This course material is designed and developed by Indira Gandhi National

Open University (IGNOU), New Delhi and Krishna Kanta Handiqui State
Open University (KKHSOU), Guwahati.
 Bachelor of Arts
POLITICAL SCIENCES (BAPS)

BAPS-4
Political Process in India

Block-4
THE CHANGING NATURE OF THE
INDIA STATE

UNIT-12 THE ROLE OF THE STATE IN INDIAN CONTEXT

UNIT-13 DEVELOPMENTAL AND WELFARE DIMENSIONS

UNIT-14 COERCIVE DIMENTION OF INDIAN STATE

1
UNIT-12 THE ROLE OF THE STATE IN INDIAN
CONTEXT
Structure

12.1 Objectives
12.2 Introduction
12.3 The role of the State in India
12.4 Emergence of the Modern State
12.5 The Structural and Functional Evolution
12.6 Issues before the Indian State
12.7 Summary
12.8 Exercise
12.9 Reference
12.1 OBJECTIVES

After reading this Unit, you will be able to:

 Appreciate the changing role of the State in India

 Understand the structural and functional evolution of the State, and
 Analyse the issues confronting the State in India

12.2 INTRODUCTION

In this Unit, we propose to study the role of the State in the Indian context. You will
appreciate that the issues involved in the kind of discussion are pretty complex. One
has to take into account the special nature of State-society relationship in a
developing State like India. Besides, there are other issues such as the evolution of the
idea of Indian State as evolved during the national movement, the Constitutional
mandate for it, the goals as set out by the Constitution makers and the working of the
Indian State as reflected in its experiments with federalism, coalition government,
bureaucracy and development administration, judiciary and judicial activism etc. All
these issue need to be discussed and analysed. In the process, the problems of
democratic participation, socio-political moblisation and the crisis of governability
need to be probed and some future direction explored.

12.3 THE ROLE OF THE STATE IN INDIA

The role of the State is perhaps the most dominant theme of political disagreement
among thinkers, reflecting different views about the proper relationship between the

1
State, society and the individual. While all political thinkers, with the exception of
anarchists, have regarded the State as a worthwhile or necessary association, they
profoundly disagree about the exact role that the State should play in society. At one
extreme in this debate, Classical Liberals have argued that individuals should enjoy
the widest possible liberty and have therefore insisted that the State be confined to a
minimal role. This minimal role is simply to provide a framework of peace and social
order within which private citizens can conduct their lives as they think best. Such
minimal States, with institutional apparatus restricted to little more than a police
force, court system and army, commonly existed in the 19th century. In the 20th
century, however, they have become rare, and the dominant trend has been for the
State‘s role to expand. Progressively, this has occurred in response to electoral
pressures for economic and social security, supported by a broad ideological coalition
including democratic socialists, modern liberals and paternalistic conservatives.

Indian society tried to create a space for the idea of the modern Nation State in the
Indian culture along with the traditional concept of the State. While doing so, they
could not visualise that this imported concept of the State will eventually totally
marginalise the indigenous concept and become the hegemonic concept. The process
was helped by the colonial inheritance of the imperial State structure which has
shaped much of the relationship of the State with the rest of Indian society. A crucial
component of the inheritance is the concept of the State as the ultimate pacesetter and
protector of the society, a moral exemplar, and as an arbiter among social groupings
having conflicting interests. The nationalist movement, under the leadership of the
Congress, sought to transform the colonial political legacy into a powerful State with
the aim of firing the engines of capitalist economic development and establishing a
just, socialistically inclined, civil society capable of overcoming poverty.

The Indian Constitutional State emerged in 1947 after one of the world‘s most novel
and long-drawn-out struggles for political emancipation. The leading elite in Indian
nationalist struggle and the founding fathers of Indian National Congress were
profoundly enamoured of Western influence. The Party developed a nationalist, State-
centred, and secular ideology. Its conversion to Socialism was actually concomitant
with its accession to power. This conversion gave the party a way to adapt to the
requirements of State construction. It led to the creation of a strong State for the
precise purpose of overcoming the traditional order, which was segmented both
regionally and socially.

The new State marked a significant departure from the values and institutions of
traditional India. The Constitution adopted in 1950, turned India into a secular,
parliamentary democracy with a bicameral parliament and a multi-party system, an
indirectly elected president, an independent judiciary, and a federal structure with
partial separation of the powers and responsibilities between the Centre and the states
(See: Austin, 2004). State aimed at a comprehensive form of justice, equality and

2
dignity of the individual. It rooted in the people the ultimate source of its legitimacy
and provided them certain Fundamental Rights that could not be alienated or
abrogated even by the Parliament. They, however, were subject to national security
and general welfare. The Constitution also contained Directive Principles of State
Policy under which the State was to strive to secure a social order oriented to people‘s
welfare, ensure means of livelihood for all citizens, achieve a use of the material
resources of the community that promoted the common good, prevent harmful
concentration of wealth, ensure equal pay for equal work for both men and women,
and protect children and youth from exploitation.

Adopting a federal form, the Constitution demarcated those subjects that could be
legislated upon by the Centre i.e. the Union government, those by the States, and
those by both. Defence, foreign affairs, inter-state communication, trade and
commerce, currency, banking, control of industry, etc. were reserved for the Union
government. Public order, police, public health, education, agriculture, professions,
etc. were reserved for the states. The concurrent list included such items of legislation
as marriage and divorce, transfer of non-agricultural property, contracts, civil and
criminal procedure, monopolies, welfare, social security, price-control, factories,
electricity and food adulteration. The states were to have autonomy in enacting
legislation on these subjects, but not in contravention of any law passed by the
Parliament. The Constitution also demarcated the means of raising revenues between
the Centre and the states. The Union government could raise its revenues from
corporation and income tax, capital gains tax, customs and excise, coinage, currency,
foreign exchange, taxes on stock exchange transactions, etc. The states could raise
revenues through land revenue, agriculture, income tax, electricity and water rates,
taxes on vehicles, taxes on trades, professions, land and property taxes, sales and
purchase taxes, entertainment tax etc. Besides, to provide help to the poorer or less
developed States, the Constitution provided for grants-in-aid to the states by the
Centre.

The post-independence elite also cherished certain values and set certain goals to
achieve. The main goals in India were national integration, economic development,
social equality and political democracy. All these goals could be achieved through a
centralised bureaucratic State which Nehru sought to build. The State also undertook
the construction of atomic power plants, massive dams and huge steel plants.
Emphasis was also laid on the coordination between the class relations in Indian
society and power relations in the state structure which culminated in shaping a
strong state structure in India and the state could solve the linguistic and regional
tensions/problems initially through a policy of consensus. Thus, the post-
independence ruling elite sought and to a great extent was successful in forging a
strong state on the basis of a full acceptance and even glorification of India‘s
regional, linguistic, ethnic and religious diversities.

3
This kind of attempt promoting a unifying and legitimising conception of a strong and
powerful State also became an effective way for the leading elite to establish their
monopoly on legitimate physical violence (Badie, 2000). Accordingly, the socialist
reference promoted egalitarian principles that, in the context of India‘s construction
of a State, became a major asset for the governing political elite. The
removal/diminution of inequalities in a society of castes and profound regional
disparities also provided opportunity for diminishing the resources of the competing
traditional elite and thus establishing the political arena as the privileged space for the
exercise of power. Moreover, socialist ideology offered the new elites of the State the
means to establish influence in society and economy. The setting up of Planning
Commission (1950), launching of Five Year Plans (1951), National Development
Council (1952), the (Industries Development Regulation Act) 1951 etc. were notable
steps in this direction.

12.4 EMERGENCE OF THE MODERN STATE

Modern States tend to displace all other ordering mechanisms of society, and become
the sole source of mandatory rules. When the modern State arose in Europe, it had a
very limited conception of itself, and therefore did not participate systematically in
social engineering. In India, the colonial State was the first form of the modern State,
and it assumed its title to sovereignty emphatically. But it remained ambiguous in its
position on the relation between the State and society in British India. Broadly, the
response of the State oscillated between a stance of non-interference in the affairs of
an alien society and a converse one of energetic reformism, but it did not enter into a
direct intervention in the structures of caste society. However, the post-independence
Indian State could not maintain a similar attitude of distance. It was committed to
social reform as the Constitution itself introduced large programmes of social
engineering and entrusted these to the State as their principal agency of realisation.
The State, therefore, undertook serious legislation introducing positive discrimination
in favour of deprived communities, giving them relative advantage in State
employment and education. It led to the growth of a highly interventionist State.

Despite considerable continuity with the past, the governmental structures, which
were established after British rule introduced complexity into relations within the
State and of the State with, society. For instance, the All-India Services of the Indian
State were the major institutional legacy of the British colonial State, yet they also
became the principle instrument that laid foundations for the successor bureaucratic
and managerial State, whose functions, powers and personnel grew exponentially
once India embarked upon its strategy of planned economic development so much so
that by 1980s, the bureaucrats manning the public sector were far more powerful than
their counterparts in the large private business houses by virtue of their presiding over
the economy in the organised industrial sector, and administering a formidable

4
regulatory apparatus for the licensing and expansion of private enterprises, import and
export of capital goods, allocation of foreign exchange and clearances to raise capital.

The result was a disproportionately large involvement of the State in managing the
economy. Not only did the Indian State emerge as the major employer, it also played
a prominent role in managing the flow of international finance from aid, loans and
foreign investment. The State became the main source of capital and it controlled the
use of that capital. An extensive State apparatus had to be developed to support the
State in its responsibilities. Public sector management; State marketing and rationing
of scarce foreign exchange and consumer goods; State ownership; the provision of an
infrastructure of communications, energy supply and transportation; the creation of a
legal structure for commercial transactions; maintenance political stability to create
confidence among investors all became the responsibility of the State. It like all
modern States, almost took the Weberian principle of monopoly of coercive authority
which sent signals to social groups to route their demands against each other through
its agencies. Consequently, there was a steep rise in the demands made by social
groups on the State. The Rudolphs analysed this by highlighting the distinction
between ‗Demand‘ and ‗Command‘ Polity.

The ‗Demand‘ polity, according to the Rudolphs, is oriented towards short-term

goals, competitive processes for determining policies and the public interest, as well
as the provision of private goods. It is constrained and directed by electoral verdicts
and through the demands of organised interests and classes, political parties, social
movements and agitational politics. It is also oriented toward the ‗rationality‘ of
incremental policy choice. The ‗Command‘ polity, on the other hand, is oriented
towards State-determined long-term goals and formulations of the public interest and
the provision of public and collective goods. The preferences of political leaders and
bureaucrats largely determine investment divisions and policy choices. They favour,
repress, license, or co-opt economic classes, organised interests, and elites. The role
of the State in the ‗Command‘ polity is like that of monopolistic or obigpotistic
producers who can determine what and how much is produced because they can
control investment and shape consumer preferences and structure their choice in
accordance with their investment decisions. Accordingly, the Rudolphs distinguish
four periods since Indian independence, which are further classified into those of
‗Command politics‘ (1956-66 and 1975-1977) and of ‗demand politics‘ (1966-1975
and 1977 to 1980) (Rudolph and Rudolph, op.cit.).

