History of Panchayati Raj

Firoj Ansari & Prof. Mohammad Abid Aligarh Muslim University

The establishment of Muslim power in India signified a political change which had a much deeper significance than the political changes caused by the struggle among the Medieval Hindu Kingdoms. Although, the disorder and political instability prevailing during the long period of decay were not conducive to an uninterrupted period of growth, yet the fundamental principles of state-local relationship hardly changed with the change of Kingdoms.

The Hindu Kings were tolerant of diversities in matters of religious faith and respected the autonomy of religious orders. They equally recognized the autonomous rights of Srenis (guilds) which looked towards villages of artisans as well as towns for their membership. The guilds permitted self-government to the people in a wide range of economic and social functions. This, along with religious practices and administration of justice in local Panchayats, seems to be one of the important reasons for the remarkable continuity and vitality of local self-governing institutions in Ancient India.

However, the Muslim rule in India was marked by a number of assumptions and ideas which were foreign to the soil. The new rulers claimed solidarity with the “Believers” only, the “non-Believers” being required to pay Jaziya for the protection of life and property and exemption from military service. The Muslim settlers were entitled to the lands but the Hindus had to pay between one third and one half of their produce as land revenue depending upon the commands of the rulers. Shershah and Akbar fixed land revenue to one-third of the produce while Ala-ud-din khilji and

Aurangzeb pitched it to one-half. The theory of relation between the Emperor and peasant regarding the land was totally different. All land belonged to the Emperor. The cultivator was, therefore, viewed as a tenant with rights to the crops raised by him rather than to the land. There were ‘abwab’ or illegal cesses of various kinds and other taxes like grazing tax, house tax, etc. In fact, the policy of Ala-Ud-Din Khilji was to impoverish the subjects to a level that they could not think of rising against the authority of Sultan. The economic basis for maintaining local institutions and undertaking development work continued to shrink with the fleecing away of the surplus margins and reducing the incomes of the villages to the substandard level of existence.

The local institutions still continued to function by sheer neglect on the part of the State government. The hands of the administration reached only up to district level or cities for the purpose of policing and administration of justice. For revenue purposes the machinery was rather more elaborate. When the Empire was at its zenith of glory it was divided in subahs (provinces), sarkars (sub -division) and parganas (union of villages). At village level it was the Muquaddam (headman) with whom the village dues were settled. Another important village level official was the Patwari or village accountant. Payment could be made in cash or kind. In South the Ryotwari system was adopted under which the liability regarding the payment of land revenue was fixed on the cultivator of the soil rather than on the village as a whole. When the Emperor was strong, he issued elaborate rules, caused frequent inspections to be made and took disciplinary action against delinquent officials. In this way headman controlled the arbitrary use of powers on the part of local officials.

The Hindu kingdom of Vijainagar in the South which had attained its acme of glory and wealth, during the times of the Sultanate rule in Northern India, had a well- developed system of rural local government based on the principles of Hindu polity. The Panchayat was responsible for the administration of justice, executive work and providing police services. It secured the assistance of village accountant (senateova), village watchman (talara), supervisor of compulsory labour (begar), and others, each of whom was paid by grants of land or portion of agricultural produce. The heads of guilds and corporations were allotted a place on the village Panchayat. The king had Mahanayakacharya as an officer to supervise the work of village assemblies and maintain links with village administration. ¹⁵

Panchayati Raj in twilight of the Mughals

In the twilight of the Mughal Empire when the Company Raj was rising to its ascendancy, the local governments in rural areas had been severally damaged at vital points but they had withstood the onslaughts with remarkable tenacity. Their strength, of course, depended upon the kind of social structure of the village and its revenue status.

Their vitality was most marked where the villages happened to be Bhaichara villages in which the habitants claimed blood ties with one another, cultivated the land, shared its products and met revenue demands collectively. Here the villagers settled their disputes themselves in the manner of a phratry, revenue demands and joined together for the purpose of village defence and construction work. It was this kind of village on which Charles Metcalfe remarked.

“The village communities are little republics, having nearly everything they want within themselves, and almost independent of any foreign relations. They seem to last where nothing else lasts. Dynasty after dynasty tumbles down, revolution succeeds revolution. Hindu, Pathan, Mughal, Maratha, Sikh, English, are masters in turn, but the village remains the same.”

The Panchayats were weakest in Zamindari or Jagirdari villages which were controlled by the revenue farmer or his agent under a grant from the Emperor or Nawab. He had consolidated his position, raising himself to the status of a virtual overlord in the period of anarchy that followed the decline of central authority. When checks and controls to his power of extortion became inoperative, he resorted to manage the villages under his revenue lease, in the manner of a big estate, and started usurping the magisterial authority in league and illicit connivance with Qanungo (local revenue registrar) and Daroga (the local police agent).

The Panchayat had practically ceased to exercise any function where the Zamindar or Jagirdar dealt with the farmer individually and himself held the court except on a caste level, where they still continued to enforce caste regulations. Where Panchayats did exist were dominated by the Zamindar, Jagirdar or his local agent or the members of the leading castes and could not render impartial justice to the weaker sections of the community.

The landless labourers or the lower caste inhabitants could not hope to receive equitable treatment of their demands for justice. The concept of Panchayat as a body which was equitable and dear to all the Varnas had come to be replaced by more hierarchical concepts of social organization in which the Zamindars,  government

servants and higher castes were entitled to special privileges and immunities, in relation to those considered below them. The bonds of interdependence, absence of excessive pressure on land and a clear definition of customary obligations, however, allowed the village community a placid and relatively peaceful existence, although it made it look too much towards the tradition which had become iniquitous by then as judged by modern standards.

Some villages had a heterogeneous population comprising of Muslim and Hindu elements. Cases amongst Muslims had to be decided according to Shriyat. The Mughal rulers had established courts of justice with a Qazi, to investigate the charges, Munsiff to apply the law of Shariyat, and Faujdar or police officers to enforce the same. Although, the disputes amongst Hindus could be decided according to local customs and practices yet the Muslim subjects enjoyed special protection if they happened to be parties to the suit.

The institutions of rural local government at village level as well as in occupational, social and religious fields, survived despite the adverse impact of an alien rule. They were considerably impoverished under a shrinking material base caused by heavy exactions of the Muslim rulers, frequent visitation of famines and recurring foreign invasions which broke the backbone of the peasantry.

Their village communities still performed judicial functions and apportioned revenue demands of the State amongst themselves (except in ryotwari areas). Their representation in district, provincial and imperial government had ceased. The Mughal nobility was no match for the ancient nobility of guild presidents, mayors, etc. whose interests and powers counterpoised the arbitrary powers of the king and prevented the misuse of governmental powers. The Mughal nobility was heterogenous, alien, profligate and divided. Except under Akbar, Shershah and a few other enlightened emperors, the State did not recognize its responsibility to improve irrigation, public works and social services.