Public Sector Undertakings: Public sector in modern India; Forms of Public Sector Undertakings; Problems of autonomy, accountability and control; Impact of liberalization and privatization.

_______________________________________________________________________________

Click on ' JOIN THIS SITE ' to get instant updates on new posts on this blog. And also for 'INTERACTIONS AND DISCUSSIONS' regarding this blog's posts 'JOIN ITS FACEBOOK COMMUNITY/GROUP' that is mentioned on the right hand side of this page.

_______________________________________________________________________________

PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKINGS IN INDIA:

In India, a government-owned corporation is termed as a Public Sector Undertaking (PSU). This term is used to refer to companies in which the government (either the federal Union Government or the many state or territorial governments, or both) own a majority (51 percent or more) of the company equity. 

List - 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_public_sector_undertakings_in_India

EVOLUTION OF PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKINGS IN INDIA:

During the British Rule the presence of factories and enterprises was conspicuous,however they were mostly built and used for vested interests of colonialism and thus did little good to India and its people.

Post Independence due to the above as well as other factors, India was in deep socio-economic issues. There was grave underdevelopment,along with disparities in income,unemployment,lack of trained manpower and a weak industrial base and investments,unacceptable infrastructural facilities,etc.

Therefore in order to self sustain and become self reliant the Public Sector Undertaking blueprint was developed under Planned Economic Development model of Socialist countries that would address all the above problems.

ROLE OF PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKINGS IN INDIA:

PSUs have laid a strong foundation for the Industrial development of the country as it is not interested in profit making but nation building.

They leverage the government through major shareholding in the Industries to intervene in the economy in a major way thus helping in achieving the desired socio-economic objectives and long term goals.

They help in pushing the agricultural economy on to the progressive pathway and rural development as well as providing basic infrastructural facilities,educational and employment opportunities.

PUBLIC SECTOR IN MODERN INDIA:

Do go through this write up -  


http://www.dnaindia.com/specialfeatures/report_psus-modern-industrial-temples-of-india_1296571

In the beginning these PSUs were confined to those core and strategic industries that would not be touched by the private players like Railways,Coal and Oil,Heavy Industries,Forest industries,etc. due to heavy investment required along with a lot of time to complete and humongous risks involved that could lead to heavy loss if went wrong and also the private players lacked the expertise for the same.

Therefore,the public sector(govt.) entered the same and began the development.

The later or second phase witnessed steps like nationalisation of industries,sick units being taken over by private players,and the public sector entering into many other fields like manufacturing consumer goods,consultancy,contracting and transportation,etc.

Thus according to Industrial Policies taken out from time to time, there were three categories that industries were classified into with respect to the State's role:

i) Schedule A category was reserved for the future development of those industries that would be the exclusive responsibility of State.

ii) Schedule B category included Enterprises whose initiative of development would be driven principally by the State and then private participation would be allowed to supplement the efforts.

iii) Schedule C included remaining industries left to the private sector.

The latest Industrial policy of  1991 has thus under collapse of socialist model of development,non fulfillment of stated objectives of the State of PSUs leading to low growth,underdevelopment and Liberalisation,privatisation and globalisation principles brought in fundamental changes in the approach of public sector responsibilities and priorities where the role of the State is rolled back and restrictions removed along with New Public Management,Public Choice theory and Public-Private Partnership theories and practices taking over.

FORMS OF PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKINGS IN INDIA:

i) Public Sector Enterprises - Where government (state or central or both) hold at least 51% shares. Its forms of organisation are Departments,Corporations,Company,Joint Enterprise,Development corporation. For details please refer to the classifications of the above mentioned in a previous post on this blog titled "Organisations"- 


( http://publicadministrationtheone.blogspot.in/2012/07/organisations-theories-systems.html ) 

and also refer to conferring of statuses  


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navratna

ii) Central Public Sector Enterprises - Classified into Strategic and Non Strategic. Their areas are: Arms and Ammunitions and allied items of defence equipments,defence aircrafts and warships. Atomic energy(except in the areas related to the operation of nuclear power and applications of radiation and radio-isotopes to agriculture, medicine and non-strategic industries). Railways transport. Further conferred with Maharatna,Navratna,Miniratna status,refer  


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navratna

iii) Public Sector Banks - Banks where government holds more than 50% or majority stake. 

Refer:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_sector_banks_in_India

iv) Section 25 Companies -

Public Sector Enterprises having objects to promote commerce, art, science, religion, charity or any other useful purpose and not having any profit motive can be registered as non-profit company under section 25 of the Companies Act, 1956.

This section empowers the Central Government to grant a licence directing that such an association may be registered as a company with limited liability, without the addition of the words `Limited' or `Private Limited' to its name.

Such companies are also called as the Non-profit or 'No Profit - No Loss' companies.

CHANGING SCENARIO OF PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKINGS IN INDIA:

Their elevated status as drivers as economy was romanticist in approach and thus led to issues like over staffing ,corruption,wasteful practices,lack of work culture and motivation were unchecked and systematically ignored by the government and led to the subsidisation of these concerns by them. This led to permanent drainage on the exchequer. thus instead of socialist attitude these PSUs were developing an attitude of Statism with all its dangers.

Many reports and committees followed to understand the issue and these were the results:

i) Persistently loss making units that are irretrievable and either need to be disposed off or handed over to private sector for overhaul.

ii) Diversification into activities like producing bread and foot wear,where public enterprise intervention is superfluous.

iii) High wage bills to the total neglect of productivity.

iv) Under utilisation of capacities

v) Hasty nationalisation of sick concerns that ultimately turned out as an incentive for unscrupulous capitalists to bleed the enterprise white in the hope that once sick,the Govt's intensive care unit would automatically jump to rescue.

vi) Unprofessional personnel practices

vii) Appointment of politicians as part time chairmen

viii) Low calibre of senior executives

ix) Excessive rules and regulations causing red tapism

x) Non cooperation from controlling economic ministers residing in New Delhi

xi) Poor infrastructural linkages among various segments like power,coal,steel,cement,irrigation,transport and communication.

xii) Wrong product mix which saddles the public sector with unsold stock.

xiii) Obsolete technology

xiv) Unclear definition of objectives.

xv) Low profitability which is an impediment to successful plan implementations. THis is because of contradictions and dilemma in the socio economic objectives of the PSUs due their obligation to provide employment to a large base instead of profitability as well.

xvi) They are not permitted to change their economic prices for the services they render and goods they supply.

