Post-Independence Consolidation and Reorganization within the Country

Relevance: Prelims/Mains: G.S paper I: Post-independence consolidation and reorganization within the country.

Post-Independence Consolidation and Reorganization within the Country

 Challenges in the Nation Building Process

A. Partition and its aftermath

The initial few years of independent India were full of daunting challenges and concerns regarding national unity and territorial integrity of India. Freedom came with Partition, which resulted in large scale communal violence and displacement and unprecedented violence challenged the very idea of a secular India.

Challenges Faced by Independent India:

1. The first and immediate challenge was to shape a nation that was united, yet accommodative of the diversity in our society. Due to the large landscape, different cultures with different regions and religions, variety of spoken languages, many people widely believed that a country with such amount of diversity could not remain together for long.
2. The second challenge was to establish democracy. India adopted representative democracy based on the parliamentary form of government. These features strived to ensure that the political competition would take place in a democratic framework. The challenge was to develop democratic practices in accordance with the constitution.

• The third challenge was to ensure inclusive development and well-being of the entire society. Due to the widespread poverty, the real challenge now was to evolve effective polices for economic development and eradication of poverty. Partition: Displacement and Rehabilitation On 14–15 August 1947, two nation states came into existence, because of ‘partition’ of the division of British India into India and Pakistan.

According to the “two nation theory” advanced by the Muslim League, India consisted of two ‘People’ Hindus and Muslims. Due to the forceful circumstances and several political developments in 1940’s the political competition between the congress and the Muslim League and the British role led to the decision for the creation of Pakistan.

A very important task at hand was demarcation of boundaries. After 3rd June plan of Mountbatten a British jurist Radcliff was invited to fix the problem and to form two boundary commissions one for Bengal and one for Punjab. Four other members were also there in commission but there was a deadlock between Congress and Muslim league.

On 17th August, 1947 he announced his award. Limitation of this award:

1. a) Justice Radcliff had no prior knowledge about India.
2. b) He had no specialized knowledge needed for the task also.
3. c) He had no advisors and experts.
4. d) 6 week deadline that Radcliff had was also a limitation of this award. It was decided to follow the principle of religious majorities which means that areas where the Muslims were in majority would make up the territory of Pakistan. The remaining was to stay with India.

The principle of religious majorities had entailed with it so many difficult positions:

1. There were two areas of concentration with Muslim majority, In the West and East part of India. Hence, it was decided that the new country. Pakistan will comprise two territories, West and East Pakistan.
2. All the Muslims were not in favour joining Pakistan. Frontier Gandhi, Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan, the undisputed leader of the North West Frontier Province, staunchly opposed the two nation theory. But as Khudai khidmatgar of Abdul Ghaffar Khan boycotted the Plebiscite due to provision of limited franchise rights in that, the lone contender in the fray, the Muslim League, won the vote by default and in the end NWFP was made to merge with Pakistan.

• Two Muslims majority concentrated provinces of British India, Punjab and Bengal had very large areas with non Muslims population in the majority. Eventually it was decided that these two provinces would be bifurcated according to the religious majority at the district or even lower level. The partition of these two provinces caused the prolonged trauma of Partition.

The last difficult position was of “minorities” on both the sides of the border. Minorities then on either side lived in fear and fled from their homes to save their lives from brutal violence unleashed during partition. Consequence of Partition: The year 1947, saw the one of the most abrupt and haphazard, tragic transfer of people that human history had ever witnessed.

There were brutal killings, atrocities, rapes, on both sides of the border. The cities like Lahore, Amritsar, Kolkata (then Calcutta) got divided into “Communal Zones”. In many cases women were killed by their own family members to preserve the ‘family honor’.

Everything was divided then from tables, chairs to government officials. It is estimated that the Partition forced about 80 lakhs people to migrate across the new border. Between five to 10 lakh people were killed in Partition related violence.

The government of India was successful in providing relief and in resettlement and rehabilitation of nearly six million refugees from Pakistan. A department of rehabilitation was created.

Various refugee camps were set up some notable being camp at Kurukshetra and Kolwada camp at Bombay. Many of the Hindus and Sikhs fleeing West Punjab were directed by the government of India to refugee camp in Kurukshetra.

A vast city of tents had grown up on the plain, to house waves of migrants, sometimes up to 20,000 a day. Kurukshetra was the largest of the nearly 200 camps set up to house refugees from West Punjab.

While there were five refugee camps in Mumbai for refugees from Sindh region. Some refugees had arrived before the date of transfer of power; among them prescient businessmen who had sold their properties in advance and migrated with the proceeds. However, the vast majority came after 15 August 1947, and with little more than the clothes on their skin.

These were the farmers who had ‘stayed behind till the last moment, firmly resolved to remain in Pakistan if they could be assured of an honourable living’. But when, in September and October, the violence escalated in the Punjab, they had to abandon that idea.

The Hindus and Sikhs who were lucky enough to escape the mobs fled to India by road, rail, sea and on foot. Camps such as Kurukshetra were but a holding operation. The refugees had to be found permanent homes and productive work. Thus refugees required land for permanent settlement. As it happened, a massive migration had also taken place the other way, into Pakistan from India. Thus, the first place to resettle the refugees was on land vacated by Muslims in the eastern part of the Punjab.

If the transfer of populations had been ‘the greatest mass migration’ in history now commenced ‘the biggest land resettlement operation in the world’.

As against 2.7 million hectares abandoned by Hindus and Sikhs in West Punjab, there were only 1.9 million hectares left behind by Muslims in East Punjab. The shortfall was made more acute by the fact that the areas in the west of the province had richer soils, and were more abundantly irrigated.

To begin with, each family of refugee farmers was given an allotment of four hectares, regardless of its holding in Pakistan. Loans were advanced to buy seed and equipment. While cultivation commenced on these temporary plots, applications were invited for permanent allotments.

Each family was asked to submit evidence of how much land it had left behind. Applications were received from 10 March 1948; within a month, more than half a million claims had been filed.

These claims were then verified in open assemblies consisting of other migrants from the same village. As each claim was read out by a government official, the assembly approved, amended, or rejected it. Expectedly, many refugees were at first prone to exaggeration.