Like most post-colonial societies, India inherited a distorted State structure with an
overdeveloped bureaucratic State apparatus reflected in certain highly developed
institutions like the bureaucracy, the military and the police. A universal feature of
the colonial government was that it developed bureaucracies while neglecting
legislatures, parties, local councils and other bodies able to maintain control and
accountability. Although the Indian subcontinent has been credited with the longest

5
history of democratic development, yet even here the bureaucracy has been found to
be overdeveloped (Smith, 1996). The bureaucracy was associated with power,
prestige and status, monopolising the knowledge and expertise required for running a
government and developing a society. It was the main source of employment for the
highly educated and professional people.

The basic apparatus of governmental administration in independent India was also

inherited from the colonial era, although it soon expanded hugely in size. It consisted
of a small elite cadre belonging to the All-India Services and a much larger corps of
functionaries organised in the Indian Civil Service. The Indian members of the Indian
Civil Service, the much acclaimed ‗steel frame‘, were retained after Independence, in
the form of a new service called the Indian Administrative Service, which was
constituted after 1947. The crucial unit of the governmental apparatus was the district
administration which, under the charge of the district officer, was primarily
responsible for maintaining law and order as in colonial times, but was also to
become the principal agency for development work.

12.5 THE STRUCTURAL AND FUNCTIONAL EVOLUTION

The structural-functional pattern of administration that India inherited was based on

colonial ideas and philosophy. Indian State was constrained to establish new
administrative structures and functions in the immediate post-independence phase.
Thus, it adapted to an administrative system that was actually suited to British
requirement rather than ours. The basic structure of civil and criminal law as well as
of its administration was inherited from the colonial period besides, of course, the
creation of a Supreme Court and its position in the new Constitutional scheme.
Similarly, the British model of a professional army strictly under the control of the
political leadership was successfully maintained in post-independence India.

The bureaucracy in India is neither monolithic nor homogenous (Vithal, 1997). The
heterogeneity of the bureaucracy usually reflects the social and class composition of
society at large and of the ruling class in particular, but in the case of India, it was
consciously planned by the British in view of the peculiar circumstances of their rule.
It consisted of three distinct echelons of administration, namely the covenanted
services, the gazetted services and nongazetted services. Each of the three echelons
has evolved in its own way since independence. Interestingly, the higher civil service
is not the only site occupied by the ‗political elites‘ a significant faction of it has, over
the years, become involved in intra-coalition conflicts at the state level. The post
independence political process has given rise to changes in the class composition of
the political executive that was more rapid and far-reaching than those in the social
composition of the civil services. It has resulted in disparity and conflicts at times and
horizontal links between the two. Sometimes, one comes across a great deal of
skepticism about the integrity of superior officers as well as political bosses and

6
corresponding readiness to believe allegations of misappropriation as well as
misbehaviour.

The role of the State is determined largely by its structural and functional evolution.
The same is true of the Indian State. As a conceptual entity, the Indian State is based
on universally accepted moral principles, humanism and democratic ideals. Its
structure is elaborately laid down in the Constitution in its various parts, chapters and
articles. It has evolved over the years, as guided by usually a core charismatic
leadership, epitomised for a long initial phase of one party dominance.

Gradually, one party dominance has paved way for polarised pluralism and more and
more elements have entered the State system through free and fair elections. In spite
of the turmoil of partition and consequent political chaos caused by ethnic riots, India
has sought to emerge as a ‗Union of State‘. Power has been vested in the people of
India who are regarded as the makers of ‗Sovereign Democratic Republic‘. Thus, the
Indian Constitution has constituted the principal site for the elaboration of the
political discourse of the Indian State and also become central to an analysis of the
changing role of political and bureaucratic structures.

Over the years, political contestation has increased in India. For instance, in the first
general elections, held in 1952, on an average 4 candidates per parliamentary seat
were in fray, the number rose to 16 in the 10th general elections in 1991.
Interestingly, while the national parties have more or less held their own,
independents have lost out to regional parties, which have grown incredibly in
number as well as in significance. The rise of regional parties and increased
contestation have also meant that the chances of any one party winning a majority of
parliamentary seats have declined. Coalition government at the Centre has tended to
become inescapable. This has led to the concept of governance on the basis of a
Common Minimum Programme accepted by all the constituents of the coalition
government. And, since even the coalition governments may need outside support to
survive, consultation and consensus politics have tended to become the norm and may
well give rise to a ‗Consociational State‘ (Lijphart, 1989), which could make it
possible to have a reasonably stable democratic polity despite a deeply divided or
segmented society.

With increased social mobilisation and political contestation, the Indian State has
been facing what is usually termed as the crisis of governability (Kohli, op.cit.).
Personal rule has replaced party rule at all levels and below the rulers, the entrenched
civil and police services have been increasingly politicised. Various social groups
have pressed new and ever more diverse political demands in demonstrations that
often have led to violence. The omnipresent, highly interventionist but feeble State, in
turn, vacillates; its responses are varied in form of indifference, sporadic concessions,
and repression. Such response and vacillation fuels further opposition. The growing
political and communal violence tends to periodically bring the armed forces into
7
India‘s political arena. All this puts into question the capacity of the Indian State to
govern which, in turn, concerns primarily the State‘s capacity simultaneously to
accommodate disparate interests and promote development in view of the persistent
feeling that over the last few decades, India‘s institutional capacity to deal with
conflict and initiate solutions has declined.

However, if one focuses exclusively on the formal aspects of the Indian Constitution,
one could miss fundamental changes in Constitutional ideas and practices that
distinguished the Indian State of the 1990s from that of the 1950s. Neither the party
system nor the Planning Commission are mentioned in the formal Constitution,
though both have played a central role in creating the Constitutional order. Attention
to the conventional Constitution directs us to analyse changes in the party and federal
systems, as well as the changing balance of power between branches and units of
government. It also highlights the erosion of the centralised Nehruvian State and
economy that prevailed for four decades after independence in 1947. The analysis
reveals that in the 1990s, a multiparty system, including strong regional parties,
displaced a dominant party system; market ideas and practices displaced central
planning and controlled economy; and the federal system took on a new lease of life
with the regional units gaining ground at the expense of the Centre. With the
launching of economic reforms in 1991, a centralised, interventionist State was
challenged and ultimately displaced by an increasingly decentralised regulatory State.

The Indian Constitution has withstood the test of time (Austin, 1999). At the same
time, it has been an evocative document with 98 Amendments made to it between
1950 to 2004. Many of these Amendments have tended to bolster the arbitrary powers
of the State. Some of the Amendments, on the other hand have moved the nation
forward in terms of greater enfranchisement and empowered local self-government.
Several court decisions have sought to restrict the ability of the parliament to tamper
with the basic character and essential features of the Constitution. Public Interest
Litigation permitted by the Supreme Court since 1985 has tended to restrain arbitrary
behaviour of the State. Thus, over the years, the balance of power between Central
institutions that was provided by the formal Constitution has been reshaped by the
practice of actors responding to historical challenges. The balance has shifted in
favour of the Supreme Court, the Election Commission, and the President at the
expense of the Parliament, the Prime Minister, and the Cabinet. Not long ago, the
Central government decided to appoint a National Commission to comprehensively
review the Constitution of India.The Commission has come up with several
recommendations to reform the legislature, executive and judiciary. Let us now
examine some of the issues before the Indian State.

8
12.6 ISSUES BEFORE THE INDIAN STATE

During the last 50 years, the State in India has witnessed the struggle for democratic
transformation in which, there has been the rise of democratic consciousness among
the people and a comprehensive understanding of the meaning of democratic
revolution. Various identity groups seek autonomy and self-determination, and
demand social, cultural, economic and political guarantees to fulfill their aspirations.
The deprived people such as the dalits, adivasis, poor peasants, workers and women
have come to acquire an unprecedented level of awareness of democratic rights and
their creative potentiality. The intensity of the challenge has shaken the State to such
an extent that it has resorted to many measures such as liberalisation, globalisation,
religious mobilisation and authoritarian repression to meet this situation.

The issues that will confront the Indian State in the new millennium will be of much
greater complexity and sophistication, dealing with highly demanding requirements
of the new technological age. We have become a nuclear weapons State, there are
challenges posed by new technologies of satellite broadcasting, and the Internet, also
there are complex international trade and investment issues before the World Trade
Organisation (WTO), or the global environmental negotiations which require levels
of analysis and understanding that is hardly present in our public discourse. The
problem before the Indian State is that ―It is being called upon to confront all the
challenges of a new technological age, with the worn out instruments and apparatus
of a post-colonial State, which has still not progressed much beyond its traditional
role of collecting the revenues and administering the laws‖. To meet the challenge,
the Indian State has to take certain urgent steps such as trains forming its bureaucracy
into a technocracy, and also creating a new work culture that is responsive, agile and
capable of understanding the complexity of the problems of the technological age and
solve them in the matrix of long-term national interest.

With a population which is second largest in the world, Indian State represents a
mind-boggling diversity and continuity. Continental in size and geographical variety,
it consists of a medley of religions and religious sects, races, linguistic groups, castes,
communities and political groupings. Such systems are often found to be extremely
differentiated, ‗loosely coupled‘ and ‗soft‘ to the point of near Anarchy (Orton and
Weick, 1990); these operate in highly turbulent social, political and economic
environments, filled sometimes with frustration and anger and paralysed at others by
alienation and consist of two distinct but highly interdependent layers namely the
‗democratic populist‘ and the ‗bureaucratic regulatory‘ that often work at cross-
purposes. While the Indian State may not exactly be in such a grim condition, the
corruption and criminalisation of its political system, the corruption and inefficiency
of its bureaucracy continue to erode its credibility.

The critique of the State based on a cultural nation of India sees the secular, modern
State of India as universalising and homogenising in the name of unity. According to
9
a privileged position to State over people, it is seen as deigning the social space to
plurality of traditions, religion, language, and the like. This view projects the agenda
of the State as inherently repressive. Alternatively, India is seen as a cultural nation
imbibing multiplicity and as a civilisational unity rather than a modern Nation State
(Kumar, 1989). This view emphasises the plural cultural identity of India based on
the plural cultural ethos. The modern State tries to remove this plurality and
togetherness in-built in Indian culture and creates a single political entity out of it.
Thus, the State is identified as the root of intolerance and communalism in modern
India.

In a recent study of Indian State from a ‗Managerial Perspective‘, observes that the
performance of Indian State presents a paradox as a disaster and as one of the world‘s
more effective developmental States. For him, the Indian State can be seen as a
disaster due to its failures in the field of planned economic development due to which
India has been rated as one of the most regulated and black-market-infested of the
World‘s States, it ranked 86th among 101 countries as per the 1995 Index of
Economic Freedom. Many Commissions appointed by the Government of India have
identified the malaises in the bureaucracy which is huge and has become notorious
for its corruption, slowness, elitism, and inefficiency.

The developmental Indian State has failed to reduce stark economic inequalities and
combat poverty, political violence and inter-caste violence which have increased, the
judicial and legal system remains in a mess delaying justice for common man to a
distant dream, police-brutalities remain common, and sustainability of its economic
development also remains doubtful leading to a crisis of governability as described by
Atul Kohli (op.cit.). Thus: ―…A democratic developing country is well-governed if
its government can simultaneously sustain legitimacy, promote socio-economic
development, and maintain order without coercion. The growing incapacity in India
to perform these tasks is what has been conceptualized…as a manifestation of a crisis
of governability‖.

The nature and the depth of crisis of the Indian State has been analysed variedly by
various authors, schools and methodologies. They see the crisis as emanating from
different sources, and therefore would expect radically different solutions. One line of
argument finds that the difficulties of the modern Indian State stem from its alien
provenance, the forms and procedures of which largely remain unintelligible to the
common people of India; and the solution of the crisis must be sought in some more
understandable, or indigenous form of political construction.

