (3.66) (2.87) (2.61) (7.06)
Upto 45 12 18 20 12 23 84 21 11 09 13 30
Middle (8.91) (2.37) (3.56) (3.96) (2.37) (4.55) (16.63) (5.49) (2.87) (2.35) (3.40) (7.85)
Upto High 54 17 24 16 09 30 90 27 15 06 09 33
School (10.69) (3.36) (4.75) (3.16) (1.78) (5.94) (17.82) (7.06) (3.92) (1.57) (2.35) (8.63)
Upto 37 05 18 16 06 21 61 21 09 03 05 23
Intermediate (7.32) (0.99) (3.56) (3.16) (1.18) (4.15) (12.07) (5.49) (2.35) (0.78) (1.30) (6.02)
Graduation 25 07 11 06 04 14 39 14 06 00 01 18
(4.95) (1.38) (2.17) (1.18) (0.79) (2.77) (7.72) (3.66) (1.57) (0.00) (0.26) (4.71)
P.G. 14 05 06 03 01 08 21 09 02 02 03 05
(2.77) (0.99) (1.18) (0.59) (0.19) (1.58) (4.15) (2.35) (0.52) (0.52) (0.78) (1.30)
Total 225 60 98 79 43 123 382 117 57 31 41 136
(44.55) (11.88) (19.40) (15.64) (8.51) (24.35) (75.64) (30.62) (14.92) (8.11) (10.73) (35.60)
Note: Percentage Indicated in the parenthesis.

20
 Table – 8

Views of the Respondents about Information of Development Programmes According to level of Education
Level of Not any gain to villages Limited to caste, Limited to influential Only on paper Not worry about people
Educat- community, and family people welfare
ion Agree Disa- No Agree Disa- No Agree Disa- No Agree Disag- No Agree Disa- No
gree Opinion gree Opinion gree Opinion ree Opinion gree Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Upto 61 29 24 68 26 20 63 30 21 61 30 23 50 44 20

Primary (12.07) (5.74) (4.75) (13.46) (5.14) (3.96) (12.47) (5.94) (4.15) (12.07) (5.94) (4.55) (9.90) (8.71) (3.96)

Upto 57 26 24 62 27 18 60 28 19 64 22 21 48 41 18
Middle (11.28) (5.14) (4.75) (12.27) (5.34) (3.56) (11.88) (5.54) (3.76) (12.67) (4.35) (4.15) (9.50) (8.11) (3.56)

Upto 60 28 32 63 30 27 72 27 21 69 27 24 54 42 24

High (11.88) (5.54) (6.33) (12.47) (5.94) (5.34) (14.25) (5.34) (4.15) (13.66) (5.34) (4.75) (10.69) (8.31) (4.75)

School
Upto 39 18 25 45 21 16 45 20 17 42 22 18 39 29 14
Interme- (7.72) (3.56) (4.95) (8.91) (4.15) (3.16) (8.91) (3.96) (3.36) (8.31) (4.35) (3.56) (7.72) (5.74) (2.77)
diate
Graduat- 28 13 12 33 12 08 27 18 08 36 09 08 24 20 09
ion
(5.54) (2.57) (2.37) (6.53) (2.37) (1.58) (5.34) (3.56) (1.58) (7.12) (1.78) (1.58) (4.75) (3.96) (1.78)
P.G. 15 09 05 17 09 03 18 08 03 21 05 03 13 09 07
(2.97) (1.78) (0.99) (3.36) (1.78) (0.59) (3.56) (1.58) (0.59) (4.15) (0.99) (0.59) (2.57) (1.78) (1.38)
Total 260 123 122 288 125 92 285 131 89 293 115 97 228 185 92
(51.48) (24.35) (24.15) (57.02) (24.75) (18.21) (56.43) (25.94) (17.62) (58.01) (22.77) (19.20) (45.14) (36.63) (18.21)

Note: Percentage Indicated in the parenthesis.

21
any opinion in this regard.