 PROBLEMS OF AUTONOMY IN PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKINGS IN INDIA:

i) Chief executives of the PSUs not given a fixed tenure thus hampering policy stability and continuity in a definite manner.

ii) Minister allotted to the undertaking has full authority to terminate Chairman or Director or Chief Executive.

iii) Due to a short tenure (As per a Standing conference on Public Enterprise the average tenure is only 2 years) the Chief Executive is under constant pressure to show short term results at the cost of long term disadvantages.

iv) Many Committees have recommended that the procedure of contract termination of a CEO should be same as the appointment procedure,i.e. by an appointment committee of the cabinet's recommendation. This recommendation has been somewhat implemented by the Central government but with certain conditions.

v) Directors appointed by the government to the Board of Directors of PSUs try to influence the decision making process of the board without accepting responsibility at the end creating a lot of interference in their independent functioning and economical inititatives.

vi) Control from above is a big impediment in the functioning of PSUs as whenever a new project is taken up by a PSU it has to go through Expenditure Finance Committee and Project Investment Board which is very cumbersome and causes unnecessary delay and authoritarianism.

vii) No definite criteria for evaluation of performance of PSUs. On the basis of The Sen Gupta Committee recommendations certain memoranda of understanding have been signed with the PSUs and Central Govt. and State Govt. Recent one is between the Central Govt. and SAIL.

viii) Nepotism and favourability in PSU appointments by politicians leading to inefficiency and incompetency in functioning. Therefore merit should only be the criteria for selection.

ix) No proper retention policies for retaining competent staff from the lure of lucrative private offers.

x) Lack of corporate planning,inventory management,paucity of resources,not up to the mark pay scales,delay in project implementations.

xi) Lack of authority in taking a commercial mode in areas where opportunities exist for profit making and thus gets caught in bureaucratic and political red tapism thus keeping it bureaucratic in nature instead of a complementing approach of profitability and social obligations.

Another very good and effective measure to increase autonomy of PSUs introduced is the conferring of Navratna,Maharatna and Miniratna status to them.

ACCOUNTABILITY AND CONTROL OF PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKINGS IN INDIA:

The Parliamentary Committee on Public Undertakings since 1963 is a mechanism of accountability and control of parliament over the PSUs. Every year,it submits 6 reports that educate the public opinion but that is all what they seem to do. The latest device invoked to enforce accountability is a memorandum of understanding between the PSU/PSE and its undertaking Ministry. Since 1989 PSE in India had been put under a notice as it were to show results and in 1990 and 91 about 95 enterprises have signed MoUs. Latest is SAIL MoU with the Central Govt.

This has given these Undertakings and Enterprises necessary freedom as well as a clear defined objective to follow that are practical as well as the necessary control and accountability of PSUs to the people through the Parliament thus avoiding misuse of their powers.

IMPACT OF LIBERALIZATION AND PRIVATISATION ON PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKINGS IN INDIA:

on 24th July 1991,the New Economic Policy was announced to be followed from there on that has been advocating for public sector reforms.

Under collapse of socialist model of development,non fulfillment of stated objectives of the State of PSUs leading to low growth,underdevelopment and Liberalisation,privatisation and globalisation principles brought in fundamental changes in the approach of public sector responsibilities and priorities where the role of the State is rolled back and restrictions removed along with New Public Management,Public Choice theory and Public-Private Partenership theories and practices taking over.

All theorists and experts have been propagating the need for the above mentioned. Also under the new economic policy,1991, there has been massive restructuring organisational set up,financial restructuring,introduction of modern management practices,greater autonomy for PSUs,disinvestments of public enterprises to raise resources for other needs and encourage wider citizen and worker participation in the ownership of industries that were under govt. monopoly,MoUs signed between PSU & PSE and centre and state govts greater efficiency,autonomy and accountability,and privatization.

There will be no further nationalisation pf private sector industries. Sick units are being referred to the Board Of Infrastructure,Finance and Reconstruction and consequent to this policy the Sick Industrial COmpanies Act 1985 was amended in 1991 to implement the same. As on March 1996, 56 sick units have been referred to the BIFR. To provide safety to these sick units' employees, the govt. created the National Renewal Fund under administrative control of the Ministry Of Finance.

Full finance and operational autonomy has been granted by Union govt to the nine leading PSUs through the Navratna status and the lesser autonomy status conferred on others under the Maharatna and Miniratnas status. These are only granted to profit making PSUs and Undertakings thus saving them from red tapism and process of going through the Expenditure Finance Committee and Project Investment Board (EFC & PIB) and will be free to raise resources domestically as well as internationally and enter into financial and technical joint ventures with them.

Even though the PSUs would continue to be audited by CAG and Parliamentary Scrutiny,there will be appointment of eminent part time directors to their boards to reduce the domination of government nominees.

Thus LPG into the economy has definitely helped the efficiency and growth of PSUs in India. However,private support under guidance and facilitation of State is more needed then privatisation of public enterprises as that will lead to a total domination of market in our economy which is not favourable. There is still a need to reduce bureaucratic way of functioning and upgrading the techniques of management and technology and also more effective accountability,retention and pay policies.

PSUs are still very important as they play a very important role in neutral and impartial implementation of a planned economy as well as socio-economic development and justice and regulating the monies in the economy efficiently.

________________________________________________________________

Click on ' JOIN THIS SITE ' to get instant updates on new posts on this blog. And also for 'INTERACTIONS AND DISCUSSIONS' regarding this blog's posts 'JOIN ITS FACEBOOK COMMUNITY/GROUP' that is mentioned on the right hand side of this page.

_______________________________________________________________________________

The next post on this blog will cover:

Union Government and Administration:
Executive, Parliament, Judiciary - structure,
functions, work processes; Recent trends;
Intragovernmental relations; Cabinet Secretariat;
Prime Minister’s Office; Central
Secretariat; Ministries and Departments;
Boards; Commissions; Attached offices;
Field organizations.

Philosophical and Constitutional framework of government: Salient features and value premises; Constitutionalism; Political culture; Bureaucracy and democracy; Bureaucracy and development.

Before we begin this article, many congratulations to all those who have qualified for the UPSC Civil Services Mains exam this year. All the best for your endeavours. May success be bestowed upon you as honest civil servants are the immediate need of the hour right now.

And to all those who could not make it this time, do not give up hope and keep going because Perseverance is an essential trait for Success.

To those who plan to appear in the future, good decision and wish you all the very best.

_______________________________________________________________________________

Click on ' JOIN THIS SITE ' to get instant updates on new posts on this blog. And also for 'INTERACTIONS AND DISCUSSIONS' regarding this blog's posts 'JOIN ITS FACEBOOK COMMUNITY/GROUP' that is mentioned on the right hand side of this page.
_______________________________________________________________________________


This article will discuss all that is needed to understand the Philosophical framework and Constitutional framework on which the Government is based and within which it functions.

Terms to understand before proceeding:

1) Framework - An essential supporting structure of a building, vehicle, or object / A basic structure underlying a system, concept, or text / A system of rules,ideas or beliefs that is used to plan / decide or execute something.

2) Philosophical - Relating to the study of the use of reason in understanding the nature of a thing(s) / system / belief,etc.

3) Constitutional : How something is formed from different parts(Constituents) / Set of political principles by which a State or organisation is governed,especially in regards to the rights of the people governed.

4) State - There is no unanimous definition of State. However,
The state has four essential elements:

1. Population - They together form the government and all functions of the govt. are for them so without them there is no foundation for anything else.
2. Territory - Definite territory that includes lands,mountains,forests,water bodies,etc.
3. Government - Legislature,Executive and Judiciary.
4. Sovereignty- Vested in the people of India.

All of them together form the State and no one can be taken out.






PHILOSOPHICAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK OF GOVERNMENT:
As one can easily comprehend from the above meaning of  the term "Constitutional", that all aspects/parts of a State or an Organisation / System are to be based or governed by a set of political principles that are enlisted in its Constitution.

Therefore, the Constitution is the framework / foundation for all aspects of polity and governance and their functioning emerges from the principles of its Constitution. The Constitution of India elaborately specifies the problems of relations between Union and States,problems relating to public services,special classes,SCs and STs.