However, every false claim was punished, sometimes by a reduction in the land allotted, in extreme cases by a brief spell of imprisonment. This acted as a deterrent; still, an officer closely associated with the process estimated that there was an overall inflation of about 25 per cent.

To collect, collate, verify and act upon the claims a Rehabilitation Secretariat was set up in Jullundur. At its peak there were about 7,000 officials working there; they came to constitute a kind of refugee city of their own.

The bulk of these officials were accommodated in tents, the camp serviced by makeshift lights and latrines and with temporary shrines, temples for Hindus and gurdwaras for Sikhs.

Leading the operations was the director general of rehabilitation, Sardar Tarlok Singh of the Indian Civil Service. A graduate of the London School of Economics, Tarlok Singh used his academic training to good effect, making two innovations that proved critical in the successful settlement of the refugees. Thus the task of rehabilitation took time to accomplish and by 1951, the problem of the rehabilitation of the refuges from West Pakistan had been fully tackled.

The rehabilitation on East took years and it was more difficult because of constant exodus of Hindus from East Bengal continued for years.

After handling this worst nightmare of Partition, Indian leadership had strived to consolidate India from within and look after its internal affairs.

Plan of consolidation: The broad strategy for national consolidation after 1947 involved :

1. Territorial integration,
2. Mobilization of political and institutional resources
3. Economic development, and
4. Adoption of polices which would promote social justice, remove glaring inequalities and provide equal opportunities.
5. Integration of Princely States Unifying post partition India and the princely states under one administration was perhaps the most important task faced by then political leadership.

In colonial India, nearly 40% of the territory was occupied by five hundred sixty five small and large states ruled by princes who enjoyed varying degrees of autonomy under the system of British Paramountcy.

British power protected them from their own people as also from external aggression so long as they did British bidding. As the British left, many of 565 princely states, began to dream of independence.

They had claimed that the paramountcy could not be transferred to the new states of India and Pakistan. The ambitions were fuelled by the then British PM Clement Attlee announcement on Feb 20, 1947 that “His Majesty’s Government does not intend to hand over their powers and obligations under paramountcy to any government of British India”.

With great skill and masterful diplomacy and using both persuasion and pressure, Sardar Patel succeeded in integrating the hundreds of princely states. Few princely states joined Constituent Assembly with wisdom & realism, patriotism, but other princely states still stayed away from joining it. Princely states of Travancore, Bhopal, and Hyderabad publicly announced their desire to claim an independent status. On June 27, 1947, Sardar Patel assumed additional charge of the newly created states department with V.P. Menon as its Secretary.

The government’s approach was guided by three considerations. :

1. The people of most of the princely states clearly wanted to become part of the Indian Union.
2. The government was prepared to be flexible in giving autonomy to some regions. The idea was to accommodate plurality & adopt a flexible approach in dealing with the demands of the regions.

• In the back drop of Partition, the integration and consolidation of the territorial boundaries of the nation had assumed supreme importance.

Patel threw a series of lunch parties where he requested his princely guests to help the Congress in framing the new constitution for India. Patel’s first step was to appeal to the princes whose territories fell inside India to accede to the Indian Union in three subjects which affected the common interests of the country, namely, foreign relations, defence and communications.

He also gave an implied threat he would not be able to restrain the impatient people post August 15, 1947. States were issued an appeal with an implied threat of anarchy and chaos. Next step of Patel was to convince Mountbatten to bat for India. 25th July speech of Mountbatten to the Chamber of Princes finally persuaded the Princes.

This speech ranked as the most significant Act of Mountbatten in India. After this, virtually all the states except 3 signaled the instrument of accession. One was Travancore under the Maharaja of Travancore Chithira Thirunal but the real ruler was its Diwan C. P. Ramaswamy Aiyyer. There was an attack on C. P. Aiyyar, and after that it was Maharaja of Travancore which wired the government that they are ready for accession.

Jodhpur- A young hindu king was there, it’s accession was a serious issue due to its proximity to border. Jinnah also persuaded him but after tremendous pressure from Patel, finally he signed the Instrument of Assession. Bhopal- Mainly hindu population and ruler was Habibullah Khan supported by Jinnah. There was a revolt against the Bhopal ruler, he faced pressure from Patel and communist population and finally he signed the Instrument of Accession. Thus before August 15, 1947 peaceful negotiations has brought almost all states whose territories were contiguous to the new boundaries of India, into the Indian Union.

The rulers of most of the states signed a document called the “Instrument of Accession” which meant that their state agreed to become a part of the Union of India.

Accession of the princely states of Junagadh, Hyderabad, Kashmir and Manipur proved more difficult than the rest.

1. Junagadh was a small state on the coast of Saurashtra surrounded by Indian Territory without any geographical contiguity with Pakistan. Yet it’s Nawab Mohabbat Khan announced accession of his state to Pak on August 15, 1947 even though majority of the people, overwhelmingly Hindu, desired to join India. People of the state organized a popular movement and a group of Junagarhi people forced the Nawab to flee and formed Aarze Hukumat (a temporary govt. in exile) it was led by Samal Das Gandhi. The Dewan of Junagadh, Shah Nawaz Bhutto, the father of the more famous Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto now decided to invite the Government of India to intervene. Indian troops marched into the state. Later, a plebiscite was held in state in Feb 1948, which favoured joining India.
2. In the state of Kashmir, The Hindu ruler of the state Hari Singh, did not wish to merge with India and tried to negotiate with Indian and Pak to have an independent status for his state. Since majority population of the state was Muslim, the Pakistani leaders thought the Kashmir region ‘belonged’ to them.

The popular movement in the state, led by Sheikh Abdullah of the National Conference, wanted to get rid of the Maharaja, but was against joining Pak. He formed an organization called National conference which was a secular organization & had a long association with the congress. Abdullah asked Dogra dynasty to quit and hand over the power to people.

On 15th August Harisingh offered standstill agreement with both countries which would allow the free movement of people and goods. Pakistan signed the agreement but India didn’t and followed the policy of wait and watch. Pakistan became impatient and started violating standstill agreement. Mehar Chand Mahajan then prime minister of Kashmir complained this to British government for economic blockade and breach of standstill agreement.