Another line of argument sees the crisis as stemming from the narrowness of
participation which is reinforced by the hierarchies inherent in the western structure
of political parties (See: Kothari, 1989). The Marxist analysis persistently links the
crisis to the capitalist development in India, which destroys earlier structures without
providing the advantages of a mature capitalism, the contradictions of which get
10
reflected in the political conflicts evident in modern Indian society (Vanaik, 1990).
According to yet other line of argument, the roots of the crisis can be seen in the
arrival of a democratic society, which is making the functioning of democratic
government more problematic.

The power struggle between the rising social classes and the Indian State has resulted
in weakening of the latter. The inability of any national party to remain decisively in
power at the Centre has resulted in the Indian State coming under the control of a
shifting political coalition. The vertical contradiction between the dominant segments
of Indian society and the mass of the people has also been affected by the competitive
and conflict - ridden interplay of the horizontally related segments of the dominant
elite in the recent decades.

In such a scenario, certain forms of mass opposition on the one hand and the regional
opposition on the other have shown themselves to be capable of withstanding the
pressure of the Centre and of mounting a challenge, albeit partial but earlier
unknown, to the Indian State. Although the State continues to wield preponderant
power as an arena of conflict between upper and lower classes, it has shown itself to
be weak as an arena of competition between classes or class fractions in horizontal
contradiction with each other.

The Indian State pursues a policy of dualism with regard to religion. In the case of the
religions of Indian origin, particularly the majority religion (Hinduism), the State
intervenes as a reformer whereas it pursues a policy of expedient retreatism in the
case of minority religions. Two most outstanding examples of this are the Sati
Prevention Act and the Muslim Women's Bill. An unstated assumption and a
projected expectation seem to underly such a policy. The assumption seems to be that
the State has the moral authority to intervene in the case of native religions and its
intervention is acceptable to them. The expectation is that the native religions will
identify themselves and cooperate with the State. But it is clear that both the
assumption and expectation have been faulted.

However, the performance of the Indian State after independence seems vastly
superior to that in the first half of the 20th century. Operating within a democratic
framework, it has outperformed most other developing countries, with the exception
of China and some of the East Asian countries. Among the strengths, we can count
―The institutionalisation of democracy; a federal structure with governance at several
levels, an independent judiciary; a mixed economy; economic planning that funnels
increasing resources to poverty alleviation, human resource development,
infrastructure development and a highly effective, phased liberalisation of the
economy‖.

In the globalisation context, the Indian State is trying to take up the responsibility of
facilitating and promoting economic policies that are in consonance with the norms of

11
global free trade, privatisation of public sector, tax reforms, environment and nuclear
disarmament related agreements. Despite the accent on minimalist State, the Indian
State is repositioning itself in order to adopt to the changing scenario through
rightsizing bureaucracy, streamlining public sector, promoting welfare of the
disadvantaged and encouraging efforts toward human rights, social justice and
economic equity.

12.7 SUMMARY

The achievement of the Indian State operating democratically in a very poor society
is almost unprecedented, ―The past fifty years have trenchantly displayed the powers
of the State and of the idea of democracy to reconstitute…caste and religion-and to
force them to enter politics…. within a very short time, India has moved from being a
society in which the State had for most people a distant profile and limited
responsibilities, and where only a few had access to it, to one where State
responsibilities have swollen and everyone can imagine exercising some influence
upon it…A return to the old order of castes, or of rule by empire is inconceivable : the
principle of authority in society has been transformed‖ (Khilanani, op.cit.). The
strength of Indian State lies in its overall democratic framework, civil liberties, the
federal structure, the independent judiciary, some form of economic planning,
graduated liberalisation, the mixed economy, and the luxuriant organisational
diversity of public, private, cooperative, voluntary, associational, institutional, and
other non-governmental actors, which have not only stood the test of time, but also
provide continuity with the past and a sound platform for future revitalisation. The
impact of globalisation on the Indian State assumes significance in the contemporary
context. This Unit tried to discuss these issues.

12.8 EXERCISE

1. What is the role of state in India?

2. Explain the emergence of modern state in India.
3. What are the structural and functional patterns of administration in India?
4. The bureaucracy in India is neither monolithic nor homogenous, explain.
5. What are the different issues before the Indian state?

12
12.9 REFERENCE

 Bertrand, Badie, 2000, the Imported State: The Westernisation of the Political
Order, (Translated by Claudia Royal), Stanford University Press, and
Stanford.
 Chatterjee, Partha, 1997, ―Development Planning and the Indian State‖ in
Partha Chatterjee (Ed.), State and Politics in India, OUP, Delhi.
 Dirks, Nicholas, 1997, ―The Study of State and Society in India‖, in Sudipta
Kaviraj (Ed.), Politics in India, OUP, Delhi.
 Frankel, R. Francine, 1997, ―Decline of a Social Order‖ in Sudipta Kaviraj
(Ed.), ibid.
 Austin, Granville, 1999, ―Working a Democratic Constitution: The Indian
Experience‖, OUP, New Delhi.
 Austin, Granville, 2004, (8th Edition), The Indian Constitution: The
Cornerstone of a Nation, OUP, New Delhi.
 Kaviraj, S, 1991, ―State, Society and Discourse in India: in J. Manor, (Ed.)
Rethinking Third World Politics, Longman, London

13
UNIT-13 DEVELOPMENTAL AND WELFARE
DIMENSIONS
Structure
13.1 Objectives
13.2 Introduction
13.3 Changing Nature of Indian State during 1950-67
13.3.1 The implementation of Five years plans
13.3.2 History of Five years plans
13.3.3 First Plan (1951–1956)
13.3.4 Second Plan (1956–1961)
13.3.5 Third Plan (1961–1966)
13.3.7 Fourth Plan (1969–1974)
13.3.8 Fifth Plan (1974–1979)
13.3.9 Rolling Plan (1978–1980)
13.3.10 Sixth Plan (1980–1985)
13.3.11 Seventh Plan (1985–1990)
13.3.12 Annual Plans (1990–1992)
13.3.13 Eighth Plan (1992–1997)
13.3.14 Ninth Plan (1997–2002)
13.3.14.1 Objective of the Ninth Five-Year Plan
13.3.14.2 Strategies
13.3.14.3 Performance
13.3.15 Tenth Plan (2002–2007)
13.3.16 Eleventh Plan (2007–2012)
13.3.17 Twelfth Plan (2012–2017)
13.3.17.1 Objectives of the Twelfth Five-Year Plan
13.3.18 thirteen five year plans for India
13.4 Trends in Social Welfare
13.5 Inequality and Participation
13.6 Development, Freedom and Opportunities
13.6.1 The Processes of Change During 1967
13.6.2 The Processes of Change During 1969
14
 13.6.3 Electoral malpractices during 1977
13.7 Summary
13.8 Exercise
13.9 Reference
13.1 OBJECTIVES
After reading this Unit, you will be able to:

 Understand the structural and functional evolution of the Indian State.

 Describe the implementation of Five years plans.
 Analyse Trends in Social Welfare dimensions. And
 Describe the process of change in Indian politics.

13.2 INTRODUCTION

Development in its broadest social terms as an upward directional movement of

society from lesser to greater levels of energy, efficiency, quality, productivity,
complexity, comprehension, creativity, choice, mastery, enjoyment, and
accomplishment. The development of individuals and societies results in increasing
freedom of choice and increasing the capacity to fulfill their choices by their own
capacity and initiative. Growth and development usually go together, but they are
different phenomena subject to different laws. Although welfare or social welfare is a
commonly discussed topic, it can have many different meanings depending on the
focus of analysis. The Welfare approach is usually discussed in the context of the
welfare state – a state with welfare orientation. It can be general social welfare or
welfare of women and children or welfare of the disabled and so on.

13.3 CHANGING NATURE OF INDIAN STATE DURING 1950-67

India held its first national elections under the Constitution in 1952, where a turnout
of over 60% was recorded. The National Congress Party won an overwhelming
majority, and Jawaharlal Nehru began a second term as Prime Minister. President
Prasad was also elected to a second term by the electoral college of the
first Parliament of India.

The history of the Republic of India begins on 26 January 1950. The country became
an independent nation within the British Commonwealth on 15 August 1947.
Concurrently the Muslim-majority northwest and east of British India was separated
into the Dominion of Pakistan, by the partition of India. The partition led to
a population transfer of more than 10 million people between India and Pakistan and
the death of about one million people. Indian National Congress leader Jawaharlal
Nehru became the first Prime Minister of India, but the leader most associated with
15
the independence struggle, Mahatma Gandhi, accepted no office. The
new constitution of 1950 made India a democratic country.
The nation faced religious, violence, casteism, naxalism, terrorism and
regional separatist insurgencies, especially in Jammu and Kashmir and northeastern
India. India has unresolved territorial disputes with China, which in 1962 escalated
into the Sino-Indian War, and with Pakistan, which resulted in wars
in 1947, 1965, 1971 and 1999. India was neutral in the Cold War, and a leader in
the Non-Aligned Movement. It purchased its military weapons from the Soviet
Union, while its arch-foe Pakistan was closely allied to the United States and loosely
to the People's Republic of China.
India is a nuclear-weapon state, having conducted its first nuclear test in 1974,
followed by another five tests in 1998. From the 1950s to the 1980s, India
followed socialist-inspired policies. The economy was influenced by extensive
regulation, protectionism and public ownership, leading to pervasive corruption and
slow economic growth. Beginning in 1991, neoliberal economic reforms have
transformed India into the third largest and one of the fastest-growing economies in
the world, though corruption remains a pervasive problem. Today, India is a major
world power with a prominent voice in global affairs and is seeking a permanent seat
in the United Nations Security Council. Many economists, military analysts and think
tanks expect India to become a superpower in the near future.
13.3.1 The implementation of Five years plans

From 1947 to 2017, the Indian economy was premised on the concept of planning.
This was carried through the Five-Year Plans, developed, executed, and monitored by
the Planning Commission (1951-2014) and the NITI Aayog (2015-2017). With
the prime minister as the ex-officio chairman, the commission has a nominated
deputy chairman, who holds the rank of a cabinet Minister. Montek Singh
Ahluwalia is the last deputy chairman of the commission (resigned on 26 May 2014).
The Twelfth Plan completed its term in March 2017. Prior to the Fourth Plan, the
allocation of state resources was based on schematic patterns rather than a transparent
and objective mechanism, which led to the adoption of the Gadgil formula in 1969.
Revised versions of the formula have been used since then to determine the allocation
of central assistance for state plans. The new government led by Narendra Modi,
elected in 2014, has announced the dissolution of the Planning Commission, and its
replacement by a think tank called the NITI Aayog (an acronym for National
Institution for Transforming India).