It also elaborates a list of Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy. All of these together direct the functioning of all organs of State and whenever in doubt,one has to revert to the founding philosophy and principles of the constitution as envisaged by our freedom fighters to understand one's duties better. Therefore,the Constitution is the source of all legislation,policy as well as executive,military and judicial action in a country. They all function upon the framework of the Constitution and its philosophy which is detailed and enshrined in the preamble of the Constitution India and elaborated in the Directive Principles Of State Policy.

In order to understand the purpose and philosophy of the Constitution as well as the Philosophical framework of India and its government, one must tread into the minds of our constitution framers and freedom fighters. And to do that one can simply read and understand the Preamble of the Indian Constitution which is also called the philosophy and key of the Indian Constitution -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preamble_to_the_Constitution_of_India
where words like sovereign,socialist,secular,democratic republic,socio-economic-political Justice,Liberty and freedom of expression,Equality of status and opportunity,promotion of Fraternity and Dignity,Unity and Integrity are the cardinal principles of the constitution and beautifully describe the noble ideas, spirit and conscience of our Constitution and its framers' minds as well as how the future caretakers/governments of India should carry out their duties and functions and last but not the least, it depicts the way India should be in all its glory.






SALIENT FEATURES AND VALUE PREMISES OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION:
 The Indian Constitution is a remarkable document. It is the most lengthy and detailed constitutional document in the world as it has borrowed most of its provisions from all known constitutions of the world so in such a way that it is suitable to existing conditions and needs of the country and also it has embodied modified results of judicial decisions of other countries to minimise any uncertainty..It occupies an important place in the constitutional history of the world for its unique combination of both rigidity as well as flexibility and quasi- federal(Not completely federal) political setup. That's why it is termed as 'sui-generis' meaning Unique.

 India has a written constitution which means that all provisions are laid down in black and white and follow a process if to be changed or repealed or updated. Britain has an unwritten constitution where provisions are based on conventions and traditions of land instead of a detailed comparative study of a written constitution.

Indian Constitution is seen as an example of meta (underlying definition) policy of State governance based on the noble ideals of democratic governance. Its framework provides for an arrangement that is democratic in character and where the Rule of Law is seen as the cardinal principle. The other cardinal principles as well as ideals of a modern State can be seen highlighted in the Preamble(discussed above). Indian Administration could be seen as an example of a well organised people oriented administration where the popular will or sovereign which is the people are considered as the supreme authority  guiding all policies in the country. The Indian Political arrangement is provided with the unique feature of a Union arrangement with a federal setup.

Parliamentary form of government here is adopted from the United Kingdom. A Parliamentary democracy system of government exists at both levels that is Centre and States. In this system,government / political executive is responsible to the parliament and not to the President. It has a strong Centre and vests the constituent and residual powers of legislation coded in lists to the central legislature which is the parliament. Here the executive is part of legislature and so conflicts are less likely to arise.

The Indian Constitution as mentioned above is commendable in its unique combination of flexibility and rigidity in legislative process that is adding and amending to the Constitution. That's why it is also known as quasi federal because a federal system has a very rigid constitution. And in a federal system states have completely autonomy and function with no interference at all from the centre and also every state possesses its own constitution and citizenship. So, coming back to the Indian constitutions quasi federal framework, it is only a few provisions of it that require a ratification by the states legislatures and even then only half of them need to do so. The rest of the constitution is amended by a simple majority of the Union Parliament as in general legislation. One can see the flexibility of our constitution as since independence it has been amended 97 times already ( Constitutional Amendment Acts).

The Constitution in its very first article pronounces India as a union of states and article 3 specifies the supremacy of the Union where the states could be altered viz. their boundaries and their names,etc. So the states do have a federal character in regards to the State list and the subjects listed in them and decision making on the same is instituted in their level which is democratic decentralisation and also stabilises these states machineries.

Article 5 of the Indian Constitution then proceeds to detail citizenship followed by Fundamental Rights in Part 3 (article 14-32) that guarantee various types of rights to the people of the country and also how to enforce them if violated and is adapted from the Bill of Rights of the American Constitution.

Part 4 of Indian Constitution then goes on to describe such principles which could be seen as directions and integral to the process of policy making in the country and are known as Directive Principles Of State Policy,an idea taken from Ireland's constitution. The DPSP are not enforceable by law(which means that if not followed by the State in policy making process then one cannot approach the Judiciary to get it enforced). So these guidelines for making policies are to be applied in the policy making process as long as the government has the resources to do so. The importance of DPSP is that it cannot be ignored especially in a welfare, as it helps in achieving a socialistic and people oriented modern State that has always been the cherished dream of our country's founding fathers.

Indian Constitution's provision for separation of powers is an integral and cardinal principle followed at both Union / Centre and state levels and the three organs of legislature,executive and judiciary have been established with sufficiently exclusive domains so that a constitutional deadlock does not occur where all are interfering in each other's work and no progress happens ultimately leading to a breakdown of each and every institution of the country.

And Independent judiciary also derives its power of Judicial review from the constitution although not explicitly but impliedly from article 13. India has a single integrated system of courts for the Union and States that administer both the Union and state laws and the apex or head body is the Supreme Court of India. Below the Supreme courts are the high Courts and below the High Courts are the subordinate courts. Judges are appointed by the President under his warrant and seal and to ensure their independence their terms and conditions of service as well as removal are regulated and directed by the Constitution. There is a special process of removal through a special majority(majority of total membership of that house and by majority of not less than 2/3 members of that house present and voting) of each house of parliament on grounds of proved misbehaviour or incapacity,which is not easy. The Judiciary through the power of judicial review can pronounce upon the constitutional validity of acts of public authorities both executive as well as the legislature. It protects,guarantees and enforces the fundamental rights of the country's people and maintains federal equilibrium.

The 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendment to the constitution in principle has provided for the establishment and recognition to democratic local self governing institutions of Panchayat and Municipalities at the local level which are the grassroots of governance. During the drafting of the Constitution of India, Panchayati Raj Institutions were placed in the non-justiciable part of the Constitution, the Directive Principles of State Policy, as Article 40. The Article read 'the State shall take steps to organise village panchayats and endow them with such powers and authority as may be necessary to enable them to function as units of self-government'. However, no worthwhile legislation was enacted either at the national or state level to implement it.
In the four decades since the adoption of the Constitution, panchayat raj institutions have travelled from the non-justiciable part of the Constitution to one where, through a separate amendment, a whole new status has been added to their history.

The Constitution also provides for special provisions for the underprivileged and backward viz. SC,ST and OBC. Elaborate provisions have been given to various constitutional authorities guaranteeing autonomy and ensures their smooth functioning as per the rights given to them in the Indian Constitution.

Emergency provisions of the Constitution were added in the light of the German Constitution.






