Balwantrai Mehta Committee

The Balwantrai Mehta Committee was a landmark committee appointed by the Government of India in 1957 to examine and recommend measures for the establishment of democratic decentralisation and the revitalisation of Panchayati Raj institutions. The committee’s recommendations laid the foundation for the three-tier Panchayati Raj system, which became the cornerstone of rural local self-government in India. Its report marked a major turning point in the evolution of India’s democratic governance at the grassroots level.

Background and Context

After India’s independence in 1947, rural development became a central objective of national policy. The government launched the Community Development Programme (1952) and the National Extension Service (1953) to promote socio-economic development in rural areas. However, by the mid-1950s, it became evident that these centrally administered schemes were not achieving the desired outcomes.
Key weaknesses identified included:

• Excessive bureaucratic control and lack of local participation.
• Poor coordination among departments.
• Limited public accountability and ownership.
• Inadequate representation of villagers in development planning.

To address these issues, the Government of India decided to review the functioning of these programmes and explore ways to involve local communities more effectively in their implementation.
Consequently, on 16 January 1957, the Balwantrai G. Mehta Committee was appointed under the chairmanship of Shri Balwantrai G. Mehta, who was then a member of Parliament and an experienced administrator.

Composition of the Committee

The committee consisted of several members drawn from administrative and political backgrounds. Although the full list of members is not always cited in records, the committee included representatives from both the Union and state governments.

• Chairman: Shri Balwantrai G. Mehta
• Constituted by: The National Development Council (NDC)
• Objective: To examine the working of the Community Development Programme (1952) and the National Extension Service (1953) and to suggest institutional arrangements for their more effective implementation.

Terms of Reference

The main objectives or terms of reference of the Balwantrai Mehta Committee were:

1. To evaluate the functioning of the Community Development Programme and the National Extension Service.
2. To identify the weaknesses in these programmes and suggest measures for improvement.
3. To recommend ways to ensure greater people’s participation in the planning and execution of rural development schemes.
4. To propose an administrative framework for democratic decentralisation in India.

Submission of the Report

The committee submitted its report in November 1957 to the Government of India. The report was considered revolutionary in the context of post-independence India’s administrative and political structure because it proposed to institutionalise grassroots democracy through the establishment of a multi-tier system of Panchayati Raj.

Major Recommendations

The Balwantrai Mehta Committee’s report recommended a comprehensive framework for democratic decentralisation. Its major recommendations were as follows:

1. Three-tier Panchayati Raj System: The committee proposed the establishment of a three-tier structure of local self-government to ensure effective participation of people in development activities:
   • Zila Parishad at the district level.
   • Panchayat Samiti at the block level.
   • Gram Panchayat at the village level.

   Each level was to be organically linked through a system of representation and coordination, with the Gram Panchayat functioning as the basic unit.

2. Democratic Composition: All members of the Panchayati Raj bodies should be elected directly or indirectly by the people, ensuring democratic legitimacy.
3. Devolution of Powers and Responsibilities: Real powers and responsibilities related to planning, implementation, and supervision of development programmes should be transferred to these local bodies. Panchayati Raj institutions should have adequate financial resources and administrative authority.
4. Planning and Coordination: The Panchayat Samiti was proposed as the key unit of planning and development, responsible for coordinating between village panchayats and the district Zila Parishad.
5. Official Participation: The committee emphasised the need for a close partnership between officials (bureaucracy) and elected representatives at each level to ensure effective administration and people’s participation.
6. Role of Zila Parishad: The Zila Parishad was to act as an advisory, coordinating, and supervisory body at the district level, overseeing the functioning of the Panchayat Samitis and aligning local plans with district development objectives.
7. Financial Resources: Panchayati Raj institutions should have access to local taxation powers, grants-in-aid from the state government, and other sources of revenue to ensure financial autonomy.
8. Link with the State Government: The committee recommended that the state government should provide guidance, training, and supervision to the Panchayati Raj bodies but should not interfere in their day-to-day functioning.
9. Training and Capacity Building: Special emphasis was placed on training programmes for elected representatives and officials to improve their understanding of planning, administration, and community leadership.

Implementation and Adoption

Following the acceptance of the committee’s recommendations by the National Development Council (NDC) in 1958, several states initiated steps to establish the Panchayati Raj system.

• Rajasthan became the first state to implement the system, inaugurating it on 2 October 1959 in Nagaur district.
• Andhra Pradesh followed shortly thereafter, becoming the second state to adopt Panchayati Raj institutions.

Over time, other states introduced similar structures, adapting the system to their regional administrative and political contexts.
The early success of the Panchayati Raj institutions marked a significant step toward decentralised governance and people’s participation in rural development, aligning with the Gandhian ideal of Gram Swaraj (village self-rule).

Evaluation and Criticism

While the Balwantrai Mehta Committee’s recommendations revolutionised local governance in India, their implementation faced several challenges:

• Uneven adoption across states, with variations in structure, powers, and functions.
• Dominance of bureaucracy, which limited the autonomy of elected representatives.
• Inadequate financial devolution, leading to dependence on state governments.
• Limited capacity and training of local representatives.

Despite these challenges, the committee’s framework provided the institutional foundation for local self-government in India, influencing subsequent reforms.

Legacy and Further Developments

The Balwantrai Mehta Committee’s report inspired later committees and constitutional initiatives aimed at strengthening Panchayati Raj institutions.
Subsequent developments include:

• Ashok Mehta Committee (1977): Recommended a two-tier system and greater political decentralisation.
• G.V.K. Rao Committee (1985) and L.M. Singhvi Committee (1986): Advocated constitutional status for Panchayati Raj institutions.
• These efforts culminated in the 73rd Constitutional Amendment Act (1992), which gave constitutional recognition to the Panchayati Raj system and established a uniform three-tier structure across India.

Significance

The Balwantrai Mehta Committee holds a central place in the history of democratic decentralisation in India. Its significance lies in:

• Institutionalising grassroots democracy and participatory governance.
• Providing an administrative framework for local planning and rural development.
• Serving as the blueprint for modern Panchayati Raj institutions.
• Reflecting the Gandhian vision of empowering villages as self-governing units.