Table – 9 revealed that 87.72 per cent of the respondents felt that

reservation for women, SCs/STs has been considered to be effective for villages

and 8.31 per cent of the respondents were against about this statement, and

3.96 per cent of the respondents did not say anything about the effectiveness of

reservation for women, SCs/STs in the panchayat. 77.02 per cent of the

respondents felt that they were well aware about political power. 17.22 per cent

of the respondents did not agree about this statement and 5.74 per cent of the

respondents could not explain any thing in this regard.

82.97 per cent of the respondents felt that reservation is essential to do

justice to backward and downtrodden people in the society, 10.69 per cent of the

respondents did not agree about the same and 6.33 per cent of the respondents

did not express any opinion in this regard. Thus, the reservation of women,

SCs/STs in panchayats has been playing an immense role to do justice to these

persons in the society.

Table – 10 depicted that 80.79 per cent of the respondents felt that the rich and

powerful persons really trapped panchayats, 11.88 per cent of the respondents

did not agree about this statement and 7.32 per cent of the respondents did not

express any opinion in this regard.

42.97 per cent of the respondents felt that village fund allotted for this

purpose has not been properly utilized for the development of villages. 30.09 per

cent of the respondents felt that muscular power has been playing a very

22
 Table – 9

Views of the Respondents About Reservation of Women, SCs/STs in Panchayats According to level of Education
Level of In your opinion, is reservation Do you know about their Will they be successful in giving
Education is effective for villages? political power? justice to backward classes and
downtrodden people in society?
Yes No Can’t say Yes No Can’t say Yes No Can’t say

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Upto Primary 102 08 04 91 18 05 101 09 04
(20.19) (1.58) (0.79) (18.01) (3.56) (0.99) (20.00) (1.78) (0.79)
Upto Middle 97 07 03 81 20 06 91 11 05
(19.20) (1.38) (0.59) (16.03) (3.96) (1.18) (18.01) (2.17) (0.99)
Upto High 105 10 05 94 21 05 108 07 05
School (20.79) (1.98) (0.99) (18.61) (4.15) (0.99) (21.38) (1.38) (0.99)
Upto 73 06 03 59 16 07 58 16 08
Intermediate (14.45) (1.18) (0.59) (11.68) (3.16) (1.38) (11.48) (3.16) (1.58)
Graduation 42 07 04 40 09 04 38 08 07
(8.31) (1.38) (0.79) (7.92) (1.78) (0.79) (7.52) (1.58) (1.38)
P.G. 24 04 01 24 03 02 23 03 03
(4.75) (0.79) (0.19) (4.75) (0.59) (0.39) (4.55) (0.59) (0.59)
Total 443 42 20 389 87 29 419 54 32
(87.72) (8.31) (3.96) (77.02) (17.22) (5.74) (82.97) (10.69) (6.33)
Note: Percentage Indicated in the parenthesis.

23
 Table – 10

Views of the Respondents about Political Power of Panchayats according to level of Education

Level of It is said in villages that rich and powerful Explain some reasons which are proving
Education persons trap panchayats. What is your hurdles in the development of village
opinion? panchayats
It is true Not like that Can’t say Misuse of village Muscular Groupism
budget money power

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Upto Primary 94 12 08 47 35 32
(18.61) (2.37) (1.58) (9.30) (6.93) (6.33)
Upto Middle 83 14 10 50 30 27
(16.48) (2.77) (1.98) (9.90) (5.94) (5.34)
Upto High School 98 15 07 46 39 35
(19.40) (2.97) (1.38) (9.10) (7.72) (6.93)
Upto Intermediate 66 09 07 37 24 21
(13.06) (1.78) (1.38) (7.32) (4.75) (4.15)
Graduation 44 06 03 28 13 12
(8.71) (1.18) (0.59) (5.54) (2.57) (2.37)
P.G. 23 04 02 09 11 09
(4.55) (0.79) (0.39) (1.78) (2.17) (1.78)
Total 408 60 37 217 152 136
(80.79) (11.88) (7.32) (42.97) (30.09) (26.93)
Note: Percentage Indicated in the parenthesis.