13.3.2 History of Five years plans

Five-Year Plans (FYPs) are centralized and integrated national economic

programs. Joseph Stalin implemented the first Five-Year Plan in the Soviet Union in
1928. Most communist states and several capitalist countries subsequently have
adopted them. China continues to use FYPs, although China renamed its Eleventh
16
FYP, from 2006 to 2010, a guideline (guihua), rather than a plan (jihua), to signify
the central government's more hands-off approach to development. India launched its
First FYP in 1951, immediately after independence, under socialist influence of the
first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru.
The First Five-Year Plan was one of the most important, because it had a great role in
the launching of Indian development after Independence. Thus, it strongly supported
agriculture production and also launched the industrialization of the country (but less
than the Second Plan, which focused on heavy industries). It built a particular system
of mixed economy, with a great role for the public sector (with an emerging welfare
state), as well as a growing private sector (represented by some personalities as those
who published the Bombay Plan).
13.3.3 First Plan (1951–1956)

The first Indian Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, presented the First Five-Year Plan
to the Parliament of India and needed urgent attention. The First Five-year Plan was
launched in 1951 which mainly focused in development of the primary sector. The
First Five-Year Plan was based on the Harrod–Domar model with few modifications.
The total planned budget of Rs.2069 crore (2378 crore later) was allocated to seven
broad
areas: irrigation and energy (27.2%), agriculture and community development(17.4%)
, transport and communications (24%), industry (8.4%), socialservices (16.6%), rehab
ilitation of landless farmers (4.1%), and for other sectors and services (2.5%). The
most important feature of this phase was active role of state in all economic sectors.
Such a role was justified at that time because immediately
after independence, India was facing basic problems—deficiency of capital and low
capacity to save.
The target growth rate was 2.1% annual gross domestic product (GDP) growth; the
achieved growth rate was 3.6% the net domestic product went up by 15%.
The monsoon was good and there were relatively high crop yields, boosting exchange
reserves and the per capita income, which increased by 8%. National income
increased more than the per capita income due to rapid population growth. Many
irrigation projects were initiated during this period, including
the Bhakra, Hirakud, Mettur Dam and Damodar Valley dams. The World Health
Organization (WHO), with the Indian government, addressed children's health and
reduced infant mortality, indirectly contributing to population growth.
At the end of the plan period in 1956, five Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) were
started as major technical institutions. The University Grants Commission (UGC) was
set up to take care of funding and take measures to strengthen the higher education in
the country. Contracts were signed to start five steel plants, which came into
existence in the middle of the Second Five-Year Plan. The plan was quasi-successful
for the government.

17
13.3.4 Second Plan (1956–1961)

The Second Plan focused on the development of the public sector and "rapid
Industrialisation". The plan followed the Mahalanobis model, an economic
development model developed by the Indian statistician Prasanta Chandra
Mahalanobis in 1953. The plan attempted to determine the optimal allocation of
investment between productive sectors in order to maximise long-run economic
growth. It used the prevalent state-of-the-art techniques of operations research and
optimization as well as the novel applications of statistical models developed at
the Indian Statistical Institute. The plan assumed a closed economy in which the main
trading activity would be centred on importing capital goods.
Hydroelectric power projects and five steel plants at Bhilai, Durgapur,
and Rourkela were established with the help of Russia, Britain (the U.K) and West
Germany respectively. Coal production was increased. More railway lines were added
in the north east.
The Tata Institute of Fundamental Research and Atomic Energy Commission of
India were established as research institutes. In 1957, a talent search and scholarship
program was begun to find talented young students to train for work in nuclear
power.
The total amount allocated under the Second Five-Year Plan in India was
Rs.48 billion. This amount was allocated among various sectors: power and irrigation,
social services, communications and transport, and miscellaneous. The second plan
was a period of rising prices.The country also faced foreign exchange crisis. The
rapid growth in population slowed down the growth in the per capita income.
The target growth rate was 4.5% and the actual growth rate was 4.27%.
The plan was criticized by classical liberal economist B.R. Shenoy who noted that the
plan's "dependence on deficit financing to promote heavy industrialization was a
recipe for trouble". Shenoy argued that state control of the economy would undermine
a young democracy. India faced an external payments crisis in 1957, which is viewed
as confirmation of Shenoy's argument.
13.3.5 Third Plan (1961–1966)

The Third Five-year Plan stressed agriculture and improvement in the production of
wheat, but the brief Sino-Indian War of 1962 exposed weaknesses in the economy
and shifted the focus towards the defence industry and the Indian Army. In 1965–
1966, India fought a War with Pakistan. There was also a severe drought in 1965. The
war led to inflation and the priority was shifted to price stabilisation. The construction
of dams continued. Many cement and fertilizer plants were also built. Punjab began
producing an abundance of wheat.

18
Many primary schools were started in rural areas. In an effort to bring democracy to
the grass-root level, Panchayat elections were started and the states were given more
development responsibilities.
State electricity boards and state secondary education boards were formed. States
were made responsible for secondary and higher education. State road transportation
corporations were formed and local road building became a state responsibility.
The target growth rate was 5.6%, but the actual growth rate was 2.4%.
13.3.6 Plan Holidays (1966–1969)
Due to miserable failure of the Third Plan the government was forced to declare "plan
holidays" (from 1966–67, 1967–68, and 1968–69). Three annual plans were drawn
during this intervening period. During 1966–67 there was again the problem of
drought. Equal priority was given to agriculture, its allied activities, and industrial
sector. The government of India declared "Devaluation of Rupee" to increase the
exports of the country. The main reasons for plan holidays were the war, lack of
resources and increase in inflation.
13.3.7 Fourth Plan (1969–1974)
At this time Indira Gandhi was the Prime Minister. The Indira Gandhi
government nationalised 14 major Indian banks and the Green Revolution in
India advanced agriculture. In addition, the situation in East
Pakistan (now Bangladesh) was becoming dire as the Indo-Pakistan War of
1971 and Bangladesh Liberation War took funds earmarked for industrial
development. India also performed the Smiling Buddha underground nuclear
test (Pokhran-1) in Rajasthan on May 18, 1974, partially in response to the United
States deployment of the Seventh Fleet in the Bay of Bengal. The fleet had been
deployed to warn India against attacking West Pakistan and extending the war.
The target growth rate was 5.6%, but the actual growth rate was 3.3%.
13.3.8 Fifth Plan (1974–1979)
The Fifth Five-Year Plan laid stress on employment, poverty alleviation (Garibi
Hatao), and justice. The plan also focused on self-reliance in agricultural production
and defence. In 1978 the newly elected Morarji Desai government rejected the plan.
The Electricity Supply Act was amended in 1975, which enabled the central
government to enter into power generation and transmission.
The Indian national highway system was introduced and many roads were widened to
accommodate the increasing traffic. Tourism also expanded. The twenty-point
programme was launched in 1975. It was followed from 1974 to 1979.
The Minimum Needs Programme (MNP) was introduced in the first year of the Fifth
Five-Year Plan (1974–78). The objective of the programme is to provide certain basic
minimum needs and thereby improve the living standards of the people. It is prepared
and launched by D.P.Dhar.

19
The target growth rate was 4.4% and the actual growth rate was 4.8%.
13.3.9 Rolling Plan (1978–1980)
The Janata Party government rejected the Fifth Five-Year Plan and introduced a new
Sixth Five-Year Plan (1978–1980). This plan was again rejected by the Indian
National Congress government in 1980 and a new Sixth Plan was made. The Rolling
Plan consisted of three kinds of plans that were proposed. The First Plan was for the
present year which comprised the annual budget and the Second was a plan for a
fixed number of years, which may be 3, 4 or 5 years. The Second Plan kept changing
as per the requirements of the Indian economy. The Third Plan was a perspective plan
for long terms i.e. for 10, 15 or 20 years. Hence there was no fixation of dates for the
commencement and termination of the plan in the rolling plans. The main advantage
of the rolling plans was that they were flexible and were able to overcome the rigidity
of fixed Five-Year Plans by mending targets, the object of the exercise, projections
and allocations as per the changing conditions in the country's economy. The main
disadvantage of this plan was that if the targets were revised each year, it became
difficult to achieve the targets laid down in the five-year period and it turned out to be
a complex plan. Also, the frequent revisions resulted in the lack of stability in the
economy.
13.3.10 Sixth Plan (1980–1985)
The Sixth Five-Year Plan marked the beginning of economic liberalisation. Price
controls were eliminated and ration shops were closed. This led to an increase in food
prices and an increase in the cost of living. This was the end of Nehruvian socialism.
The National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development was established for
development of rural areas on 12 July 1982 by recommendation of the Shivaraman
Committee. Family planning was also expanded in order to prevent overpopulation.
In contrast to China's strict and binding one-child policy, Indian policy did not rely on
the threat of force. More prosperous areas of India adopted family planning more
rapidly than less prosperous areas, which continued to have a high birth rate. Military
Five-Year Plans became coterminous with Planning Commission's plans from this
plan onwards.
The Sixth Five-Year Plan was a great success to the Indian economy. The target
growth rate was 5.2% and the actual growth rate was 5.7%.The only Five-Year Plan
which was done twice.
13.3.11 Seventh Plan (1985–1990)
The Seventh Five-Year Plan was led by the Congress Party with Rajiv Gandhi as the
prime minister. The plan laid stress on improving the productivity level of industries
by upgrading of technology.
The main objectives of the Seventh Five-Year Plan were to establish growth in areas
of increasing economic productivity, production of food grains, and generating
employment through "Social Justice".
20
As an outcome of the Sixth Five-Year Plan, there had been steady growth in
agriculture, controls on the rate of inflation, and favourable balance of payments
which had provided a strong base for the Seventh Five-Year Plan to build on the need
for further economic growth. The Seventh Plan had strived towards socialism and
energy production at large. The thrust areas of the Seventh Five-Year Plan were:
social justice, removal of oppression of the weak, using modern technology,
agricultural development, anti-poverty programmes, full supply of food, clothing, and
shelter, increasing productivity of small- and large-scale farmers, and making India
an independent economy.
Based on a 15-year period of striving towards steady growth, the Seventh Plan was
focused on achieving the prerequisites of self-sustaining growth by the year 2000.
The plan expected the labour force to grow by 39 million people and employment
was expected to grow at the rate of 4% per year.
Some of the expected outcomes of the Seventh Five-Year Plan India are given below:

 Balance of payments (estimates): Export – ₹330 billion (US$4.8 billion), Imports

– (-)₹540 billion (US$7.8 billion), Trade Balance – (-)₹210
billion (US$3.0 billion)
 Merchandise exports (estimates): ₹606.53 billion (US$8.8 billion)
 Merchandise imports (estimates): ₹954.37 billion (US$13.8 billion)
 Projections for balance of payments: Export – ₹607 billion (US$8.8 billion),
Imports – (-) ₹954 billion (US$13.8 billion), Trade Balance- (-) ₹347
billion (US$5.0 billion)
Under the Seventh Five-Year Plan, India strove to bring about a self-sustained
economy in the country with valuable contributions from voluntary agencies and the
general populace.
The target growth rate was 5.0% and the actual growth rate was 6.01%.and the
growth rate of per capita income was 3.7%.
13.3.12 Annual Plans (1990–1992)
The Eighth Plan could not take off in 1990 due to the fast changing political situation
at the centre and the years 1990–91 and 1991–92 were treated as Annual Plans. The
Eighth Plan was finally formulated for the period 1992–1997.
13.3.13 Eighth Plan (1992–1997)
1989–91 was a period of economic instability in India and hence no Five-Year Plan
was implemented. Between 1990 and 1992, there were only Annual Plans. In 1991,
India faced a crisis in foreign exchange (forex) reserves, left with reserves of only
about US$1 billion. Thus, under pressure, the country took the risk of reforming the
socialist economy. P.V. Narasimha Rao was the ninth Prime Minister of the Republic
of India and head of Congress Party, and led one of the most important