On 22nd October several pathan tribesmen unofficially led by Pakistan’s army officer invaded the state from north and reached up to Baramullah, were further advancing towards Srinagar.

On 24th October Hari Singh demanded military assistance from Indian government. Mountbatten pointed out that under international law India can send its troops only after the state sign a formal instrument of accession. V. P. Menon went to Kashmir and on 26th October Maharaja signed instrument of accession and also agreed upon Abdullah being appointed as the Head of the state administration. 27th Oct. morning nearly 100 planes airlifted men and weapons to Srinagar. Pakistan army left the main valley region but continue to occupy a large chunk of territory of gilgit, baltistan region.

National conference volunteers worked with the Indian Army to drive out the Pakistan infiltrators. Sheikh Abdullah became the Prime Minister. In November 1947 Mountbatten flew to Lahore on a peace mission. There took place a meeting with Jinnah but no agreement could be made.

Jinnah described that Kashmir accession is based upon fraud and violence. Nehru wrote to Harisingh that he wants a final solution to Kashmir. On 1st Jan 1948 India decided to take the Kashmir issue to UN and it is said that it was on the advice of Pakistan.

Security Council was with Pakistan; both USA and Britain supported Pak and even Nehru accepted that they were playing a dirty game. Britain’s Representative Phillip baker vigorously supported Pakistan’s position.

Finally after a security council resolution there was a cease fire from 1st Jan 1948 and India and pak agreed upon ceasefire line as LoC. After some days in 1951 constituent assembly met in Srinagar to formulate a constitution for state and constituent assembly of state also ratified the accession in 1954.

In 1951 UN passed a resolution for a referendum under UN supervision after Pak has withdrawn its troops. This resolution remains ineffective because Pakistan never withdrew its force from what is called Azad Kashmir or Pak occupied Kashmir.

• Hyderabad the largest of the princely states and it was surrounded entirely by Indian Territory. Some parts of the old Hyderabad states are today parts of Maharashtra, Karnataka, and Andhra Pradesh.

Its ruler was called “Nizam” and one the richest men of his time. Rule of the Nizam was unjust and tyrannical and he had Majlis-e-Ittehad-ul Muslimeen or MIM (Council of the Union of Muslims) which was a Muslim political party to safeguard the interest of Muslims in India.

The MIM advocated the set up of a Muslim dominion rather than integration with India. Nizam Mir Osman Ali wanted an independent status for Hyderabad.

Hence, he entered into the standstill agreement with India in November 1947 for a year while negotiations with the Indian Government were going on. People’s movement against Nizam’s rule gathered momentum. Particularly the peasants of Telangana region, and women who had seen the worst of this oppression joined the movements in great numbers. Hyderabad town was the nerve centre of this movement, and the communists and Hyderabad congress were at the forefront.

The Nizam retaliated on popular movement by unleashing a para-military force, Razakars on the people. In total up to 150,000 Razakar soldiers were mobilized to fight against the Indian Union and for the independence of the Hyderabad State against Indian integration.

The atrocities & communal nature of the Razakars knew no bounds. The murdered, maimed, raped and looted, targeting particularly the non-Muslims. The central government had to order the army to tackle the situation.

On 13th September 1948, Indian army under operation Polo (Code name of the Hyderabad Police Action] invaded the Hyderabad state & overthrew its Nizam, annexing the state merged it into the Indian Union.

After the integration of the Hyderabad state with India, the MIM was banned in 1948. The Razakar leader Qasim Rizvi was jailed from 1948 to 1957, and then he was released on the condition to go to Pakistan, where he was granted asylum. Nizam was rewarded for final submission and was made Rajpramukh.

1. Maharaja of Manipur Bodhchandra Singh signed the instrument of Accession with the Indian government on the assurance that the internal autonomy of Manipur would be maintained.

Under the pressure of public view, the Maharaja held elections in Manipur in June 1948 & thus the state became a constitutional monarchy. Manipur was the first part of India to hold an election based on universal adult franchise.

There were some differences over Manipur’s merger with India. The state congress was in favour, but other political parties opposed this view. The government of India succeeded in pressurizing the Maharaja into signing a Merger Agreement in September 1949, without consulting the popularly elected Legislative Assembly of Manipur.

The caused a lot anger and resentment in Manipur, the consequences of which are still being felt. Smaller states were either merged with the neighboring states or merged together to ‘form centrally administered areas’. A large number of states were consolidated into five new unions, forming Madhya Bharat, Rajasthan, Patiala and East Punjab states Union [PEPSU], Saurashtra and Travancore-Cochin. Mysore, Hyderabad and Jammu and Kashmir retained their original form as separate states of the Union. In return of their surrender of all power and authority, the rulers of major states were given privy purses guaranteed by the constitution. The rulers were allowed succession to the gaddi and retained certain privileges such as keeping their titles, flying their personal flags and gun salutes on ceremonial occasions.

After integration of princely states two trouble spots were French settlement and Portuguese settlements. After prolonged negotiation Pondicherry and other French possessions were handed over to India in 1954.

Portuguese were not ready to handover their areas. Its Nato allies supported Portugal’s position and India supported peaceful means. There was a independence movement in Goa, India was patient, but in 1961 when that popular movement demanded support Indian troops marched in Goa in under Operation Vijay and Portuguese did surrendered without any fight.

1. Tribal Integration

The uphill task of integrating the tribal population into the mainstream was extremely difficult given the diverse conditions under which they dwell in different parts of the country, having different cultures and speaking varied languages.