CONSTITUTIONALISM:
Constitutionalism is an abstract term and is used to denote the spirit and quality of the Constitution. An example that can be cited to explain it in detail can be that of a patriot, a patriot is one who loves his country and patriotism is an abstract term denoting the feeling of a patriot towards his country universally and generally. Similarly,a Constitution is an entity/physical object whereas constitutionalism is the feeling / abstractness of  that constitution residing in policies made by that particular country,the code of conduct followed by citizens and the political leaders while carrying out their functions both professionally as well as professionally,etc. all abiding by the constitution while doing so and imbibing a feeling of constitutionalism inside them,that is a love towards or an adherence towards a system of constitutional ideals and directions as well as government.
Therefore, Constitutionalism is a complex of ideas, attitudes, and patterns of behavior elaborating the principle that the authority of government derives from and is limited by a body of fundamental law.
The Indian Constitutionalism is a thought that provides for an arrangement where the rule of law is seen as the guiding principle for managing the State.
It evolved as a thought in USA,France and other nations where people questioned their governments for their arbitrary behaviour and thus the idea was formed of a govt. limited by a set of rules.


Constitutionalism has been seen as having various essential aspects as its core premises which are:
1) Sovereignty - It puts forward democratic values where the source of power is seen vested with the people and popular will and not in the hands of a few elites / politicians or corporates.

2) Writteness of the Constitution: A properly codified constitution builds constitutionalism as a feeling among everyone as it directs the people in power as well as administrators in a specified and proper way so that no arbitrariness is practiced anywhere.

3) Separation of Powers between the three organs of government which are legislature,executive and judiciary.

4) Consensus of agreeableness: The Constitution provides for the State to be guided by the popular will and good always and also to respect and agree to the institutional legal structures so that social conformity is achieved as prescribed by the Constitution.

5) Entrenchment: Total reject of arbitrariness practiced by public officials and leaders beyond their powers and rules prescribed. And secularism is practiced to maintain unity in diversity.






VIEWS ON CONSTITUTIONALISM:

1) Prescriptive view - It advocates the incorporation of features which have evolved as the core value premises of the constitution. Under it the attempt has been to bring up such a philosophy that would enable and guarantee such an administrative arrangement  where publicness / transparency of all governmental functioning becomes the cardinal principle to be followed. Certain values like Rule Of Law,Writteness of the Constitution,consensus,separation of powers,etc can be counted.

2) Descriptive view - It provides for the historical struggle that has been there in the powers which ultimately resulted in certain core premises and principles of the constitution. Under it administrative arrangement of the State is analysed in terms of the changes incorporated and the reasons/revolts behind them are also analysed.







POLITICAL CULTURE:
 Political culture refers to the political psychology,values and attitude of a country / nation or a sub groups reaction towards their political leaders / political system, different political changes and public officials and their legitimacy.
It is not affected by different groups having different ideologies as even such groups can share the same political culture.  People of a society share a common human nature like emotional drives,intellectual capacities and moral perspectives and this expresses itself in the form of certain values,beliefs and emotional attitudes which get transmitted from one generation to another with lesser or greater changes / modifications and that defines the political situation in which political action takes place.
India has a multiple political culture due variety in traditions,tribalism,primordialism,religion influences,caste,traditions and conventions,etc existing in different parts of it.

Almond and Powell has discussed Political Culture in regards to the following three dimensions:
i) Cognitive Orientations - Implying knowledge accurate or otherwise.
ii) Affection Orientations - Implying feelings of attachment,involvement,rejection in regards to political objects.
iii) Evaluative orientations - Implying judgements and opinions about a political system.

Almond and Finer analysed Political culture from the perspective of the participation that the society allows in the political process.

Almond and Verba have given a 3 dimensional view of Political culture :
i) Parochial political culture - Is present in those societies where specialisation does not exist and only one  or two institutions are authoritative regarding all functions of that society and only one arch ruler is there who heads that institution thus having hegemony and unfettered power. People in such a society are not educated and informed about the mechanism and even if they have it is insufficient to form any opinion. And so the rule or dictatorship of the one ruler continues unopposed.

ii) Subject political Culture - Is present in such societies that were under colonial power at some point in time. Here two types of people's attitudes towards political system prevails,one of absolute subordination and one of absolute revolt at different points in time.

iii) Participant Political culture -  Is present in such societies having a high level of development and people in it have sufficient awareness and knowledge regarding their rights and duties and thus, play an active role in the discharge of functions. This type of a culture is practiced in India to quite an extent.

Robert Dahl has bestowed upon Political culture the title of the single most important factor that explains different patterns of political opposition:
i) Orientation of problem solving - Whether the opposition is interested in being rational and pragmatic in solving the issues raised.
ii) Orientation to collective actions - Whether the opposition is cooperative or not in discharge of functions of itself or others.
iii) Orientation to political system - Whether the opposition is active/passive or alienates itself.
iv) Orientation towards other people - Whether the opposition is full of tests or not.

Talcott Parsons look to find out the role of predispositions of people like historical memories,norms,emotions,symbols,etc. towards political actions  Their studies in Political culture have been done using two traditional approaches:
i) Individualistic Approach - It examines the values and attitudes of individuals through some technique of survey or feedback obtained from respondents(people). It is a direct method but limitations are that the respondents may not be able to express their feelings at many times. Further, the questionnaire itself may be so designed as to eliminate the political view of the people. The feelings mentioned by the people also may lead to all sorts of understandings and be very subjective.

ii) Institutional Approach - Involves documents analysis to discern collective behaviour of political institutions. It pursues the following three dimensions:
a) Academic deliberation to surface features of constitution,political structure and legislative framework.
b) Analysis of the Geographical and social operators in the State.
c) Analysis of historical events that have shaped political views.





TYPES OF POLITICAL CULTURE:

1) Traditional Political Culture - Where the political system and people's attitude towards it are influenced by primordial characters and conventions / traditions.

2) Modern Political culture - Where the political system and people's attitudes towards it are influenced by constitution,rule of law,Independent Judiciary,Liberalism,duly elected body of public bureaucracy as an efficient instrument to enforce the law.

In India there exists an amalgamation of both living in confrontation and cooperation.  Like bureaucracy is there but it functions keeping in mind the conventions and traditions of the society. Reservation system in politics is based on caste and tribe division. And the constitution spells out the rest that consists of modern political culture.






CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF POLITICAL CULTURE:
 1) Strengths - It helps in providing a comprehensive analysis to the part of political science dealing with political aspirations and people living in the State.
It links the beliefs,attitudes and value of the people in the State with the political system of the State.
It helps bridge gaps of philosophy since it deals with human psychosis that could not be explained by other principles.
It has encouraged political scientists to take into account the social and cultural factors in their analysis for the purpose of better framework of their policies and connect between different societies.
It helps in gaining a better view of human behaviour towards political arrangement in different societies.
It provides a conceptual basis that facilitates forecasting to an extent.




2) Limitations  - Its findings are considered to have subjective aspects in its conclusions as it is dealing with factors like human emotions,feelings,perceptions,etc.
It has been observed that in the studies of Political culture there is always a risk that researchers may neglect certain factors in order to achieve validation of their hypothesis.
Diversity in society may create problems in deriving conclusions.
Embodiment of the feelings/perception may not be verbally in the desired direction.






BUREAUCRACY AND DEMOCRACY:
It has been considered by some theorists that Bureaucracy and Democracy are two opposing ideologies. Democracy is associated with free will and self control whereas Bureaucracy has been considered as formal and rule bound.