24
important role to become a hurdle in the development of village panchayat, and 26.93

per cent of the respondents agreed with groupism is the main hurdle in the development

of village panchayats. Thus, rich and powerful persons have been playing an important

role in trapping panchayats and misused village’s money and always used muscular

power and development groupism in the villages.

7. Government and PRIs

Panchayati Raj bodies are looked upon as instruments of rural development. As

such, it becomes relevant and meaningful to evaluate the working of these institutions. 17

Contributing to economic development and social welfare is the core strategy of

panchayati raj. Considering and evaluating this view point, one can point out that the

relationship between panchayati raj and rural development are not only interconnected

but interlinked also. The objectives of both panchayati raj and rural development are the

two sides of a coin. Since the commencement of the planning era in India in 1951,

growth with social justice has been set forth as the cardinal principle of Indian planned

economic development. Indian economy is a rural economy; India is a land of villages

and it consists of 5,75,936 villages. The potentiality for progress and valuable resources

lies in villages and not in a few metropolitan or municipal areas.18

The objectives of rural development may broadly be defined as maximizing

production in agriculture and allied activities in the rural areas, development of rural

industries with emphasis on village and cottage industries, generating maximum

possible employment opportunities in rural areas, specially for the weaker sections of

the community so as to enable them to improve their standard of living; providing basic

25
service like drinking water, communication facilities, health and welfare and education.

The success of any development programme intended to benefit the rural poor, requires

an efficient organizational structure. This is because organizational effectiveness is an

essential input for planning and implementation of development programmes. 19

Although many other complimentary factors influence the overall performance of the

programme, an efficient administrative organization is a pre-requisite for effective

implementation of any development scheme. The importance of the efficient

administrative apparatus is further felt, by the planners as the Seventh Five Year Plan

took the view that the shortcomings in the implementation of anti poverty programmes,

are basically the result of the weaknesses in the administration.20

Rural development policies and programmes are shaped and funded by the

Centre, even though rural development is within the jurisdiction of the states. At the

Centre, there is no institutionalized mechanism for coordination of these activities, which

are handled by several ministries apart from the Rural Development Ministry. A similar

lacuna prevails at the state level. District administration is essentially revenue

administration and it is ill-equipped to meet the challenges of development. Policy-

making and other strategic positions are manned by the generalist administrators and

not by specialists.21

Development of rural areas has been at the core of planning process in the

country and also in the State. Rural Development is a broad, inclusive term which takes

in its consideration socioeconomic and political development of the rural areas. It

includes measures to strengthen the democratic structure of society through the

Panchayati Raj Institutions as well as measures to improve the rural infrastructure,

26
improve income of rural households and delivery systems pertaining to education,

health and safety mechanisms. Poverty alleviation is a key component of rural

development.

Government of India has taken many initiatives for rural development. For this

purpose it has setup the Ministry of Rural Development. This Ministry is a nodal

department for the two international organizations viz., the Centre on Integrated Rural

Development of Asia and the Pacific (CIRDAP) and the Afro-Asian Rural Development

Organization (AARDO). The Ministry consists of the following three Departments: 1.

Department of Rural Development 2. Department of Land Resources 3. Department of

Drinking Water Supply The Department of Rural Development implements schemes for

generation of self employment and wage employment, provision of housing and minor

irrigation assets to rural poor, social assistance to the destitute and Rural Roads. Apart

from this, the Department provides the support services and other quality inputs such as

assistance for strengthening of DRDA Administration, Panchayati Raj Institutions,

training & research, human resource development, development of voluntary action etc.

for the proper implementation of the programmes. The major programmes of the

Department of Rural Development are Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana, (PMGSY),

Rural Housing (RH) Sampoorna Gramin Rozgar Yojana (SGRY) and Swaranjayanti

Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY).