• Tribal population was spread all over India, their greatest concentration lies in Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, Orissa, North-eastern India, West Bengal, Maharashtra, Gujarat and Rajasthan. Except the North-East, they constitute minorities in their home states. Residing mostly in the hills and forest areas, in colonial India they lived in relative isolation and their tradition, habits, cultures and ways of life were exceptionally different with that of their non-tribal neighbours.
• Radical transformation and penetration of market forces integrated the isolated tribal people with colonial power. A large number of money lenders, traders, revenue farmers and other middlemen and petty officials invaded the tribal areas and disrupted the tribal’s traditional way of life.
• To conserve forests and to facilitate their commercial exploitation, the colonial authorities brought large tracts of forest lands under forest laws which forbade shifting cultivation and put severe restrictions on the tribals’ use of forest and their access to forest products.
• Loss of land, indebtness, exploitation by middlemen, denial of access to forests and forest products, oppression and extortion by policemen, forest officials and other government officials was to lead a series of tribal uprisings in the nineteenth & twentieth centuries, e.g. Santhal & Munda rebellion.

Roots of India Tribal Policy: The preservation of the tribal people’s rich social and cultural heritage lay at the heart of Government of India’s policy of tribal integration. Jawaharlal Nehru was the main influence in shaping government’s attitude towards the tribals.

Nehru stood for economic and social development of the tribal people in multifarious ways, especially in the fields of communications, modern medical facilities, agriculture and education.

Nehru approach was based on the nationalist policy towards tribals since the 1920s when Gandhiji set up ashrams in the tribal areas and promoted constructive work. There were certain broad guidelines laid down by Nehru, with the help of Verrier Elwin [British Anthropologist] which was called as “Tribal Panchsheel”. They are:

1. People should develop along the line of their own genius & we should avoid imposing anything on them. We should try to encourage in every way their own traditional arts and culture.
2. Tribals rights to land and forest should be respected.
3. We should try to train and build up a team of their own people to do the work of administration and development. Some technical personnel from outside will no doubt, be needed, especially in the beginning. But we should avoid introducing too many outsiders into tribal territory.
4. We should not over administer these areas or overwhelm them with a multiplicity of schemes. We should rather work through & not in rivalry to, their own social & cultural institutions.
5. We should judge results not by statistics or the amount of money spent, but by the quality of human character that is involved. To give shape to government’s policy, a beginning was made in the constitution itself.

under article 46 – the state should promote with special care the educational and economic intersects of the tribal people & should protect them from social injustice & all forms of exploitation.

Except the North East, the tribals continue to be poor, indebted, landless and often unemployed. The problem lies in weak execution of even well intentioned measures.

Reasons for dismal performance of Tribal Policy:

1. Quite often the funds allocated for tribal welfare are not spent or are spent without corresponding results and sometimes funds are even misappropriated. The watch dog of tribal interests, Tribal Advisory Council has not functioned effectively.
2. Administrative personnel are either ill trained or prejudiced against tribals.

• A major handicap from which tribals suffer is denial of justice, often because of their unfamiliarity with the laws & the legal system. iv. Violation of strict land transfer laws for tribals, leading to alienation of land & eviction of tribals. v. Rapid extension of mines & industries has worsened their conditions in many areas.

1. The progress of education among the tribal people has been disappointingly slow.
2. Exploitations from the forest officials and unsympathetic attitude of officials. Positive Development happened due to state’s Initiative: Certain positive developments in the tribal sphere have occurred since 1947.

Legislation to protect tribal rights & interests, activities of the tribal welfare departments, Panchayati Raj, spread of literacy and education, reservations in government services and in Parliament, state assemblies, reservation in higher education institutions, repeated elections have led to increasing confidence among the tribal people & greater political participation by them, at least by growing middle classes & intelligentsia among them in the constitutional political processes.

Even though there are certain regions where reached the benefits of positive discrimination by the states, certain regions are still lagging behind. Protest movements have sprung up among tribals out of their frustration with the lack of development & welfare.

Some of the protest movements have taken to violence leading to strong state action against them.

1. Issue of language

The language problem was the most divisive issue in the first twenty years of independent India.

Linguistic identity during first 20 years after independence had become a strong force in all societies. Due to diversity in languages, this language issue became more difficult to tackle.

The problem posed to national consolidation by linguistic diversity has taken two major forms :

1. The dispute over official language of the union.
2. The linguistic reorganization of the states [this issue will be dealt separately not in this chapter] The Official Language:

• Opposition to Hindi as a national languages tended to create conflict between Hindi speaking and non-Hindi speaking regions of the country.
• The issue of a national language was resolved when the constitution-makers virtually accepted all the major languages as “languages of India”.
• Being a foreign language Gandhi opposed the idea that English would be an all India medium of communications in free India.
• Sharp differences marked the initial debates as the problem of the official language was highly political from the beginning.

Hindi was chosen over Hindustani [written in Devanagari or Urdu script] to be the official language of India & but the national language.

• The issue of the time-frame for a shift from English to Hindi produced a divide between Hindi & non Hindi areas. Proponents of Hindi wanted immediate switch over, while non Hindi areas advocated retention of English for a long if not indefinite period.
• Nehru was in favour of making Hindi the official language, but he also favoured English to be continuing as an additional official language.
• The constitution provided that Hindi in Devanagari script with international numerals would be India’s official language. English was to continue for use in all official purposes till 1965, when it would be replaced by Hindi in phased manner. However, Parliament would have the power to provide for the use of English for specified purposes even after 1965.
• The constitution laid upon the government the duty to promote the spread and development of Hindi & provides for the appointment of Commission & a Joint Parliamentary Committee to review the progress in the respect. The state legislatures were to divide the matter of official language at state level, though the official language of the Union would serve as the language of communication between the states and the centre & between one state & another.
• In 1956, the report of the official language commission set up in 1955 in terms of a constitutional provision, recommended that Hindi should start progressively replacing English in various functions of the central government with effective change taking place in 1965. Two members of commission, one each from West Bengal & Tamil Nadu, dissented this while accusing other members for pro-Hindi Bias. JPC [Joint Parliamentary Committee] reviewed the report to implement the recommendations of JPC, President issued an order in April 1960 stating that after 1965 Hindi would be the Principal official language, but English would continue without any restriction as the associate official language.

To promote Hindi, according to President’s directive, central government took a series of steps to promote Hindi. These includes the setting up of central Hindi Directorate, publication of standards works in Hindi or in Hindi translation in various fields, compulsory training of central government employees in Hindi and translation of major text of law into Hindi & promotion of their use by the courts.