So in both,academic as well as literature they are seen as anti-thetical approaches.
Democracy governance is based on the integral premise of control by people and expression of their will is seen as the core thought backing the execution of functions. Democratic institutions are considered responsive to the wishes of the public and attempts to arrange those preferences in order to give a positive outcome to its citizens.

Bureaucracy on the other hand is conceptualised as being typically legalistic and largely coded mechanism indifferent to the people's wishes and emphasising purely on legal framework.

Democracy has been seen as one of the most significant philosophy and value of the modern State arrangement as it is seen as a guarantee for the policies to be oriented towards the public at large and the resources in the State to be employed as per priorities set by the people. In a democratic setup to have a specialised Bureaucratic machinery appears paradoxical and its observed that the two have opposing elements. The presence of Bureaucracy is democratic arrangement has been questioned and studies have been made to establish the reasons for such an existence and the reasonability behind the existence.

At first sight, it appears that the complicity in society and the aim to have a high degree of speciality in a State somewhere must have necessitated the discharge of functions by specialist Bureaucracy. Various studies have been attempted to understand the comprehensional as well as the paradoxical aspect of the two.

Caplin in his studies in 2007 produced that Bureaucracy shall be required in the exercise of State function as people out of their pure democratic will may select inconsistent goals which may not be possible to be applied practically.

Richard Rose in 1991 observed that a linkage between voting and policy choices in conventional democracies may not be as clear as what most of the democrats may like to believe. Relationship between Bureaucracy and Democracy has been seen both supporting and opposing. The relationship between the two have been shown paradoxical because Democracy is free will while Bureaucracy champions the cause of pre established structure. It has been observed that an effective Democracy shall require an efficient Bureaucracy for attainment of the goal determined in a Democratic manner. Similarly, an efficient Bureaucracy in order to be effective requires directions coming from people's will so that its relevance in the society could be validated. The thought has surfaced the necessity of such an arrangement where the complimentary aspect of the two gets reinforced and the policy process in a State could be effective and efficient in its functioning.

It has been observed that these two aspects of the government may appear anti thetical on face,but both of them are necessary for providing effective and responsive governance. The responsiveness of the Democratic government is required to balance with impartiality and predictability assumed to reside with the Bureaucratic institutions. Likewise Democratic process is seen important in conferring legitimacy to the functioning of the Bureaucratic arrangement. Democracy provides for value of participation which is seen as a highly significant. An important trend has surfaced where association with a political party has been on the decrease and the representative democracy has been facing some sort of disinterest and alienation from the side of the people. In the democratic arrangement where involvement of people in the political process has been seen limited to casting votes during elections, disinterest and alienation have been very high. Under such societies people are not able to see some meaningful expression in the process of participation and for this reason they develop a feeling of disinterest,alienation or helplessness about the system.

Participation at the execution level thus has been seen as an important mechanism through which people could be introduced back into the system and Bureaucracy and citizens could be seen as a collective entity for this purpose.

Further the linkage between Bureaucracy and Democracy has been seen as necessary in a multi group situation transaction. The new philosophical paradigms have suggested achieving a balanced relationship between the formal Bureaucracy and the will of the people.

Goodin in his studies of 2004 has suggested for an arrangement of output democracy where establishment of such arrangement has been recommended through which delivery could be facilitated. Goodin has observed that there shall be a mechanism where conventional good of Democracy gets the directional of formal consent Bureaucracy. Arrangements like video conferencing,e-governance,direct participation could be seen providing the necessary space to will of the people in discharge of functions. Under New Public Management Osborne and Gabler had considered bureaucrats in the role of public manager and has asked them to play as facilitators. Bureaucracy has been seen in a catalytic role for the same. Democratic components in the governance,community owned government are prescribed. Controls have been suggested to be pushed out of Bureaucracy and handed over to the people.






BUREAUCRACY AND DEVELOPMENT:
Bureaucracy and development are two components of development philosophy if seen from an overview seem to possess opposing values(ideas) as Bureaucracy represents static or orthodox and rigid values while Development advocates dynamic(moving) values. Bureaucracy viewed by the Weberian model and other theorists pertains to same routine,unchanged and repeated procedures that enable it to continue,achieve its pre-established goals and handle its problems like a system without being influenced by external factors. Development as a concept on the other hand is seen as a phenomenon influenced by the concept of change and is quick to adapt and adjust to changes coming in through both external as well as internal factors on the way to development. It is the administrative process evolved for developing countries. And in the developing countries till now Bureaucracy by shedding its Weberian character is the only neutral,biggest existing and stable machinery that can achieve and lead the way towards the process of development in the developing countries. Therefore in the context of developing countries Bureaucracy and development are complementary and inter dependant instead of being hostile to one another for the purpose of Development Administration. In order to sensitise the bureaucracy for development processes it is suggested to provide them training in attitudinal changes and incorporate dynamic and social values in them to know the requirement,preparation of strategy and implementation of programmes in the present ecological setting in order to uplift the socio-cultural and economic status of the country. Bureaucracy,apart from its own duties like development policy formulation and implementation as well as educating people about the policies has been suggested to utilise their specialist knowledge in order to play the role of a friend,facilitator,coordinator,guardian,philosopher and guide to the factors like market and civil societies as well as other instruments of development administration(as listed above under the same heading) in the process of development and the bureaucrats have been asked to patiently assist people in the same. Therefore,as one can understand now that overall evaluation and implementation of Development Administration programmes are carried out by the Bureaucracy playing the leading role in developing nations.



This post ends here.

_______________________________________________________________________________

Click on ' JOIN THIS SITE ' to get instant updates on new posts on this blog. And also for 'INTERACTIONS AND DISCUSSIONS' regarding this blog's posts 'JOIN ITS FACEBOOK COMMUNITY/GROUP' that is mentioned on the right hand side of this page.
_______________________________________________________________________________





The next post on this blog will deal with:

Public Sector Undertakings:
Public sector in modern India; Forms of
Public Sector Undertakings; Problems of
autonomy, accountability and control; Impact
of liberalization and privatization.

Evolution of Indian Administration: Kautilya’s Arthashastra; Mughal administration; Legacy of British rule in politics and administration - Indianization of public services, revenue administration, district administration, local self-government.

The series of articles/posts beginning from this one will discuss all about Administration and administrative practices in the Indian context. 

_______________________________________________________________________________

Click on ' JOIN THIS SITE ' to get instant updates on new posts on this blog. And also for 'INTERACTIONS AND DISCUSSIONS' regarding this blog's posts 'JOIN ITS FACEBOOK COMMUNITY/GROUP' that is mentioned on the right hand side of this page.
_______________________________________________________________________________



 EVOLUTION OF INDIAN ADMINISTRATION:
Indian 'Administration' traces its earliest known form to the tribal system which later emerges as a monarchical system. We gain a lot of knowledge about ancient Indian Administration from ancient religious and political treatises. In the early Vedic period there were many tribes who elected their own chiefs and he handled all their responsibilities and the administration of the tribes and the Sabha( Assembly of elders) and Samiti(Assembly of people) were the tribal assemblies. The chief protected the tribe but had no revenue system or hold over land thus wars were resorted to and the booty shared among the tribes.

The first form of the 'State' in India can be traced back to the times of Manu(original name Satyavrata) the first King and progenitor of mankind according to Hinduism.People were fed up with anarchy as there was no neutral judge/arbitrator in between to solve issues of society, and so they appointed Manu as King and paid service fees as taxes for looking after them and ensuring mutual benefit and justice to everyone in society owing to his wisdom and philosophical attitude & the King was divine and regarded as descended from God.