Panchayati Raj Department is an important department of Uttar Pradesh related

to the rural development. The main objective of this department is to strengthen the

Panchayati Raj System in the state according to the 73rd amendment of Indian

constitution. So that panchayats can realize the dream of rural administration and rural

27
development with complete coordination and transparency. For this purpose the

department has provided a Citizen Charter. For the sake of public convenience and

knowledge, this charter has been divided into 7 subjects:- 1. Financial aid to Gram

Panchayats; 2. Rural Cleanliness Programmes; 3. Responsibilities of the Panchayats-

(Transparency in work, rural administration & development); 4. Responsibilities of public

towards Panchayat; 5. Decentralization Programme; 6. Control over the Gram

Panchayats; 7. Arrangement of Panchayat Help-line. Citizen Charter is a continuous

process which will change periodically according to the feelings, recommendations,

experiences and reactions of the public.

Thus, the economic development conceived in the framework of centralized

planning has curbed local initiative and aspirations. Increasingly, central and state

government control over economic resources and political power has come in the way

of locals building their identity and acquiring legitimacy. District administration has to be

restricted, and panchayati raj institutions must function not merely as appendages of the

central and state governments for implementation of programmes but must operate as

centres of local power and authority, and in fact as a third tier of the federal polity that is

very much alive and kicking.

8. Critical Assessment:

Grass root politics are related with certain factors that are playing an important

role in determining political activities at the grass root level. These factors include:

caste, religion, occupation, education, leadership, political power, economic power,

political party, mass media etc. These factors already discussed earlier have also found

to have direct or indirect linkages between grass roots politics and rural leadership,

28
participation in politics/elections, affiliation with political parties, failure/successes of

panchayat, voting, and rural development. It is imperative to note that rural people are

not at all conscious about democratic decentralization and political participation. After

casting their votes in the Panchayat elections they forget their further duties and they

are yet to learn to act as development participants in the PRIs and even they have been

taught to think themselves as part and parcel of the grassroots governance. Study also

found that the dominant male echelons connected with the PRIs manipulate some

women representatives most of the times in their role performance. Hence, men

manipulation to women leaders in their role performance virtually disrupts the vitality of

women reservation. Therefore, party politics, specifically, the ruling party interference

and dominance over the PRIs violate the very essence and philosophy of democratic

decentralization and grassroots governance.

Thus, it is clear that a number of factors have been influencing grass roots

politics in the PRIs. These factors are: democratic consciousness, participation in

elections, welfare of the masses, satisfaction on the functioning of panchayats,

education, rural banks, and voters. And related to these are other factors such as:

majority caste domination, property, land, wealth, linkages with police and bureaucracy,

religion, language, regionalism, factionalism, favouritism, groupism, affiliations of

political leaders and different parties, politicalisation, and socialization of rural masses.

This is a fact that these factors have been playing a pivotal role in determining the level

of grass roots politics in functioning and responsibilities of the panchayat leaders and

panchayat system in rural society.

Various development programmes were started by the government for rural

29
development in India, these programmes have been helpful in eliminating poverty,

unemployment, inequality, raising educational facilities, agricultural development,

infrastructure development, development in small scale and cottage industries etc.

These programmes have been found to be very helpful for the upliftment of scheduled

castes and scheduled tribes people, women and children living in rural areas. The

devolution of power to panchayats for organizing and executing various programmes of

socio-economic development and providing adequate financial support for the purpose

will be making the plan formulation and their execution through people’s participation

more realistic and efficient. The strengthening of panchayati raj institutions through

specific provisions in the constitution will greatly help this process of transfer of planning

functions from the state level to the district and panchayat level. For the creation of a

real third tier government was going to be greatly facilitated by the provisions of election

to these bodies for five year term conducted by the Election Commission. Such

elections will strengthen the roots of democracy at the grass roots level and will also

provide budgetary propriety in the raising and utilization of the financial resources.

It is true that panchayati raj structures set up in our country are not doing very

well and that there is a need to revitalize them. There is basically a need to evolve a

comprehensive concept of panchayati raj, which clearly spells out as to what kind of roll

is expected from it. It is also important to realize that representative participation may

not lead to mass participation in our kind of socio-economic rural power structure.