21
administrations in India's modern history, overseeing a major economic
transformation and several incidents affecting national security. At that time
Dr. Manmohan Singh (later Prime Minister of India) launched India's free market
reforms that brought the nearly bankrupt nation back from the edge. It was the
beginning of liberalization, privatisation and globalization (LPG) in India.
Modernization of industries was a major highlight of the Eighth Plan. Under this plan,
the gradual opening of the Indian economy was undertaken to correct the
burgeoning deficit and foreign debt. Meanwhile, India became a member of
the World Trade Organization on 1 January 1995. The major objectives included,
controlling population growth, poverty reduction, employment generation,
strengthening the infrastructure, institutional building, tourism management, human
resource development, involvement of Panchayati rajs, Nagar Palikas, NGOs,
decentralisation and people's participation.
Energy was given priority with 26.6% of the outlay.
The target growth rate was 5.6% and the actual growth rate was 6.8%.
To achieve the target of an average of 5.6% per annum, investment of 23.2% of the
gross domestic product was required. The incremental capital ratio is 4.1. The saving
for investment was to come from domestic sources and foreign sources, with the rate
of domestic saving at 21.6% of gross domestic production and of foreign saving at
1.6% of gross domestic production.
13.3.14 Ninth Plan (1997–2002)
The Ninth Five-Year Plan came after 50 years of Indian Independence. Atal Bihari
Vajpayee was the Prime Minister of India during the Ninth Plan. The Ninth Plan tried
primarily to use the latent and unexplored economic potential of the country to
promote economic and social growth. It offered strong support to the social spheres of
the country in an effort to achieve the complete elimination of poverty. The
satisfactory implementation of the Eighth Five-Year Plan also ensured the states'
ability to proceed on the path of faster development. The Ninth Five-Year Plan also
saw joint efforts from the public and the private sectors in ensuring economic
development of the country. In addition, the Ninth Five-Year Plan saw contributions
towards development from the general public as well as governmental agencies in
both the rural and urban areas of the country. New implementation measures in the
form of Special Action Plans (SAPs) were evolved during the Ninth Plan to fulfill
targets within the stipulated time with adequate resources. The SAPs covered the
areas of social infrastructure, agriculture, information technology and Water policy.
13.3.14.1 Objective of the Ninth Five-Year Plan
The main objective of the Ninth Five-Year Plan was to correct historical inequalities
and increase the economic growth in the country. Other aspects which constituted the
Ninth Five-Year Plan were:

22
  Population control.
 Generating employment by giving priority to agriculture and rural
development.
 Reduction of poverty.
 Ensuring proper availability of food and water for the poor.
 Availability of primary health care facilities and other basic necessities.
 Primary education to all children in the country.
 Empowering the socially disadvantaged classes like Scheduled castes,
Scheduled tribes and other backward classes.
 Developing self-reliance in terms of agriculture.
 Acceleration in the growth rate of the economy with the help of stable prices.
13.3.14.2 Strategies

 Structural transformations and developments in the Indian economy.

 New initiatives and initiation of corrective steps to meet the challenges in the
economy of the country.
 Efficient use of scarce resources to ensure rapid growth.
 Combination of public and private support to increase employment.
 Enhancing high rates of export to achieve self-reliance.
 Providing services like electricity, telecommunication, railways etc.
 Special plans to empower the socially disadvantaged classes of the country.
 Involvement and participation of Panchayati Raj institutions/bodies and Nagar
Palikas in the development process.
13.3.14.3 Performance

 The Ninth Five-Year Plan achieved a GDP growth rate of 5.4% against a
target of 6.5%
 The agriculture industry grew at a rate of 2.1% against the target of 4.2%
 The industrial growth in the country was 4.5% which was higher than that of
the target of 3%
 The service industry had a growth rate of 7.8%.
 An average annual growth rate of 6.7% was reached.
The Ninth Five-Year Plan looks through the past weaknesses in order to frame the
new measures for the overall socio-economic development of the country. However,
for a well-planned economy of any country, there should be a combined participation
of the governmental agencies along with the general population of that nation. A
combined effort of public, private, and all levels of government is essential for
ensuring the growth of India's economy.
The target growth was 7.1% and the actual growth was 6.8%.

23
13.3.15 Tenth Plan (2002–2007)
The main objectives of the Tenth Five-Year Plan:
 Attain 8% GDP growth per year.
 Reduction of poverty rate by 5% by 2007.
 Providing gainful and high-quality employment at least to the addition to the
labour force.
 Reduction in gender gaps in literacy and wage rates by at least 50% by 2007.
 20-point program was introduced.
 Target growth: 8.1% – growth achieved: 7.7%.
 The Tenth Plan was expected to follow a regional approach rather than
sectoral approach to bring down regional inequalities.
 Expenditure of ₹43,825 crore (US$6.3 billion) for tenth five years.

Out of total plan outlay, ₹921,291 crore (US$130 billion) (57.9%) was for central
government and ₹691,009 crore (US$100 billion) (42.1%) was for states and union
territories.
13.3.16 Eleventh Plan (2007–2012)

 It was in the period of Manmohan Singh as a prime minister.

 It aimed to increase the enrolment in higher education of 18–23 years of age
group by 2011-12.
 It focused on distant education, convergence of formal, non-formal, distant
and IT education institutions.
 Rapid and inclusive growth (poverty reduction).
 Emphasis on social sector and delivery of service therein.
 Empowerment through education and skill development.
 Reduction of gender inequality.
 Environmental sustainability.
 To increase the growth rate in agriculture, industry and services to 4%, 10%
and 9% respectively.
 Reduce total fertility rate to 2.1.
 Provide clean drinking water for all by 2009.
 Increase agriculture growth to 4%.

13.3.17 Twelfth Plan (2012–2017)

The Twelfth Five-Year Plan of the Government of India has been decided to achieve
a growth rate of 8.2% but the National Development Council (NDC) on 27 December
2012 approved a growth rate of 8% for the Twelfth Plan.
With the deteriorating global situation, the Deputy Chairman of the Planning
Commission Montek Singh Ahluwalia has said that achieving an average growth rate
of 9 percent in the next five years is not possible. The Final growth target has been set
24
at 8% by the endorsement of the plan at the National Development Council meeting
held in New Delhi.
"It is not possible to think of an average of 9% [in the Twelfth Plan]. I think
somewhere between 8 and 8.5 percent is feasible," Ahluwalia said on the sidelines of
a conference of State Planning Boards and departments. The approached paper for the
Twelfth Plan, approved last year, talked about an annual average growth rate of 9%.
"When I say feasible... that will require major effort. If you don't do that, there is no
God given right to grow at 8 percent. I think given that the world economy
deteriorated very sharply over the last year...the growth rate in the first year of the
12th Plan (2012–13) is 6.5 to 7 percent."
He also indicated that soon he should share his views with other members of the
Commission to choose a final number (economic growth target) to put before the
country's NDC for its approval.
The government intends to reduce poverty by 10% during the 12th Five-Year Plan.
Ahluwalia said, "We aim to reduce poverty estimates by 9% annually on a sustainable
basis during the Plan period". Earlier, addressing a conference of State Planning
Boards and Planning departments, he said the rate of decline in poverty doubled
during the Eleventh Plan. The commission had said, while using
the Tendulkar poverty line, the rate of reduction in the five years between 2004–05
and 2009–10, was about 1.5% points each year, which was twice that when compared
to the period between 1993–95 to 2004–05. The plan aims towards the betterment of
the infrastructural projects of the nation avoiding all types of bottlenecks. The
document presented by the planning commission is aimed to attract private
investments of up to US$1 trillion in the infrastructural growth in the 12th five-year
plan, which will also ensure a reduction in the subsidy burden of the government to
1.5 percent from 2 percent of the GDP (gross domestic product). The UID (Unique
Identification Number) will act as a platform for cash transfer of the subsidies in the
plan.

13.3.17 .1 Objectives of the Twelfth Five-Year Plan were:

 To create 50 million new work opportunities in the non farm sector.

 To remove gender and social gap in school enrolment.
 To enhance access to higher education.
 To reduce malnutrition among children aged 0–3 years.
 To provide electricity to all villages.
 To ensure that 50% of the rural population have accesses to proper drinking
water.
 To increase green cover by 1 million hectare every year.
 To provide access to banking services to 90% of households.

25
13.3.18 thirteen five year plans for India
There is no 13th Five years plan for India last five year plan ended on 31st march
2017. For the first time the Nehru Govt. introduce five years plan for social and
economic development of the country, But the MODI government replaced the
planning commission with the introduction of NITI AAYOG (National Institute for
Transforming India) so there is no 13th Five Year plans for India.

13.4 TRENDS IN SOCIAL WELFARE

It is now generally accepted that social welfare programmes play a vital role in the
over-all development of a country. The term social welfare services denotes services
intended to cater to the special needs of a person and groups who, by reason of some
handicap, social, economic, physical or mental, are unable to avail themselves Five
Year Plans of, or are traditionally denied, the amenities and services provided by the
community. In this sense, welfare services are meant to benefit the weaker, dependent
or under privileged sections of the population. The beneficiaries of these services may
be physically handicapped persons, such as the blind, the deaf, or the crippled,
socially dependent individuals, like the orphan the widow or the destitute, mentally
retarded persons, economically under-privileged groups such as those living in slum
areas and women handicapped by restrictive social traditions or practices. Social
welfare services also embrace those special amenities which do not form part of the
normal services in the spheres of public health, education and medical relief.
Examples of such special services are those provided by the programme for the
welfare of youth or children .The purpose of these social welfare schemes is to
promote the happiness and well being of such sections of the population as are a
special charge on the State under the various provisions of the Constitution. These are
intended to pave the way for the establishment of a welfare state. No national
development plan can afford to neglect social services, and more particularly, social
welfare. Equally important is special care for the weaker and more vulnerable
sections of the population through specialized social welfare services. Only this will
enable them, first to absorb the benefits of the general social services, and later, share
in common with all others, the blessings of economic development.

A comprehensive social welfare programme would include social legislation, welfare

of women and children, family welfare, youth welfare, physical and mental fitness,
crime and correctional administration and welfare of the physically and mentally
handicapped. It would also include, in the special circumstances and background of
India, a programme for fulfilling the objective of prohibition.

13.5 INEQUALITY AND PARTICIPATION

In any society, most types of opportunities are enjoyed by some people, but not by
others. Extending freedom widely across society typically involves countering the
divide between haves and have-nots.
26
Participation is intimately connected with demands of equality. At the most
immediate level, democratic participation requires the sharing and symmetry of basic
political rights to vote, to propagate and to criticise. Actual participation in political
movements and public action can make a major difference to the agenda of
governments and influence its priorities.

Going beyond that elementary and fundamental association, another important causal
connection is that political participation can be more effective and more equally
enjoyed if there is some equity in the sharing of economic resources as well. Indeed,
economic inequality can seriously compromise the quality of democracy.
Overcoming the inequalities of power associated with economic privilege is an
important aspect of democracy in the full sense of the term.

Social inequalities too can seriously interfere with equality of political participation.
Divisions of power and influence related to caste, gender and even education can, in
many situations, make the socially underprivileged also politically marginalized. Here
again, it is important to recognize the adverse effects of inequality on political
participation and also the possibility of countering this by promoting greater social
equality as well as by overcoming the association between social privilege and
political Issues of inequality and participation are particularly crucial in India, where
social divisions (based on class, caste and gender among other sources of disparity)
are pervasive and have tended to take a heavy toll on both economic development and
social opportunities. While social disparities in India are often assumed to be
extremely rigid, if not immutable, there is, in fact, enormous scope for countering the
inequalities that happen to prevail today. The potential for change has already been
demonstrated, to some extent, in recent decades (e.g. through social movements for
the emancipation of 'backward' castes, advances in the political representation of
women, and fairly radical changes in power structures at the village level). The future
course of development and democracy in India will depend a great deal on the extent
to which further possibilities in these domains are realized.