As per the Ramayana and Mahabharata/Later Vedic times it goes to portray the role of the King as the whole and sole of administration being helped by his principal officers who were the Purohit and Senani where the Purohit( Priest) wielded much more authority than the kshatriya(Warrior clan) kings. Other figures of administration were Treasurer,Steward,Spies and Messengers,Charioteer,Superintendent of Dices. This is also mentioned in the Manu Smriti and Sukra Niti.

No legal institutions were there and the custom of the country prevailed as the law and capital punishment was not practiced but trials took place where justice was delivered by the King in consultancy with the Priest and Elders at times. By the time Kautilya wrote the ArthaShastra the Indian Administrative system was well developed and the treatise of Kautilya gives a very first detailed account of the same. We will discuss that below.






KAUTILYA'S ARTHASHASTRA:
The Mauryan period was the era of major development in Indian Administration. Decentralisation was prevalent as the village units played a very important role as the base of administration since ancient times.Empires were divided into provinces,provinces into districts,districts into rural and urban centres for efficient administration.

Kautilya's ArthaShastra is a work on Varta ( Science Of Economics) & Dandaniti(statecraft/Management Of State Administration) existing in the Mauryan rule. It was written sometime between 321 and 300 BC. It was retrieved in 1904 AD and published in 1909 AD by R. Shamasastry. It touches upon topics like functions of the chief executive,hierarchy,bureaucracy,corruption,local administration,supervisory management,motivation,morale and job description.

The most noticeable aspect of the Arthashastra is its emphasis on Public  Welfare even in an autocratic agrarian State. That is where its timelessness lies.

It is composed in the form of brief statements called Sutras and is compiled in 15 books(Adhikarnas),150 sections,180 chapters(prakarnas),6000 verses(sutras).

The 15 books could be classified under:
i) Concerning the discipline of economics and statecraft.
ii) Duties of government Superintendent.
iii) Concerning the Law
iv) Removal of thorns
v) Conduct of courtiers.
vi) Sources of sovereign State.
vii) End of six fold policy
viii) Concerning vices of the king and calamities that may arise as a consequence
ix) Work of an invader
x) Relating to a war.
xi) Conduct of a corporation
xii) Concerning a powerful enemy.
xiii) Strategic way of capturing a fort
xiv) Secret means like occult practices and remedies to keep of enemies or traitors.
xv) Plan of the treatise and thirty two methods of treating a subject.

Kautilya viewed the State as an institutional necessity for human advancement. According to him the State comprises of eight elements - King,Minister,Country,fort,treasury,army,friend and enemy. And State's prime function was to maintain law and order,punishing wrong doers and protecting subjects.

The empire was divided in to a Home Province(capital territory/administrative unit) under direct control of the central government and four to five outlying provinces(States),each under a viceroy responsible to the central government. The provinces possessed a good amount of autonomy in this feudal-federal type of organisation.Provinces were further divided into districts,districts into rural and urban centres with a whole lot of officials in charge at various levels.Departments to carry out execution of policy were created in all of these divisions with specialists dominating in the Mauryan era. Elites were preferred in job recruitment and the procedure for appointing is the same as it is practiced today. A centralised data bank of all government transactions and records were maintained in an organisation of the centre just like the cabinet secretariat and this performed audit and inspection functions of the three tiers of govt that is local,state and central.

This set up is very much similar to our present times where Union Territories and National Capital Territory are administrative units under Central rule where representative of the centre in the form of administrators/Lieutenant Governor appointed by the President rule the affairs under the direct supervision of the President & Central government.The states are under a governor(viceroy in olden times) appointed by and reporting to the President(King in olden times). The President is advised by his minister(s) and the sovereign power lies in the country's people. Also, the federal setup of powers given to states under the state list,and the district administration organisation and hierarchy. Audit mechanisms were in place and civil servants were recruited to perform the duties of policy implementation.

The King was head and his functions were military,judicial,legislative and executive,similar to modern state's functions of the President. And he was to be well equipped in all areas of study especially economics,philosophy,statecraft and the three Vedas. kautilya stated that whatever pleases the king only is to be avoided and only that which pleases the people is what needs to be followed.
Kautilya stated that the king was like the Father and all the people/subjects of the country/empire were his children. That is how he is supposed to take care of them. This is conceptualised as Welfare State in Modern times.

Corruption was not tolerated at all and dealt with severely where the ill-earned money was confiscated. Kautilya had his own criteria for selection of officers for the same. Once basic qualifications were met he tested them on their attitude to piety,lucre/revenue,lust,fear. Those who completed this criteria of piety were appointed as judges/magistrates,and those who crossed the test of revenue became revenue collectors, and those pass the test of lust are appointed to the king's harem, The candidates passing the test of fear are appointed as king's bodyguards and personal staff. And those who pass all the tests are appointed as councillors.

There were two courts according to the Arthashastra called the Dharmasthya ( civil cases court) where the matters are disposed off on basis of dharma,procedural law,conventions,royal decree ; and Kantakashodhana ( criminal cases court) where accused is convicted on basis of testimony and eye witness of spies,etc. Similar to today's times where there are separate courts having the subject matter jurisdiction of civil or criminal issues.

Agriculture was the mainstay and taxes on the goods produced as well as its imports and exports were the source of revenue and the expenditure focused on public administration,national defense,army,salaries of govt. officials. Agriculture plays an important role even today in our country.

Therefore,as one can see Kautilya's arthashastra deals with a proper strategy and system of centralised autocracy with a welfare objective in mind before performing any function by the king and his ministers.





WEAKNESSES OF THE KAUTILYAN STATE:
i) Over charged with supervision - too much of checks and balances.
ii) Prominence on individuals instead of institutions.
iii) Fundamental mistrust of officials.


The Guptas carried forward the Mauryan legacy of administration in many respects.






LINKS BETWEEN KAUTILYAN ADMINISTRATION AND MODERN PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION:
1) Personnel Administration: A system of recruitment was there and job description as well. Salaries were clearly spelled out of ministers and government officials. It also stated a view of job permanency and increment in salary/position(promotion) if the official concerned provided extraordinary service. Personnel were to be transferred from time to time as per Kautilya because it would avoid corruption and misappropriation of government funds.
Removal and tenure of officials and ministers were at the pleasure of the King just like the Governor and Attorney General,etc. hold office at a term that specifies ' pleasure of the President'.

2) Public Administration: The King is the sole source of authority and appoints and dismisses personnel and divides the work of govt. into different ministries under several ministers and officials.  Kautilya stresses on the need for specialist and generalist personnel at different levels of administration with full accountability to the King,thus talks about division of labour and coordination between them for efficient administration. As discussed above there was a clear system of recruitment,pay,and terms and conditions of service very much resembling the modern State.
Modern state is more concerned about development whereas the Kautilyan model talks about collecting revenue and employing activities to help in expediting and ensuring revenue,so it talks mainly of control instead of development.
It talks about local self government  that very much resembles a precursor to the Modern State local self government model.