Changing this structure or at least strengthening the position of the poor against

exploitation is an important requirement for the success of panchayati raj. The emerging

scenario of the dynamics of development and the thrust on decentralized planning

30
opened new vistas of development. In sum, institutional, structural, and functional

contours of Panchayati Raj have to be in conformity not only with the accelerating pace

of development but also with the developmental strategies and policies that have

evolved over a period of time. The Panchayati Raj institutions in the coming decades

should therefore be equipped to undertake democratic development management under

conditions of rapid changes, continuous growth, and sustained innovations in all shapes

of rural life.

9. Conclusions:

The study concluded that the panchayat system has fragmented the rural society

in Uttar Pradesh. It has created cleavages and generated tensions leading to castism,

groupism and factionalism. This leads to bitter infightings, allegations and counter-

allegations, mutual suspicions and rivalries which generally result in clashes leading to

long drawn out litigations. The factionalism starts with different groups among

panchayat leaders. The ex-leaders and defeated panches, pradhans and up-pradhans

play an important part in fomenting groupism. This generally happens within the

members of same economically dominant castes and classes.

The study concluded that the majority of the respondents felt that the rich and

powerful persons really trapped panchayats and village fund allotted for the purpose

has not been properly utilized for the development of villages and muscular power has

been playing a very important role to become a hurdle in the development of village

panchayat. Thus, it can be concluded that rich and powerful persons have been playing

31
an important role in trapping panchayats and misused village’s money and always used

muscular power and development groupism in the villages.

The study further concluded that the activities of village panchayat have been

indicated useful and helpful about rising political awareness, feel political power,

expectation for good life, fight for the rights, take interest and participate in village work

and develop new horizon at village level to justice and welfare for rural people in the

society. The study also revealed that the majority of the respondents have been

consulted and influenced by different categories of the people like caste leaders, local

panchayat leaders, party works, friend and relatives.

The study revealed that the majority of the respondents positive indication that

more rights should be given to women in the society to empowerment of women and

their role in political and social could be strengthen. The study concluded that due to

socialization, politicization, and transformation in rural areas, positively reforms in

women life and has greatly increased in various activities and their social status. Study

further concluded that the majority of the respondents felt that women did not get more

opportunities in developmental activities in PRIs due to the major role played by

husband and lack of participation of women in panchayati raj institutions of the study

area.

Finally, it is imperative to note that rural people are not at all conscious about

democratic decentralization and political participation. After casting their votes in the

Panchayat elections they forget their further duties and they are yet to learn to act as

development participants in the PRIs and even they have been taught to think

32
themselves as part and parcel of the grassroots governance. Study also found that the

dominant male echelons connected with the PRIs manipulate some women

representatives most of the times in their role performance. Hence, men manipulation to

women leaders in their role performance virtually disrupts the vitality of women

reservation. Therefore, party politics, specifically, the ruling party interference and

dominance over the PRIs violate the very essence and philosophy of democratic

decentralization and grassroots governance.

Panchayati Raj institutions have been playing an important role in order to

monitor these rural development programmes. These institutions have been helpful in

identifying real beneficiaries in order to get maximum benefits out of these schemes.

Under these schemes priority has been given to scheduled castes and scheduled tribes,

women, weaker sections and the upliftment of backward areas. A number of hurdles

and constraints and deficiencies are also responsible for failure of these rural

development programmes.

10. Suggestions:

 The elected representatives of the panchayats should exercise superintendence and

control over government officials, i.e. serving the Panchayats instead of playing a

subordinate role. Thus, there is an urgent need to educate local leadership about

their legitimate role in nation-building and the governance of the country.

 The Gram Sabhas should be fully involved in the plan formulation, implementation,

monitoring and evaluation of the development works to be undertaken by the Gram

Panchayats. The NGOs of repute may be assigned the job of creating awareness

33
 among the members of Gram Sabha. The presence of the women should also be

ensured in particular.

 To reduce the over-dominance of bureaucracy, its powers should be curtailed.

Sincere efforts must be made to bring an attitudinal change in the functioning of rural

bureaucracy. It would be better it all DRDAs are placed under the administrative

control of the Zila Parishads.

 The requirements of financial accountability should be designed and supervised by

the CAG and the power of dissolution as well as accountability of lower level

Panchayat units should rest with the next higher levels of Panchayats.