13.6 DEVELOPMENT, FREEDOM AND OPPORTUNITIES

The basic objective of development as the expansion of human capabilities has never
been completely overlooked in modem development literature, but the focus has been
mainly on. The generation of economic growth, in the sense of expanding gross
national product and related variables. The expansion of human capabilities can
clearly be enhanced by economic growth (even in the limited sense of growth of real
income per head), but (1) there are many influences other than economic growth that
work in that direction, and (2) the impact of economic growth on human capabilities
can be extremely variable depending on the nature of that growth.

What is crucial in all this is the need to judge the different policies ultimately by their
impact on the enhancement of the capabilities that the citizen enjoys-(whether or not
27
this comes about through the growth of real income). This differs sharply from the
more standard practice of judging economic policies by their contribution to the
growth of real incomes seen as a merit in itself .To dispute that practice must not be
seen as an invitation to ignore the important instrumental role of economic growth in
enhancing basic objectives such as human capabilities it is mainly a matter of being
clear about our ends and our means.

13.6.1 The Processes of Change During 1967

The Indian general election of 1967 elected the 4th Lok Sabha of India and was held
from 17 to 21 February. The 27 Indian states and union territories were represented
by 520 single-member constituencies (an increase of 26).

Under the leadership of Indira Gandhi, the Indian National Congress won a fourth
consecutive term in power and over 54% of the seats, while no other party won more
than 10% of the votes or seats. However, the INC's victory was significantly lower
than the results they had achieved in the previous three elections under Jawaharlal
Nehru. By 1967, economic growth in India had slowed the 1961–1966 Five-Year
Plan gave a target of 5.6% annual growth, but the actual growth rate was 2.4%.
Under Lal Bahadur Shastri, the government's popularity was boosted after India
prevailed in the 1965 War with Pakistan, but this war (along with the previous 1962
War with China) had helped put a strain on the economy. Internal divisions were
emerging in the Indian National Congress and its two popular leaders Nehru and
Shastri had both died. Indira Gandhi had succeeded Shastri as leader, but a rift had
emerged between her and Deputy Prime Minister Morarji Desai, who had been her
rival in the 1966 party leadership contest.
The INC suffered significant losses in seven states which included: Gujarat, where
INC won 11 out of 24 seats while Swatantra Party won 12 seats; Madras, where INC
won 3 out of 39 seats and DMK won 25 seats; Orissa, where INC won 6 out of 20
seats and Swatantra Party won 8 seats. Rajasthan where INC won 10 out of 20
seats Swatantra Party won 8 seats. West Bengal where INC won 14 out of 40. Kerala
where INC won only 1 out of 19. Delhi where INC won 1 out of 7 while remaining 6
were won by Bharatiya Jana Sangh. The decline in support for Congress was also
reflected by its loss of control of six state governments in the same year. The party's
electoral losses led to Gandhi becoming assertive and opting for a series of choices
that put her against the rest of the party establishment, eventually leading to a split in
the party.
13.6.2 The Processes of Change During 1969

The Indian National Congress (Organisation) or Congress (O) was a political

party in India formed when the Congress party split following the expulsion of Indira
Gandhi.

28
On 12 November 1969, the Prime Minister of India Indira Gandhi was expelled from
the Congress party for violating the party discipline. The party finally split with Indira
Gandhi setting up a rival organization, which came to be known as Congress (R). In
the All India Congress Committee, 446 of its 705 members walked over to Indira's
side. The Indian National Congress (Organisation) was also occasionally informally
referred to as the Syndicate and the Indira faction by "Indicate". K Kamaraj and
later Morarji Desai were the leaders of the INC (O).

INC(O) led governments in Bihar under Bhola Paswan

Shastri, Karnataka under Veerendra Patil, and in Gujarat under Hitendra K Desai. It
was also a part of the Janata Morcha that ruled Gujarat under Babubhai J. Patel from
1975–1976 during the emergency era.

The split can in some ways be seen as a left-wing/right-wing division. Indira wanted
to use a populist agenda in order to mobilize popular support for the party. The
regional party elites, who formed the INC (O), stood for a more right-wing agenda,
and distrusted Soviet help.

In the 1971 general election, the INC (O) won about 10% of the vote and 16 Lok
Sabha seats, against 44% of the vote and 352 seats for Indira's Congress. In March
1977, the party fought the post-Emergency election under the banner of Janata Party.

The Janata Party alliance inflicted crushing defeat to Indira's Congress Party.
Nevertheless, the total vote share of Congress (O) in 1977 was almost halved from
1971 and they lost three seats. Later the same year, INC(O) formally merged with
the Bharatiya Lok Dal, Bharatiya Jan Sangh, Socialist Party of India, Swatantra
Party and others to form the Janata Party. Congress (O)'s leader Morarji Desai served
as the fourth Prime Minister of India from 1977 to 1979 which was India's first non-
Congress government.

During the period of 1971 the Indian state increase their demands people wants
―Welfare and Employment of All‖ and ―Garibi Hatao‖

Garibi Hatao ("Remove poverty") was the theme and slogan of Indira Gandhi's 1971
election campaign and later also used by her son Rajiv Gandhi and later by her
Grandson Rahul Gandhi during his campaign for 2019 General election. The slogan
and the proposed anti-poverty programs that came with it were designed to give
Gandhi an independent national support, based on rural and urban poor, which would
allow her to by-pass the dominant rural castes both in and out of state and local
government; likewise the urban commercial class. And, for their part, the previously
voiceless poor particularly Dalits and Adivasis would at last gain both political worth
and political weight.

29
The programs created through garibi hatao, though carried out locally, were funded,
developed, supervised, and staffed by Government officials in New
Delhi and Congress Party officials. It was part of the 4th Five-Year Plan.
13.6.3 Electoral malpractices during 1977
The Allahabad High Court declared the 1977 general election as null and void on the
ground of malpractices. On 18 January 1977, Gandhi called fresh elections for March
and released all political prisoners though the Emergency officially ended on 23
March 1977. The opposition Janata movement's campaign warned Indians that the
elections might be their last chance to choose between "democracy and dictatorship."
In the Lok Sabha elections, held in March, Mrs. Gandhi and Sanjay both lost their
Lok Sabha seats, as did all the Congress candidates in northern states such
as Bihar and Uttar Pradesh. Many Congress Party loyalists deserted Mrs. Gandhi. The
Congress was reduced to just 153 seats, 92 of which were from four of the southern
states. The Janata Party's 298 seats and its allies' 47 seats (of a total 542) gave it a
massive majority. Morarji Desai became the first non-Congress Prime Minister of
India.
Voters in the electorally largest state of Uttar Pradesh, historically a Congress
stronghold, turned against Gandhi and her party failed to win a single seat in the state.
Dhanagare says the structural reasons behind the discontent against the Government
included the emergence of a strong and united opposition, disunity and weariness
inside Congress, an effective underground opposition, and the ineffectiveness of
Gandhi's control of the mass media, which had lost much credibility. The structural
factors allowed voters to express their grievances, notably their resentment of the
emergency and its authoritarian and repressive policies. One grievance often
mentioned as the 'nasbandi' (vasectomy) campaign in rural areas. The middle classes
also emphasised the curbing of freedom throughout the state and India. Meanwhile,
Congress hit an all-time low in West Bengal because of the poor discipline and
factionalism among Congress activists as well as the numerous defections that
weakened the party. Opponents emphasised the issues of corruption in Congress and
appealed to a deep desire by the voters for fresh leadership.

This action of the government transformed the Indian state into a coercive state and
the government of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi began making an arbitrary exercise
of state power in the name of securing rapid socio-economic development of the
people.

13.7 SUMMARY

After the attainment of Independence in 1947, the nation has accepted the concept of
a planned economy and to work for a socialist pattern of society. It was largely
acknowledged that the co-operative form of organization could play a very useful role

30
in the establishment and promotion of economic and social democracy and in the
implementation of democratic planning. Welfare dimensions are required for a
country like India because in India all are not socially and economically sound.
Without the intervention of the government, people cannot develop their socio-
economic conditions. From independence to date various welfare and developmental
activities were taken by the government of India as well as by the state governments
which result in we achieve development and welfare.

13.8 EXERCISE

1. Explain the changing nature of Indian state during 1950-67.

2. What is five years plans, explain the First five year plan (1951-1956)?
3. Why seventh five years plan is important for?
4. What are the different objectives of ninth five years plan?
5. What are the different trends in social welfare in India?
6. What is an Electoral malpractice in India?

13.9 REFERENCE

 N. Menon and A. Nigam, (2007) ‗Power and Contestation: India since 1989‘,
London, Fernwood Publishing, Halifax and Zed Books.
 R. Vora and S. Palshikar (eds.) ‗Indian Democracy: Meanings and Practices‘,
New Delhi, Sage.
 Shah, G (ed.) ‗Social Movements and the State‘, New Delhi, Sage
Publications.
 P. deSouza and E. Sridharan (eds.) ‗India‘s Political Parties‘, New Delhi, Sage
Publications.
 A S. Ganguly, L. Diamond and M. Plattner (eds.) ‗The State of India‘s
Democracy‘, Baltimore, John Hopkins University Press.
 Kaviraj, Sudipta(2009) ‗Politics in India‘, Oxford University Press, New
Delhi
 Kohli, Atul (2004) (ed.) ‗The Success of India‘s Democracy‘, New Delhi,
Cambridge University Press.
 Kothari,R (1970) ‗Caste in Indian Politics‘, Delhi, Orient Longman.
 M. John, (ed) (2008) ‗Women in India: A Reader, Penguin , India
 P. Brass, (1999) ‗The Politics of India since Independence, New Delhi,
Cambridge University Press and Foundation Books.
 P. Mehta and N. Jayal (2010) (eds.) ‗The Oxford Companion to Politics in
India‘, New Delhi, Oxford University Press.
 Z. Hasan (2002) (ed.) ‗Parties and Party Politics in India‘, New Delhi: Oxford
University Press.

31
UNIT-14 COERCIVE DIMENTION OF INDIAN STATE
Structure

14.1 Objectives
14.2 Introduction
14.3 Proclamation of the Emergency
14.3.1 Unlawful Arrests during Emergency
14.3.2 Laws, human rights and elections
14.4 Resistance Movements
14.4.1 The role of RSS
14.4.2 Sikh opposition
14.5 Elections Of 1977
14.5.1 The tribunal
14.5.2 Legacy
14.6 Indian General Election-1989
14.7 Indian General Election-1991
14.8 Indian General Election-1999
14.9 Indian General Election -2014
14.10 The Present Dimension of India
14.11 Summary
14.12 Exercise
14.13 Reference

14.1 OBJECTIVES
After reading this Unit, you will be able to:

 Understand the Emergency provision of India.

 Describe different general elections held in India.
 Analyse how a political parties misuse the political powers, and
 Describe how the citizen of India changes their political behaviours from time
to time.