Kautilya's Arthashastra is more about political science that is how to conduct State affairs rather than focusing on the philosophy that underlies it. He is very practical in his approach with a strict focus on amorality(no moral principles or religious diktat) so that the King's rule & administration are neutral without offending anyone, and also on rationality and an organised as well as efficient way of running a system with a greta deal of focus on accoutability and honesty and vigilance.





MUGHAL ADMINISTRATION:
 The Mughal administration was the most organised and long lasting and has even carried on to to the modern times. The reason for this stability was the long lasting more than 3 centuries rule of the Mughal sultanat. Akbar was the architect of this system since his grandfather and father Babur and Humayun respectively had their hands full with battles and socio-economic uncertainties leaving little time for administrative activities.

A very detailed,reliable and brilliant account of Akbar's empire,society and administration is given in the famous detailed document/text by Abul Fazl titled Ain-i-Akbari(Constitution Of Akbar).
The Mughal administration did carry forward a lot of the earlier traditions in political and administrative matters already existing in India as mentioned above but they upheld greater centralisation and a rigid structure without paying much interest to social services of health and welfare as also morals as compared to the Mauryan rulers. Their's was an islamic state and right from the principles of government,church policy,taxation rules,departmental arrangements to the titles of officials all was imported wholesale from the Perso-Arab crescent of khalifs of Iran and Egypt. However, even though the recruitment was mainly based on caste and kin they also did recognise merit and talent and did open up the civil services for Hindu people. It's source of revenue was taxation on land and agriculture and was highly urbanised. In the lower levels like of politics,village and lower levels of officials the Indian usage and customary practices were allowed whereas at the court/darbar and in higher official circles the foreign imported model of policy prevailed.

The sovereign was the king who was paternalistic and he had supreme authority over everything. He did have a number of ministers to help,advise and assist him in the discharge of his functions,out of which the more important were four - the Diwan who was in charge of revenue and finance,the Mir Bakshi at the head of the military department,the Mir Saman in charge of factories and stores, and the Sadr-us-Sudur who was the head of the ecclesiastical and judicial department.

Administration was based on coercion in the name of the King by the officials. The main functions of the officials were to maintain law and order,safeguard the King's interests from internal uprising and revolts,defend and extend boundaries of the empire and collect revenue and taxes.

Every officer of State held a mansab ( official appointment of rank and profit and expected to supply certain number of troops for State military service),thus the bureaucracy was essentially monetary in character.  The officials ranged from Commanders of 10 to 10000 and were classified into 33 grades. Each grade carried a certain rate of pay,from which its holder was to provide a quota of horses,elephants,etc and the State service was neither hereditary nor was it specialised. Grading system is practiced even today in recruitment matters.

The pay was received in form of either cash or jagir for a temporary period from which he could collect revenue equivalent to his salary. Thus,the jagirs though having no hold over the land extracted revenue at their whims and fancies from the land.

The Army of the Mughal empire must be understood in terms of the Mansabdari system. And apart from that there were the knights who were called the gentleman troopers and owed exclusive allegiance to the King. The cavalry was the most important unit,the infantry was made up of townsmen and peasants and the artillery with guns and the Navy.
The corruption within the army where the soldiers payed more allegiance to the immediate boss rather than the king proved to be its undoing and thus could be easily overpowered by the Marathas during the time of Jahangir.

The Policing system of the Mughals was entrusted to village headman's and subordinates in villages and to Kotwals in cities and towns. And at the district level the faujdars took over. It was a precursor to modern policing system of India.

The administration at the Centre was personal and paternal and operated with a fair degree of efficiency as long as the King kept an eye and controlled effectively. The two highest officials were the Vakil and the Wazir of which the former was higher in position and functioned as the regent of the State and maintained over all charge of the same.
The Wazir was the head of the revenue department and was known as Wazir when he acted as a Prime Minister.

Chief Diwan supervised revenue collection and expenditure and was the head of the Government's administrative wing supervising work of all high officials. All provincial diwans and their subordinates reported to him and he signed and authorised all government transactions. A Musatufi audited the income and expenditure of the government and the Waqia Navis kept a record of all important farmers.

The Khan-i-Saman was the high steward of the royal expenditure and the Mir-i-Bakshi who was the paymaster General of the empire.

The Provincial or State Administration was also known as Subahs(for states/provinces) and was headed by the Subedar or the Governor. He was appointed by the King and was given a office insignia and instrument of instructions which defined the powers,functions and responsibilities. As executive head he was in charge of provincial administrative staff and ensured law and order there. He also handled local civil intelligence agencies and controlled the local zamindars and contained their political influence.

Provincial Diwan was appointed by the central diwan and was next in the line of importance after the Provincial governor. He appointed kiroris and tehsildars to extract revenue from the ryots in time. He also exercised audit functions and had full control over public expenditure. He was assisted in office by the Office Superintendent,head accountant,treasurer and clerk.

The provincial Bakshi performed the same function as the central bakshi.
The Sadr and Qazi were two officers at provincial level who were sometimes united in the same person but the Sadr was basically a civil judge but did not handle all civil cases and the Qazi was concerned with civil suits in general and also with criminal cases.





DISTRICT AND LOCAL ADMINISTRATION UNDER MUGHAL RULE:
The Subah/Province was further divided into Sarkars which were of two types. One was ruled by officers appointed by the emperor and those under the tributary rajas. Each Sarkar was headed by Faujdar,he was the executive head who had policing and military functions and could surpass the provincial rulers to speak directly to the imperial government.

The Amalguzar was in charge of the revenue and the other head of the Sarkar. The Kotwal did the policing. The qazi performed the judicial duties. The Sarkars were further divided into parganas and the parganas further divided into Chaklas headed by officials called Chakladars. Qanungos kept the revenue records and the Bitikchi was the accountant and Potdar was the title of the treasurer.This was the hierarchy for a sound and efficient administration

Akbar kept the land revenue at 1/3 and Todar Mal brought in reforms as in a standard system of land revenue collection that included survey and measurement of land,classification of land based on its fertility and fixing the rates.

Justice was administered based on the Quranic Law as the Mughal state was a Muslim State. Fatwas were issued when required and ordinances by the emperor. The principles of equity were followed and the Emperor's interpretations only was allowed till the point it did not run contrary to the sacred laws.






LEGACY OF BRITISH RULE IN POLITICS AND ADMINISTRATION - INDIANIZATION OF PUBLIC SERVICES:
Though many of Indian administrative and political features evolved post 1947 but there still are certain features that we can see as a legacy of the British times continuing for the sake of its efficient practices and no other better alternative to the same till now.

Under the charter ( official paper) of the British crown the East India Company came to India with the sole objective of making profit through commercial exchanges. The established factories here and for their protection set up a small base of soldiers. They started looking for monopolising their profits in India as her market and resources were unmatched. This led to the initial tussle with Bengal Nawab and the event of Battle of Plassey paved the way for the same. The company officials convinced the company directors that if they interfered and got a say in local policy making in india then it would lead to a lot of profit and surplus.

Lord Cornwallis developed the Civil Services Code and so he is aptly known as the Father Of Modern Civil Services. He regularised and specified the office of the District Collector and estabilished the office of the District judge. This helped the company achieve a well organised personnel administration through which control over territories/provinces in India could become more comprehensive.