 Since women for the first time have entered into Panchayati Raj politics at a large

scale, proper training for them is highly essential. In this connection it may be

recommended that for women representatives two types of training be given, i.e. one

exclusively for them and another a combined one with their male counterparts.

34
References:

1. Bhargava, B.S. (1979), “Panchayati Raj Institutions: An Analysis of Issues,

Problems and Recommendations of Asoka Mehta Committee”, Ashish Publishing

House, New Delhi.

2. Jain, S.P. (1999), “Gram Sabha – Task before the Nation”, Kurukshetra, October.

3. Chaudhary, S.N. (2004), “Dalit and Tribal Leadership in Panchayats”, Concept

Publishing Company, New Delhi.

4. Sharma, Manjusha, (2005), Empowering Women for Rural Development, In:

Governance at Grassroots Level in India (ed.) S.S. Chahar, Kanishka Publications,

Distributors, New Delhi.

5. Palanithurai, G. (2005), “Process and Performance of Gram Panchayat Women

and Dalit Presidents”, Concept Publishing Company, New Delhi.

6. George, M. (2007), “Dalits, Panchayat Raj and Power Equations”,

Countercurrents.org, May.

7. Reddy, C. Ram, Das A.R. and Naidu, R.V.K. (2009), “Panchayati Raj and the

Political Empowerment of Dalit Women (A Study of Backward Caste Sarpanches in

Anantapur District)”, Journal of Social Welfare and Management, Vol. 1, No. 1,

Jan-Mar.

8. Banerjee, Sarathi (2010) The Party and the Panchayats of West Bengal, June.

9. Singh, Chetama (2010), “Panchayat Act and Grassroot Leadership in

Decentralized Democracy”, The Indian Journal of Political Science, Vol. LXXIII, No.

2, April-June.

35
10. Buch, Nirmala (2012), “Gram Sabha and Panchayat Raj”, Social Action, Vol. 62,

January-March.

11. Datta, Prabhat Kumar (2013), “Making Local Self – Government in Rural India

Work: Old Tradition and New Challenges”, in Indian Journal of Public

Administration, Edited by S.L. Goel, Vol.- LIX, No.- 1, January- March.

12. Alok, V.N. (2013), “Strengthening of Panchayats in India: Comparing Devolution

Across States – Empirical Assessment 2012-13”, in Indian Journal of Public

Administration, Edited by S.L. Goel, Vol. LIX, No. 1, January- March.

13. Tripathi, P.P. Satyendra (2013), Women Empowerment- An Engine of Sustainable

Development”, Kurukshetra (A Journal on Rural Development), Vol. 61, No. 10,

August.

14. Nandal, Vikas (2013), “Participation of Women in Panchayati Raj Institutions: A

Sociological Study of Haryana, India”, International Research Journal of Social

Science, Vol. 2(12), 47-50, December.

15. Reddy, M. Venkat (2014), “Has the Panchayati Raj Worked?”, in Kurukshetra (A

journal on Rural Development), Vol. 62, No. 3, January.

16. Jayanandam, G.R. & Narasaiah, Panjala (2014), “Two Decades of Panchayati Raj-

Gaps and Challenges”, in Kurukshetra (A journal on Rural Development), Vol. 62,

No. 3, January.

17. Harichandram, C. (1983), “Panchayati Raj and Rural Development: A Case Study

of Tamil Nadu”, Concept Publishing Co., New Delhi, p. 1.

18. Biju, M.R. (1998), “Dynamics of New Panchayati Raj System – Reflections and

Retrospections”, Kanishka Publishers, Distributors, New Delhi, p. 254-255.

36
19. Tripathi, et. al. (1985), “IRDP in South India: An Evaluation”, p. 73.

20. Quoted in Bagchee, Sandeep (1978), “Poverty Alleviation Programme in Seventh

Plan”, Economic and Political Weekly, January, p. 144.

21. Gaur, Rinki (2008), “Political Mobilisation and Panchayati Raj Institutions”, Sunrise

Publication, New Delhi, p. 172-173.

37