• To allay the fear of non Hindi speakers Nehru in the Parliament in 1959, assured them that English would continue as alternate language as long as the people require it. In 1963, official languages Act was passed. The object of the Act, was to remove a restriction which had been placed by the constitution on the use of English after a certain dates namely 1965.
• Because of ambiguity in Official Languages Act due to the world “may” instead of “shall”, they criticized it.
• Now, many non Hindi leaders in protest changed their line of approach to the problem of the official language, while initially they had demanded a slowing down of the replacement of English, now they shifted their stand and demanded that there should be no deadline fixed for the changeover.
• There was immense amount of protests in Tamil Nadu, some students burnt themselves, Two Tamil Ministers in Union Cabinet, C. Subramaniam & Alagesan resigned, 60 people died due to police firing during agitation.
• Later when Indira Gandhi became PM in 1966, in 1967, she moved a amendment to the 1963 official Languages Act.

The amendment was passed with thumping majority.

Features of Amended Act:

1. The Act put to rest all the ambiguities regarding Nehru’s assurance in 1959. It provided the use of English as an associate language in addition to Hindi for the official work at the centre & for communication between the centre and non Hindi states would continue as long as non Hindi states wanted it.
2. Indefinite policy of bilingualism was adopted.
3. The states were to adopt a three language formula that is study of a modern Indian language, preferably one of the Southern languages, apart from Hindi and English in the Hindi speaking areas and of Hindi along with the regional languages and English in the non-Hindi speaking areas;
4. The Parliament adopted a policy resolution laying down that the public service exams were to be conducted in Hindi & English & in all the regional languages with the provision that the candidates should have additional knowledge of Hindi or English.

The Government of India took another important step on language in July 1967.

On the basis of the report of the education commission in 1966 it declared that Indian languages would ultimately become the medium of education in all subjects at the University level, though the time from for the changeover would be decided by each university to suit its convenience.

From Colony to Democracy

1. Emergence of Electoral Politics

Despite the unprecedented illiterate population, diversities, poor economic condition the national leadership were not in big quandary regarding adoption of democratic institutions to consolidate India. Faced with such serious challenges, other leaders from different countries resisted democracy as a form of governance.

According to the leaders of different countries who gained freedom from colonialism, their priority was national unity, which will not be sustained with democracy as it would bring differences and conflicts. Hence, we have seen lots of non-democratic regime in newly independent countries.

While competition and power are the two most visible things about politics, the intention of political activity should be deciding and pursuing public interest. This is the route our leaders decided to pursue.

After adoption of constitution on January 26, 1950, It was necessary to install the first democratically elected government of the country. The election commission of India was set up in January 1950 with a constitutional provision to conduct free and fair elections. Sukumar Sen became the first Chief Election Commissioner [then ECI was single member body, unlike today’s multi member body].

India has adopted universal adult franchise model of democracy where any person with prescribed condition of age, could vote without any form of discriminations.

Election commission soon realized that it was an uphill task to conduct a free and fair election in a country of India’s size. Holding an election required delimitation or drawing the boundaries of electoral rolls. Election commission faced difficult situation.

Nearly 40 lakh woman registered themselves as wife or daughter of somebody rather registering themselves by their names. The election commission refused to accept these entries and ordered a revision if possible and deletion if necessary.

Preparing for the first general election was a huge exercise. No election on this scale had ever been conducted in the world before. At that time there were 17 crores eligible voters, who had to elect about 489 MPs of Lok Sabha and 3200 MLA of state assemblies.

Only 15% of these eligible voters were literate. Hence Election Commission had sought some special method of voting, like the candidates were to be identified by symbols, assigned to each major party and independent candidates, painted on the ballot papers in the box assigned to a particular candidate and ballot was secret.

Election Commission trained over 3 lakhs officers and polling staff to conduct the election. Democracy took a giant step forward with the first elections were the biggest experiment in democracy anywhere in the world.

Many people were skeptical about the democratic elections being conducted in the caste ridden, multi religious, illiterate and backward society like India. Over 224000 polling booths, one for almost every 1000 voters were constructed and equipped with over 2.5 million steel ballot boxes one box for every candidate.

Nearly 620,000,000 ballot papers were printed. Whoever got the plurality or the largest number of votes would get elected. In all, candidates of over fourteen national and sixty three regional or local parties and a large number of independents contested the elections.

Nearly 17500 candidates in all stood for the seats to the Lok Sabha and the state legislatures. The elections were spread out over nearly four months from Oct 25, 1951 to Feb 21, 1952 [Later this period was reduced to nineteen days in 1957 and 07 to 10 days in subsequent elections. Suitable conditions were created for free participation of opposition parties in elections including Jan Sangh & communist party of India (CPI).

Nehru vigorously campaigned for the congress. He made communalism the central issue of his campaign, due to the basic struggle at that time between secular and communal forces on the background of partition inflicted communal violence and riots.

The elections were conducted in a fair, free, impartial and orderly manner with very little violence. People’s response to the new political order was tremendous. They participated in the polls with enough knowledge that their vote was a prized possession.

At certain places, people treated polling as a festival wearing festive clothes, women wearing their jewellery. Despite higher percentage of poverty and illiteracy, the number of invalid votes cast was a low as 0.3% to 0.4%.

A remarkable feature was the wide participation of women: at least 40% of women eligible to vote did so. Thus, the faith of the leadership in the people was fully justified.

When the elections results were declared, it was realised that nearly 46% of the eligible voters had cast their vote. There were many political parties which had participated in country’s first general elections and state assemblies elections in free India. Starting from the Indian National Congress to Socialist Party, Kisan Mazdoor Praja Party, Communist and allies, Jan Singh, Hindu Mahasabha, RRP [Ram Rajya Parishad] other local parties and independents. The congress had emerged as the single largest party by winning 364 seats with 45% of total polled votes for Lok Sabha.

The congress formed all the government in all the states and at the centre too. It did not get a majority on its own in four states–Madras, Travancore-Cochin, Orissa, PEPSU but formed governments even there with the help of independents and smaller local parties which then merged with it. The communist performance was big surprise and it emerged as the second largest group in the Lok Sabha. Princes and big landlords still wielded a great deal of influence in some parts of the country.