Lord Wellesley's rule period saw the emergence of the office of the Chief Secretary(1799). The doctrine of Subsidiary Alliance was an aggressive policy that resulted in the active interest of company officials in political and administrative affairs of local kingdoms governed by local Rajas. The early 1800s could be seen as an era where company officials focused all their strategies in gaining interference rights in political,commercial and military policies of local kingdoms for their profit.

The office of the Commissioner and sectional arrangement in the Secretariat saw the light of the day under Lord Bentick's rule. Under the Charter Act of 1833,the Governor General of Bengal was appointed as the Governor General of India and policy formulation was centralised for all territories under the company at the council of the Governor General Of India(Head of the British Administration In India). Also there was an estabilishment of communication between the Governor general's office which was the headquarter and its various field units and formal units of organisation. 1844 established 4 departments of Finance, Home, Foreign and Military as well as a little later on under Lord Dalhousie the setting up pf Post and Telegraph Services,Railways and Public Work Departments. The Doctrine Of lapse theory of Dalhousie very blatantly spelled out the objective of the company in India as to have absolute control over the policy process in Indian  States.
Thus all these establishments and policies helped the English to set up a strong base in India along with rights of revenue by means of strong organisational infrastructures and institutions,and interference in legislation and policy making even in the remotest of areas.

The Revolt of 1857 then shook up this system and that led to the end of the British East India Company's rule in India. The govt of India Act 1858 passed in the British parliament led to the company's dissolution and all powers transferred to the British Crown which then created an India Office in India and a Secretary Of State post was established with Indian governance and policy formulation matters. the Governor General was converted to Viceroy General of India(chief administrator of the British Crown in India) who implemented the policies devised by the India office which actually only had the role of passing on orders of the British Parliament. Military was reorganised and more higher caste officials were appointed at the higher levels and lower level occupied by lower caste as well as Europeans held the titular positions in the army. All this was done to avoid another mutiny so that communication is minimum considering the caste biasedness prevalent in India.

So,in short the British East India Company paved the way for the British government to enter. As soon as the Company outlived its utility,it was removed and the British govt. directly entered the Indian domain.

Impey devised a civil procedure code and Macaulay devised the Indian Penal Code,Contract Act and Indian Council Act.The enactment of the Criminal procedure Code by the British Parliament in the 1860's brought immense joy to the local rajas and people as they thought that now all the English officers would function under a code of conduct and there will be uniformity in treatment. There was also formulation of Arms act,Vernacular press act,Relationship codes,Transfer rights,etc. Thus, this era of late 1800's could be seen as one that was dedicated to establishing a legal environment for the smooth functioning of the British officials as they felt that no rules and regulations earlier led to the situation of disarray and sepoy mutiny/revolt.

There was also the demand of indianisation of the Civil services that was first totally occupied by Europeans and was causing a lot of discontent among Indians and Indian associations. Thus,for this purpose the Aitchison Commission recommended the induction of 25% Indians into the ICS,but this only remained on paper.The Islington Commission was appointed in 1912 and its repirt,submitted in 1915 recommended a scheme of 2 entry paths to the civil services. One was for insuring induction of natives of India through competitive exams and the other exam for superior ICS and Home services preliminary exam to be conducted in England was open to all. The Civil services was under the control of the Secretary Of State.

The Govt. Of India Act in 1919, created the All India Services replacing the imperial civil services format. This act also advocated the setting up of Public Service Commissions in India. The provincial civil services were under the control of the provincial governments.

Lee Commission and the Royal Commission on superior civil services specially recommended for the establishment of central services. Subordinate services were advocated for removal from the classification of civil services and transferred to the regional levels for conducting exams and filling up of positions only by Indians. So,basically it was a system to prevent Indians from entering the higher civil services as everybody could not afford to go to England for training and exam purpose and the lower levels were more approachable and attainable by the Indians.Also English as a compulsory language offered little scope of success for non-westernised Indians.On the recommendation of the Lee Commission,the first Public Service Commission was setup at Allahabad in 1925. The Lee Commission recommended a 40-40 percent of Europeans and Indians to fill up the superior ICS and the rest 20% to be filled up with promotions from the provincial Indian sub ordinate services. thus he advocated 60% Indians. This led to the Britishers losing interest in joining the services as they feared a monopoly of Indians and so the number of Indians in the services increased gradually.The Govt. Of India Act 1935 provided for the setting up of federal Public service commissions and also recommended for similar institutions at the state levels. This was the realisation of giving the All India Service an Indian flavour and towards the Indianisation of Civil Services.


Portfolio system was introduced in the Central Secretariat under Lord canning and arrangement of departments under Lord Mayo,Lord Lytton and Lord Ripon. Tenure arrangement was introduced under the Secretariat staffing scheme of Lord Curzon in 1905.

A special mention needs to be made here of the administrative systems/features passed on:
Judicial administration system of the Mughal period still exists in Indian administration.





REVENUE ADMINISTRATION & DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION UNDER BRITISH RULE:
After the battle of Buxar ended with the treaty of Allahabad,the company obtained "Diwani" rights from Shah Alam II and was legally authorised to issue dastaks in the name of the King thus paving the way for the company officials to enter revenue assessments and collection duties.

This very event began the evolution of the system of district arrangement that we see today. The District Collector's office was established in 1772 and it played a leading role in stabilising the company's hold over the revenue at local levels. 1780 saw the establishment of a Revenue Board created as the apex advisory body for suggesting scheme of Land Revenue Settlement. This is where we see the shift of the company majorly from commercial activities to administrative control in india. The revenue Board's recommendations culminated into : Permanenet Settlement Act in Bengal,Orissa and areas of Assam, Ryotwari arrangement in Presidencies of Maharashtra and Bombay, Mahalwari system in areas under the control of North India.






LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT UNDER BRITISH RULE:
This term originated during British rule. Lord Ripon is called the father of local self government in India but was unable to push for major reforms. They lacked autonomy and gradually declined by way of establishment of local civil and criminal courts,revenue and police organisations,increased communication, and starting of the Ryotwari system where peasants paid directly and individually instead of collectively or under the zamindar.Panchayats maintained the local social order according to the socio-political norms prevailing.

The Montague Chelmsford reform in 1919 made it a transferred subject under the dyarchy that led to the establishment of a number of panchayats in all villages to have a proper and efficient local self government/administration as well as revenue collection for the British but was still under the total control of the District collector and red tapism and corruption plagued it and funds crunch was always there as a deliberate attempt by the British to stranglehold the provincial Indian governments from having control over them and so had to depend on the centre/British government for everything.

So, the local self government though had control over certain aspects but in the others it was just a pawn of the British government for their colonial benefits.

IGNOU notes refer - 



http://www.scribd.com/doc/39746705/IGNOU-s-Public-Administration-material-Part-2-Indian-Administration





_______________________________________________________________________________

Click on ' JOIN THIS SITE ' to get instant updates on new posts on this blog. And also for 'INTERACTIONS AND DISCUSSIONS' regarding this blog's posts 'JOIN ITS FACEBOOK COMMUNITY/GROUP' that is mentioned on the right hand side of this page.
_______________________________________________________________________________



The next post on this blog will cover:

Philosophical and Constitutional framework
of government:
Salient features and value premises; Constitutionalism;
Political culture; Bureaucracy
and democracy; Bureaucracy and
development.