14.2 INTRODUCTION

Coercive power uses the threat of force to gain compliance from another. Force may
include physical, social, emotional, political, or economic means. Coercion is not

32
always recognized by the target of influence. This type of power is based upon the
idea of coercion. The main idea behind this concept is that someone is forced to do
something that he/she does not desire to do. The main goal of coercion is compliance.
Coercive power's influence is socially dependent on how the target relates to the
change being desired by the influence agent. Furthermore, a person would have to be
consistently watched by the influencing agent in order for the change to remain in
effect. In this unit, we will discuss how different political parties use the coercive
method to achieve their goals.
14.3 PROCLAMATION OF THE EMERGENCY

In India, "the Emergency" refers to a 21-month period from 1975 to 1977 when Prime
Minister Indira Gandhi had a state of emergency declared across the country.
Officially issued by President Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed under Article 352 of
the Constitution because of the prevailing "internal disturbance", the Emergency was
in effect from 26 June 1975 until its withdrawal in January 1977. The order bestowed
upon the Prime Minister the authority to rule by decree, allowing elections to be
suspended and civil liberties to be curbed. For much of the Emergency, most of
Gandhi's political opponents were imprisoned and the press was censored. Several
other human rights violations were reported from the time, including a forced mass-
sterilization campaign spearheaded by Sanjay Gandhi, the Prime Minister's son. The
Emergency is one of the most controversial periods of independent India's history.

The Government cited threats to national security, as a war with Pakistan had recently
been concluded. Due to the war and additional challenges of drought and the 1973 oil
crisis, the economy was in poor condition. The Government claimed that the strikes
and protests had paralysed the government and hurt the economy of the country
greatly. In the face of massive political opposition, desertion and disorder across the
country and the party, Gandhi stuck to the advice of a few loyalists and her younger
son Sanjay Gandhi, whose own power had grown considerably over the last few years
to become an "extra-constitutional authority". Siddhartha Shankar Ray, the Chief
Minister of West Bengal, proposed to the prime minister to impose an "internal
emergency". He drafted a letter for the President to issue the proclamation on the
basis of information Indira had received that "there is an imminent danger to the
security of India being threatened by internal disturbances". He showed how
democratic freedom could be suspended while remaining within the ambit of the
Constitution.
After a quick question regarding a procedural matter, President Fakhruddin Ali
Ahmed declared a state of internal emergency upon the prime minister's advice on the
night of 25 June 1975, just a few minutes before the clock struck midnight.
As the constitution requires, Mrs. Gandhi advised and President Ahmed approved the
continuation of Emergency over every six-month period until her decision to
hold elections in 1977.
33
14.3.1 Unlawful Arrests during Emergency

Invoking article 352 of the Indian Constitution, Gandhi granted herself extraordinary
powers and launched a massive crackdown on civil liberties and political opposition.
The Government used police forces across the country to place thousands of
protestors and strike leaders under preventive detention. Vijayaraje
Scindia, Jayaprakash Narayan, Raj Narain, Morarji Desai, Charan Singh, Jivatram
Kripalani, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, Lal Krishna Advani, Arun Jaitley, Satyendra
Narayan Sinha, Gayatri Devi, the dowager queen of Jaipur, and other protest leaders
were immediately arrested. Organisations like the Rashtriya Swayamsevak
Sangh (RSS) and Jamaat-e-Islami, along with some political parties, were banned.
Numerous Communist leaders were arrested along with many others involved with
their party. Congress leaders who dissented against the Emergency declaration and
amendment to the constitution, such as Mohan Dharia and Chandra Shekhar, resigned
their government and party positions and were thereafter arrested and placed under
detention.
In Tamil Nadu, the M. Karunanidhi government was dissolved and the leaders of the
DMK were incarcerated. In particular, Karunanidhi's son M. K. Stalin was arrested
under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act. At least nine High Courts
pronounced that even after the declaration of an emergency, a person could challenge
his detention. However, the Supreme Court, now under the control of Indira Gandhi-
appointed Chief Justice A. N. Ray, overruled all of them, upholding the state's plea
for power—to detain a person without the necessity of informing him of the grounds
for his arrest, to suspend their personal liberties, and to deprive them of the right to
life in an absolute manner (the habeas corpus case). Many political workers who
were not arrested in the first wave went 'underground', continuing to organise
protests. Cases like the Baroda dynamite case and the Rajan case became exceptional
examples of atrocities committed against civilians in independent India.
14.3.2 Laws, human rights and elections

Elections for the Parliament and state governments were postponed. Gandhi and her
parliamentary majorities could rewrite the nation's laws, since her Congress party had
the required mandate to do so a two-thirds majority in the Parliament. And when she
felt the existing laws were 'too slow', she got the President to issue 'Ordinances' – a
law-making power in times of urgency, invoked sparingly – completely bypassing the
Parliament, allowing her to rule by decree. Also, she had little trouble amending the
Constitution that exonerated her from any culpability in her election-fraud case,
imposing President's Rule in Gujarat and Tamil Nadu, where anti-Indira parties ruled
(state legislatures were thereby dissolved and suspended indefinitely), and jailing
thousands of opponents. The 42nd Amendment, which brought about extensive
changes to the letter and spirit of the Constitution, is one of the lasting legacies of the

34
Emergency. In the conclusion of his Making of India's Constitution, Justice Khanna
writes:
If the Indian constitution is our heritage bequeathed to us by our founding fathers, no
less are we, the people of India, the trustees and custodians of the values which
pulsate within its provisions! A constitution is not a parchment of paper; it is a way of
life and has to be lived up to. Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty and in the final
analysis; its only keepers are the people. Imbecility of men, history teaches us, always
invites the impudence of power.
Fallout of the Emergency era was the Supreme Court laid down that, although the
Constitution is amenable to amendments (as abused by Indira Gandhi), changes
that tinker with its basic structure cannot be made by the Parliament. (Kesavananda
Bharati v. State of Kerala)
In the Rajan case, P. Rajan of the Regional Engineering College, Calicut, was
arrested by the police in Kerala on 1 March 1976, tortured in custody until he died
and then his body was disposed of and was never recovered. The facts of this incident
came out owing to a habeas corpus suit filed in the Kerala High Court.

14.4 RESISTANCE MOVEMENTS

14.4.1 The role of RSS

Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, which was seen close to opposition leaders, and with
its large organisational base was seen as having the potential of organising protests
against the Government, was also banned. Police clamped down on the organisation
and thousands of its workers were imprisoned. The RSS defied the ban and thousands
participated in Satyagraha (peaceful protests) against the ban and against the
curtailment of fundamental rights. Later, when there was no letup, the volunteers of
the RSS formed underground movements for the restoration of democracy. Literature
that was censored in the media was clandestinely published and distributed on a large
scale and funds were collected for the movement. Networks were established between
leaders of different political parties in the jail and outside for the co-ordination of the
movement.
The Economist described the movement as "the only non-left revolutionary force in
the world". It said that the movement was "dominated by tens of thousands of RSS
cadres, though more and more young recruits are coming". Talking about its
objectives it said "its platform at the moment has only one plank: to bring democracy
back to India".
The claims of RSS leaders have been contested by political scientist Professor DL
Sheth saying that these organisations have never borne the brunt Indira's oppressive
regime. The RSS projects itself as the champion of anti-Emergency struggle but it
was, in fact, it‘s only lifeline. In a 2000 Hindu daily article, Dr. Subramanian
Swamy had alleged that several Sangh leaders were hobnobbing with Indira. He
35
added that the Sangh, at the instance of Vajpayee, even went further to sign a peace
accord with Indira Gandhi.
14.4.2 Sikh opposition

Shortly after the declaration of the Emergency, the Sikh leadership convened
meetings in Amritsar where they resolved to oppose the "fascist tendency of the
Congress". The first mass protest in the country, known as the "Campaign to Save
Democracy" was organised by the Akali Dal and launched in Amritsar, 9 July. A
statement to the press recalled the historic Sikh struggle for freedom under the
Mughals, then under the British, and voiced concern that what had been fought for
and achieved was being lost. The police were out in force for the demonstration and
arrested the protestors, including the Shiromani Akali Dal and Shiromani Gurdwara
Prabandhak Committee (SGPC) leaders.
The question before us is not whether Indira Gandhi should continue to be prime
minister or not. The point is whether democracy in this country is to survive or not.
According to Amnesty International, 140,000 people had been arrested without trial
during the twenty months of Gandhi's Emergency. Jasjit Singh Grewal estimates that
40,000 of them came from India's two percent Sikh minority.

14.5 ELECTIONS OF 1977

On 18 January 1977, Gandhi called fresh elections for March and released all political
prisoners though the Emergency officially ended on 23 March 1977. The opposition
Janata movement's campaign warned Indians that the elections might be their last
chance to choose between "democracy and dictatorship."
In the Lok Sabha elections, held in March, Mrs. Gandhi and Sanjay both lost their
Lok Sabha seats, as did all the Congress candidates in northern states such
as Bihar and Uttar Pradesh. Many Congress Party loyalists deserted Mrs. Gandhi. The
Congress was reduced to just 153 seats, 92 of which were from four of the southern
states. The Janata Party's 298 seats and its allies' 47 seats (of a total 542) gave it a
massive majority. Morarji Desai became the first non-Congress Prime Minister of
India.
Voters in the electorally largest state of Uttar Pradesh, historically a Congress
stronghold, turned against Gandhi and her party failed to win a single seat in the state.
Dhanagare says the structural reasons behind the discontent against the Government
included the emergence of a strong and united opposition, disunity and weariness
inside Congress, an effective underground opposition, and the ineffectiveness of
Gandhi's control of the mass media, which had lost much credibility. The structural
factors allowed voters to express their grievances, notably their resentment of the
emergency and its authoritarian and repressive policies. One grievance often
mentioned as the 'nasbandi' (vasectomy) campaign in rural areas. The middle classes
also emphasised the curbing of freedom throughout the state and India. Meanwhile,
36
Congress hit an all-time low in West Bengal because of the poor discipline and
factionalism among Congress activists as well as the numerous defections that
weakened the party. Opponents emphasised the issues of corruption in Congress and
appealed to a deep desire by the voters for fresh leadership.
14.5.1 The tribunal

The efforts of the Janata administration to get government officials and Congress
politicians tried for Emergency-era abuses and crimes were largely unsuccessful due
to a disorganised, over-complex and politically motivated process of litigation.
The Thirty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution of India, put in place shortly after
the outset of the Emergency and which among other things prohibited judicial
reviews of states of emergencies and actions taken during them, also likely played a
role in this lack of success. Although special tribunals were organised and scores of
senior Congress Party and government officials arrested and charged, including Mrs.
Gandhi and Sanjay Gandhi, police were unable to submit sufficient evidence for most
cases, and only a few low-level officials were convicted of any abuses.