Their party Gantantra Parishad won 31 seats in Orissa Assembly. Despite the numerically dominant position of the congress, the opposition was quite effective in parliament. Other forms of political participation such as trade unions, Kishan Sabha, strikes, hartals, bands and demonstrations were available to the middle classes, organized working class and sections of the rich and middle class peasantry.

Elections were the main form of direct political participation for the vast mass of rural and urban poor. After 1952, during the Nehru years, two other general elections were held for the Lok Sabha and state assembles in 1957 & 1962. Voter’s turnout improved in 1957 to 47% and in 1962 to 54%. In both the elections, the congress again emerged as a single largest party and formed government at the centre and at states level.

However, In 1957, the communist were able to form a government in Kerala, which was the first democratically elects communist government anywhere in the world. The fair and peaceful conduct of the polls was an indication that the democratic system and institutions, a legacy of the national movement were beginning to take root.

The successful conduct of the polls was one of the reasons why India and Nehru, came to be admired abroad, especially in the ex-colonial countries. Political leadership used elections both to promote national consolidation and to legitimize its policies of integration. Ashok Mehta said, “The parliament acted as a great unifier of the nation”.

1. Dominance of Congress System:

As we have discussed about emergence of electoral politics, the congress party achieved great success in country’s first general elections. Here we will discuss how it secured such success and further will inquire into nature of such congress dominance.

In the initial three general elections, the congress gained overwhelming majority. The congress won three out of every four seats but it did not manage to win half the total votes polled. In 1952, for example the congress obtains 45% of the total votes, but it manages to win 74% of the seats. In the first general elections, out of 489 seats of Lok Sabha, the congress had won 364 seats. In the next two general elections of 1957 and 1962 respectively, it had secured 371 and 361 seats out of total 494.

It had also formed government at the state level throughout the country except few occasions.

Nature of Congress Dominance

India is not the only exception to have experienced the dominance of one party. We can see example of ‘one party dominance’ in other parts of the world as well.

In other countries, we have seen that there was compromise with democratic values and norms whereas India upheld those values and norms. In some countries like China, Cuba and Syria the constitution allows only a single party to rule the country. Some others like Myanmar, Belarus, Egypt and Eritrea were effectively one party states due to legal and military measure.

Until a few years ago, Mexico, South Korea and Taiwan were also effectively one party dominant states. The congress had reached the fruits of their diligent labor of their freedom struggle movement in ensuring post independence general elections.

It had inherited the legacy of Indian National Congress Movements and their stalwart leaders. So, by default, due to their strong organizational network of freedom movement, throughout the country, it reached out to the masses instantly and connected with masses well.

It was puerile to imagine other political parties organizing themselves in such a short time and achieving the faith of the masses. During the freedom struggle movement, INC adopted inclusive approach and accepted membership of all strata of the society.

After independence, the congress maintained the same characteristics. The congress also remained sensitive to and functioned as the medium for the reconciliation, accommodation and adjustment of the diverse and divergent class, sectional and regional interests.

The congress was an ideological coalition. It accommodated the revolutionary and pacifist, conservative and radical, extremist and moderate and the right, left and all shades of the centre. The coalitional nature of the congress party tolerated and encouraged various factions and instead of being a weakness, internal factionalism became the strength of the congress. The system of factions functioned as balancing mechanism within the ruling party. In the first decade of electoral competition, the congress acted both as the ruling party as well as the opposition. Hence, noted political scientist, Mr. Rajni Kothari termed this period of Indian Politics as “The Congress system”.

1. Emergence of Opposition Parties

Due to the great performance of the congress party, all opposition parties achieved only a token representation in the Lok Sabha and State assemblies during the “congress system”, period. Yet these oppositions played a key role in maintaining the democratic character of the system. The opposition parties offered a sustained and principle criticism of the parties and policies of the congress of the practices and policies of the congress party. By keeping democratic political alternative alive, the opposition parties prevented the resentment with the system from turning into anti-democratic. In the beginning of true sense of democracy in India, there was high respect between the congress and opposition leaders. There was induction of opposition leaders in the interim government before independence and even in the post independence government, opposition leaders like Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, Shyama Prasad Mukherjee(Jan Jabha) were in the Nehru’s Cabinet. The positive rapport between the congress and opposition leaders gradually declined when these parties in intense competition of achieving power. As the ability of congress to accommodate all interests and all aspirants for political hour steadily declined, other political parties started gaining greater significance. Thus, the congress dominance constitutes only one phase in the country’s politics. Now, we will discuss the major political parties during the “congress system” period.

Socialist party

• The foundation of the socialist party laid before independence when some leaders within the congress party has sought more radical and egalitarian congress. So, they formed the Congress Socialist Party (CSP) in 1934.
• Later after independence, the congress party had changed the rule regarding duel membership and barred the C.S.P members with congress’s membership. This situation compelled CSP leaders to form separate Socialist Party in 1948.
• The socialists believed in the ideology of democratic socialism which distinguished them both from the congress and the communists.
• Socialist party leaders criticized congress for favouring capitalists and landlord and ignoring teaming masses like workers, peasants. Socialist party was in big dilemma when the congress party in 1955 declared its goal to be the socialist pattern of society. In such scenario, their leader Ashok Mehta offered limited cooperation with the congress.
• Many faction emerged from the split and union of the socialist party viz. Kisan Mazdoor Praja party, the praja socialist party, Samyukta Socialist Party
• Jayprakash Narayan, Rammanohar Lohiya, Achyut patwardhan, Ashok Mehta, Acharya Narendra Dev, S.M. Joshi were stalwart leaders of the socialist party. • In the contemporary times, the Samajwadi party, the Rashtriya Janta Dal (RJD), Janta Dal (United), Janta Dal (Secular) trace their origins to the socialist party Bhartiya Jan Sangh (BJS)
• BJS was formed in 1951 by Shyama Prasad Mukharjee and trace its roots with R.S.S (Rashtriya Sawyamsevek Singh) and the Hindu Mahasabha before independence. • The BJS emphasised the idea of one country, one culture and one notion and believes that the country could become modern, progressive and strong on the basis of Indian culture and traditions.
• BJS leaders were Shyama Prasad Mukharjee, Deen Dayal Upadhayaya (He initiated the concept of integral humanism), and Balraj Madhok.
• BJS performed very party in almost all the Lok Sabha Election.
• In the contemporary times, the Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP) traces its roots to B.J.S The communist party of India Taking inspiration from the Bolshevik revolution in Russia, there emerged lots of communist group advocating socialism is the solution to the problems affecting the notion in 1920’s.
• The communists worked mainly within the congress fold, but they had separated themselves from the congress when they supported the British in WW-II.
• It had well organized dedicated cadre and healthy machinery to run political party.
• The communist believed in violent uprising, as they thought transfer of power was not genuine. Very few people believed in their ideology and they got crushed by the armed force. They later abandoned violent means and participated in general elections and emerged as second largest opposition party.
• The party’s support was more concentrated in Andhra Pradesh, West Bengal, Bihar, and Kerala.
• Their stalwart leaders included A.K. Gopalan, S.A. Dange, E.M.S. Namboodiripad, P.C. Joshi, Ajay Ghosh and P. Sundarrya.
• The CPI was spilt up in 1964 and the pro-china faction formed the CPI (Marxist).
• Now, the base of both has shrunk a lot and their presence concentrates in very few states of the country. Swatantra Party
• The swatantra party was formed in August 1959 after Nagpur resolution of the congress which called for land ceilings, takeover of food grain trade by the state, adoption of cooperative forming. They didn’t believe this resolution.
• The party believed lesser involvement of the government in economy. It opposed the development strategy of state intervention in economy, central planning, nationalization, Public sector. They opposed progressive tax regime, demanded dismantling of license Raj. It was critical of non-alignment policy and friendly relations of India with the Soviet Union and advocated closer ties with the U.S.A.
• The industrialist and big landlords had supported this party.
• This party has a very limited influence, lacked dedicated cadres, so it didn’t perform well. • The stalwart of party were C. Rajagopalachari, K.M. Munshi, N.G. Ranga and Minoo Masani.

Economic Development and Planning A. Mixed Economy Model (Socialism) Post Independence, apart from extreme poverty, illiteracy, a ruined agriculture and industry, the structural distortions created by colonialism in Indian economy and society made the future transition to self sustained growth much more difficult.

Ensuring well being and economic development were the important challenges for the Indian leadership and to pursue these goals, they had two model of economic development, the liberal – capitalist model followed in U.S.A. and Europe, another was the socialist model followed in U.S.S.R. During the debate of model of economic development, Almost everyone agreed that the development of India means economic growth and social and economic justice.

Hence very few people supported the American style of capitalist development. There were many who got impressed by the Soviet model of development.

India had to abandon the colonial style of functioning for commercial gains only; and strive for poverty alleviation and social-economic redistribution was primary responsibility of the then government.

Therefore India adopted the mixed model of economic development, which has features of both the capitalist and socialist models.

The things which helped Indian economy to revive itself after years of exploitation:

1. There was a mature indigenous entrepreneurial class (Birlas, Tatas, Singhanias, Dalmia-Jains) that developed an independent economic base which was an asset for post independence planned development.
2. Wider societal consensus on the nature and path of development. Everyone from the staunch Gandhian to the Socialists, the capitalists as well as the communists were more or less agreed on following agenda:
3. Multi pronged strategy of economic development based on self reliance.
4. Rapid industrialization based on import-substitution including capital goods industries.
5. Prevention of imperialist or foreign capital domination.
6. Land reforms involving tenancy reforms.
7. Abolition of Zamindari system. f. Introduction of cooperatives especially of service cooperatives like marketing, credit, etc.

Note: What are the Leftists and Rightist Party?

Leftist: refers to those who are in favour of the poor, down trodden sections and support government policies for the benefit of these sections.

Rightist: refers to those who believe that free competition and market economy alone to ensure progress and that the government should not unnecessarily intervene in the economy]

Why India completely rejected the capitalist style of Modernization?

During that era, it was common for people to refer ‘West’ as the standard for measuring development. Development meant becoming more and more modern was like industrialised countries of the West.

India rejected such model because majority of the people were illiterate and to become modern, it was required the breakdown of traditional social structures which was highly impossible.

Modernisation was also associated with the ideas of growth, material progress and scientific rationality, but due to lack of resources and education right away it was not possible in India which was fully dyed in the wool of caste based mentality. Indian Parliament in December 1954 accepted ‘ the socialist pattern of society as the objective of social and economic policy.

In fact the model projected was of a “mixed economy” where the public and the private sectors were not only to co-exist but where to be complementary to each other and the private sector was to be encouraged to grow with as much freedom as possible within the broad objectives of the national plan.

1. Planning and its Impact

There was consensus on one point that ‘the government’ should plan for the development, not the private sector. In fact the idea of planning as a process of rebuilding economy earned a good deal of public support in the 1940’s and 1950’s all over in the world.

The experience of great depression in Europe, the inter-war reconstruction of Japan and Germany, most of all spectacular economic growth against heavy odds in the Soviet Union in the 1930s and 1940s contributed to this consensus.

Generally, it is assumed that the big business entrepreneurs are averse to the idea of planning. Contrary to this, a section of big industrialists came together in 1944 and drafted a joint proposal for setting up a planned economy in the country.

It was called the Bombay Plan. After the Independence, the Planning Commission was set up in March 1950 by a simple resolution of the Government of India. It has an advisory role and its recommendation become effective only when the Union cabinet approves these.

The scope of the resolution by which Planning Commission was formed:

1. Every individual should have the right to an adequate means of livelihood.
2. Material resources of community their ownership and control should served the common good.
3. Economic system should operate in such a way that use of ‘means of production’ and ‘wealth’ should not result in well being of particular community and to the detriment of the society.

As in the then U.S.S.R [United Soviet Socialist Republic], the Planning Commission of India opted for five year plan. The government of India prepares a document that has a plan for all its income and expenditure for the next 5 years.