14.5.2 Legacy

The Emergency lasted 21 months, and its legacy remains intensely controversial. A
few days after the Emergency was imposed, the Bombay edition of The Times of
India carried an obituary that read
Democracy, beloved husband of Truth, loving father of Liberty, brother of Faith,
Hope and Justice, expired on June 26.
A few days later censorship was imposed on newspapers. The Delhi edition of
the Indian Express on 28 June, carried a blank editorial, while the Financial
Express reproduced in large type Rabindranath Tagore's poem "Where the mind is
without fear".
However, the Emergency also received support from several sections. It was endorsed
by social reformer Vinoba Bhave (who called it Anushasan parva, a time for
discipline), industrialist J. R. D. Tata, writer Khushwant Singh, and Indira Gandhi's
close friend and Orissa Chief Minister Nandini Satpathy. However, Tata and Satpathy
later regretted that they spoke in favour of the Emergency. Others have argued that
Gandhi's Twenty Point Programme increased agricultural production, manufacturing
activity, exports and foreign reserves. Communal Hindu–Muslim riots, which had
resurfaced in the 1960s and 1970s, also reduced in intensity.
In the book JP Movement and the Emergency, historian Bipan Chandra wrote,
"Sanjay Gandhi and his cronies like Bansi Lal, Minister of Defence at the time, were
keen on postponing elections and prolonging the emergency by several years.In
October–November 1976, an effort was made to change the basic civil
libertarian structure of the Indian Constitution through the 42nd amendment to it. The
most important changes were designed to strengthen the executive at the cost of the
37
judiciary, and thus disturb the carefully crafted system of Constitutional checks and
balance between the three organs of the government."
1977 witnessed the reemergence of the democratic processes in the country and a
total rejection of the idea of the idea of coercive state and authoritarian rule. After
these elections, the union parliament enacted 43rd and 44th Amendments in the
constitution and both of these were designed to reduce of practicing authoritarianism
and conversion of Indian state into a coercive state by the use of emergence
provisions of the constitution.

Since that time no political party, repeat no political party has tried to transform
Indian democratic state into a coercive state.

14.6 INDIAN GENERAL ELECTION-1989

In the year 1989, the Congress government defeated in the Lok Sabha election. The
Janata Dal formed a coalition government which also enjoyed the support of some
other parties during 1989-91. The 1989 Indian general election were held because the
previous Lok Sabha has been in power for five years, and the constitution allowed for
new elections. Even though Rajiv Gandhi had won the last election by a landslide,
this election saw him trying to fight off scandals that had marred his administration.
The Bofors scandal, rising terrorism in Punjab, the civil war between LTTE and Sri
Lankan government were just some of the problems that stared at Rajiv's government.
Rajiv's biggest critic was Vishwanath Pratap Singh, who had held the portfolios of the
finance ministry and the defence ministry in the government.
But Singh was soon sacked from the Cabinet and he then resigned from his
memberships in the Congress and the Lok Sabha. He formed the Jan Morcha with
Arun Nehru and Arif Mohammad Khan and re-entered the Lok Sabha from
Allahabad. Witnessing V P Singh's meteoric rise on national stage, Rajiv tried to
counter him with another prominent Rajput stalwart Satyendra Narain Singh but
failed eventually.
The Janata Dal government decided to go for promoting the peoples who are
belonging to Other Backward Class but it gives social tensions and conflicts over the
issues of reservations.

In December 1980, the Mandal Commission submitted its Report which described the
criteria it used to indicate backwardness, and stated its recommendations in light of its
observations and findings. By then, the Janata government had fallen.The following
Congress governments under Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi was not willing to act
on the Report due to its politically contentious nature. After being neglected for 10
years, the Report was accepted by the National Front government led by V.P. Singh.
On 7 August 1990, the National Front government declared that it would provide 27
per cent reservations to "socially and educationally backward classes" for jobs in
38
central services and public undertaking. Having released the Government Order on 13
August, V.P. Singh announced its legal implementation in his Independence Day
speech two days later.
That same year in September, a case was brought before the Supreme Court of India
which challenged the constitutional validity of the Government Order for the
implementation of the Mandal Report recommendations. Indra Sawhney, the
petitioner in this case, made three principal arguments against the Order:

 The extension of reservation violated the Constitutional guarantee of equality

of opportunity.
 Caste was not a reliable indicator of backwardness.
 The efficiency of public institutions was at risk.
V.P. Singh, the Prime Minister at the time, tried to implement its recommendations in
1989.The criticism was sharp and colleges across the country held massive protests
against it. On 19 September 1990, Rajiv Goswami, a student of Deshbandhu
College, Delhi, committed self-immolation in protest of the government's actions. His
act made him the face of the Anti-Mandal agitation then. This further sparked a series
of self-immolations by other upper-caste college students like him, whose own hopes
of getting a government job were now at threat, and led to a formidable student
movement against job reservations for Backward Castes in India. Altogether, nearly
200 students committed self-immolations; of these, 62 students succumbed to their
burns. The first student protester who died due to self-immolation was Surinder Singh
Chauhan on 24 September 1990.
Across northern India, normal business was suspended. Shops were kept closed, and
schools and colleges were shut down by student agitators. They attacked government
buildings, organised rallies and demonstrations and clashed with the police. Incidents
of police firing were reported in six states during agitation, claiming more than 50
lives.
However, according to Ramchandra Guha, the agitation did not gain as much traction
in southern India as it did in the North due to certain reasons. Firstly, people in the
South were more agreeable to the implementation of the Mandal report
recommendations as affirmative action programmes had long been in existence there.
Furthermore, while in the South the upper castes constituted less than 10 per cent of
the population, the figure in the North was in excess of 20 per cent. Lastly, as the
region had a thriving industrial sector, the educated youth in the South were not as
dependent on government employment as those in the North.

14.7 INDIAN GENERAL ELECTION-1991

The 1991 Indian general election were held because the previous Lok Sabha had been
dissolved just 16 months after government formation. The elections were held in a
polarised environment and are also referred to as the 'Mandal-Mandir' elections after
39
the two most important poll issues, the Mandal Commission fallout and the Ram
Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid issue.

General elections were held in India in 1991 to elect the members of the 10th Lok
Sabha. The result of the election was that no party could get a majority, so a minority
government (Indian National Congress with the help of left parties) was formed,
resulting in a stable government for the next 5 years, under the new Prime
Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao.

During the period of 1991 a new Economic policy was adopted and implemented.
The new Economic policy gives importance to privatization, liberalization, market
economy free trade and business. The private sectors were encouraged and several
new decisions were taken by the government to strengthen the economic condition of
India. India also becomes a nuclear weapon state during that period.

14.8 INDIAN GENERAL ELECTION-1999

Lok Sabha General Elections were held in India between 5 September and 3 October
1999, a few months after the bloody and remembered Kargil War. For the first time, a
united front of political parties managed to win a majority and form a National
government that lasted a full term of five years, thus ending a period of political
instability at the national level in the country that had been characterised by three
general elections held in as many years.

The results were decisively in favour of the BJP and the NDA, with the formal NDA
picking up 269 seats, and a further 29 seats taken by the Telugu Desam Party, which
gave support to the BJP-led government but was not strictly part of its alliance. The
Congress party lost 23 seats, and its two key regional allies performed worse than
expected, however it did regain ground in some states such as Uttar Pradesh (where it
had been wiped out in 1998, not winning a single seat in the state). The leftist parties‘
fortunes continued to decline, with the Communist Party of India dropping to just
four seats and losing its official status as a "national party".

The BJP led NDA government of prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee came to
power. The BJP government fuscous on Socio-Economic development of the country.
But once again in the year 2004 the congress led UPA government came to power.
The UPA government led by Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh was continuing
for two terms from 2004 to 2014.

14.9 INDIAN GENERAL ELECTION -2014

The Indian general election, 2014 was held to constitute the 16th Lok Sabha, electing
members of parliament for all 543 parliamentary constituencies. Running in nine
phases from 7 April to 12 May 2014, it lasted 36 days. According to the Election
Commission of India, 814.5 million people were eligible to vote, with an increase of
40
100 million voters since the last general election in 2009, making it the largest ever
election in the world. Around 23.1 million or 2.7% of the total eligible voters were
aged 18–19 years. A total of 8,251 candidates contested for the 543 Lok Sabha
seats. The average election turnout over all nine phases was around 66.40%, the
highest ever in the history of Indian general elections.
The results were declared on 16 May 2014, 15 days before the 15th Lok
Sabha completed its constitutional mandate on 31 May 2014. The counting exercise
was held at 989 counting centres. The National Democratic Alliance won a sweeping
victory, taking 336 seats. The BJP won 31.0% votes, which is the lowest share for a
party to form a majority government in India since independence, while NDA's
combined vote share was 38.5%. BJP and its allies won the right to form the largest
majority government since the 1984 general election, and it was the first time since
that election that a party had won enough seats to govern without the support of other
parties. The United Progressive Alliance, led by the Indian National Congress, won
59 seats, 44 (8.1%) of which were won by the Congress, that won 19.3% of all
votes. It was the Congress party's worst defeat in a general election. In order to
become the official opposition party in India, a party must gain 10% of the seats (55
seats) in the Lok Sabha; however, the Indian National Congress was unable to attain
this number. Due to this fact, India remains without an official opposition party, as of
2019.

14.10 THE PRESENT DIMENSION OF INDIA

The BJP led NDA government is in power till today and Indian state continues to be
development and welfare state. Now India is treated as the largest successfully
working Liberal Democratic Secular state and the fastest developing economy in the
world. India is now recognized as a big economic, military and nuclear power it also
maintaining international relation with other countries. The present dimension of
India or the changing dimension of India is positive and it continues to be a
developmental, welfare, liberal democratic country.

14.11 SUMMARY

In this above discussion we may summaries that in India the Congress Government
uses coercive powers for their own party interest. They miss using the emergency
provision of the Indian constitution. During the period of Congress government, the
Indian economy showed signs of a big weakness. Foreign exchange reserves had
declined to a precarious level, and by 1991 Indians had to take loans against its gold
reserves for maintaining Indian ability to meet its foreign exchange needs for meeting
the balance of payment problems. In 2004 the BJP Government replaces the Congress
Government and the BJP led NDA government is in power till today. India now
stands to recognize as a big economic power, a nuclear power and a great power in

41
international relations. The changing nature of the Indian state has been productive of
positive and healthy results.

14.12 EXERCISE

1. What is the meaning of Coercive Dimention?

2. Explain the Proclamation of the Emergency during the period of 1975-1977.
3. Explain the resistance movements taken by RSS and Sikh community.
4. Write a note on 1989 Indian general election.
5. Write a note on 2014 Indian general election.

14.13 REFERENCE

 N. Menon and A. Nigam, (2007) ‗Power and Contestation: India since 1989‘,
London, Fernwood Publishing, Halifax and Zed Books.
 R. Vora and S. Palshikar (eds.) ‗Indian Democracy: Meanings and Practices‘,
New Delhi, Sage.
 Shah, G (ed.) ‗Social Movements and the State‘, New Delhi, Sage
Publications.
 P. deSouza and E. Sridharan (eds.) ‗India‘s Political Parties‘, New Delhi, Sage
Publications.
 A S. Ganguly, L. Diamond and M. Plattner (eds.) ‗The State of India‘s
Democracy‘, Baltimore, John Hopkins University Press.
 Kaviraj, Sudipta(2009) ‗Politics in India‘, Oxford University Press, New
Delhi
 Kohli, Atul (2004) (ed.) ‗The Success of India‘s Democracy‘, New Delhi,
Cambridge University Press.
 Kothari,R (1970) ‗Caste in Indian Politics‘, Delhi, Orient Longman.
 M. John, (ed) (2008) ‗Women in India: A Reader, Penguin , India
 P. Brass, (1999) ‗The Politics of India since Independence, New Delhi,
Cambridge University Press and Foundation Books.
 P. Mehta and N. Jayal (2010) (eds.) ‗The Oxford Companion to Politics in
India‘, New Delhi, Oxford University Press.
 Z. Hasan (2002) (ed.) ‗Parties and Party Politics in India‘, New Delhi: Oxford
University Press.

42