 Accordingly the budget of the central and all the state governments is divided into parts:

1. Non ‘Planned’ Budget – This is spent on routine items on a yearly basis.
2. Planned Budget – This is spent on a Five year basis as per the priorities fixed by the plan. A five years plan has the advantage of permitting the government to focus on the larger picture and make long term intervention in the economy. The First Five Year Plan: The draft of the first five year plan and the actual plan document was released in December 1951. People from all walks of life-academics, journalists, government and private sector employees, industrialists, farmers, politicians etc. discussed and debated the documents extremely. The first five year plan (1951-56) sought to get economy out of the vicious cycle of poverty. The prominent young economist K.N. Raj argued for “hasten slowly” for the development for the first two decades as a fast rate of development might endanger democracy. The First Five Year Plan addressed mainly the agrarian sector including investment in dams and irrigation. Due to the bitter Partition, Agricultural sector was hit hardest and needed urgent attention. Huge allocations were made for “Modern Temples of India” like the Bhakhra Nangal Dam. The First Five Year Plan also focused on land reform for the country’s development. One of the basic aims of the planners was to raise the level of national income. Basic level of spending was very low in the 1950’s.

Hence planners sought to push savings up. Due to the efforts of the planners, savings did rise up and that rise continued till the Third Five Year Plan, but later it declined sharply.

Second Five Year Plan

The second plan stressed on heavy industries and it was drafted by a team of economists and planners under the strong leadership of P.C. Mahalanobis.

Contrary to the patience preached in first plan, second plan aspired to bring about quick structural transformation by making changes as all possible directions. The congress party passed a resolution in Avadi near Madras before finalization of the draft of the second plan and declared its goal of “Socialist pattern of society”.

This was visible in Second Plan document. The government imposed substantial tariffs on imports to protect domestic industries, which helped them to grow. Savings and investments were growing, bulk of these industries like electricity, railways, steel, machineries and communication could be developed in the public sectors.

The push for industrialization marked a turning point in India development. Achievements of Plans From 1947–65 1. Stepping up the rate of growth required a substantial increase in the investment rate. An important achievement in this period was the rise in the savings and investment rates.

On the agrarian front, the comprehensive land reforms measures initiated soon after independence, the setting of a massive network for agricultural extension and community development at village level, the large infrastructural investment in irrigation, power, and agricultural research created favorable conditions for agricultural growth.

3. Industry during the first three plans, grew more rapidly than agriculture. The industrial growth was based on rapid import substitution of both consumer goods and capital good and intermediate goods. This helped India in reducing India’s total dependence on the advances countries for basic goods and capital equipment’s.
4. Apart from industry and agriculture, the early planners gave utmost priority to the development of social infrastructure including education and health, areas greatly neglected in the colonial past.
5. Nehru’s temples of Modern India’ consisted not only of steel and power plants, irrigation dams, etc. but included institutions of higher learning particularly in the scientific field.

During first Five year Plan, high powered national laboratories and institutes were set up by the council of scientific and industrial research for conducing fundamental and applied research in each of following areas : Physics, chemistry, fuel, glass and ceramics food technology drugs, electro-chemistry, roads, leather and building.

In 1948, the Atomic Energy Commission was set up laying the foundations of the creditable advances India was to make in the sphere of nuclear Science and related areas. India’s scientific and technical manpower increased more than 12 times from 190,000 to 2.32 million.

Key controversies regarding 5 year plans:

The strategy of development followed in the early years raised several important questions.

1. Agriculture vs. Industry Many thought that the second Plan lacked an agrarian strategy for development and the stress on industry caused agriculture and rural India to suffer badly. Veteran Gandhian economists like J.C. Kumarappa proposed an alternative blueprint that put greater emphasis on rural industrialisation. The stress on rapid industrialisation required import of technology for which India has to spend precious foreign exchange to buy from global market. It was the industry that attracted more investment than agriculture, the possibility of food shortage loomed large.

2) Public vs. Private Sector: The state controlled key heavy industries, provided industrial infrastructure, regulated trade and made some crucial interventions in agriculture. Critics argued that the planners refused to provide the private sector with enough space and the stimulus to grow. The enlarged public sector produced powerful vested interests that created enough hurdles for private capital by installing systems of licenses and permits for investment. With the restriction on imports, of goods, Production of such goods in domestic market with little or no competition in addition to no incentive to improve the quality of products. The state controlled more things than required which led to inefficiency and corruption. C. Green Revolution Green Revolution in India is known to reduce the dependence of India on foreign aids for the supply for good grains during the agricultural crises like droughts, floods etc. and envisaged to make India self dependent and self sustained nation in terms of food grains availability.

Prevailing Conditions before the introduction of Green Revolution:

• The focus for Indian agriculture was only on institutional reforms, not on the technological base for agriculture.
• Despite very credible growth of agriculture output during 1949 to 65 of 3% per annum India had been facing food shortages since the mid 1950’s.
• The massive jump in population growth rates after independence, steady rise in per capita income, huge outlays towards planned industrialisation put long term pressures on Indian agriculture which resulted in massive demand.
• To meet food shortage, India was forced to import food in greater amount.

Two wars, one with China (1962) and another with Pak (1965) and successive drought in years 1965– 1966, led to fall in agriculture output massively. Food prices shot up.

• Arm twisting policies of U.S.A. Government due to India stand on Vietnam and India’s denial of accepting an economy policy package. [During shortage of food, India was importing food from U.S.A. under the PL-480 Scheme].
• Due to the grim Scenario of the mid 1960’s economic self reliance and food self sufficiency became top priority objectives of Indian leadership.

Initiatives prior to Green Revolution to boost Agriculture:

• There was wrong perception prevailed during the Nehru’s era that he had neglected the agriculture sector and instead focused too much on rapid industrialisation.

But contrary to this perception, Nehru had placed great importance to create the physical and scientific infrastructure essential for Indian agriculture. There was massive large scale irrigation and power projects like Bhakra Nangal, various agricultural Universities and research laboratories fertilizer plant were set up. Introduction of Green Revolution in India Green Revolution took place in three different phases in India in various regions of the country at different point of time.

First phase of the Green Revolution: This happened from 1962–65 to 1970-73 with the sharp increases in yield in wheat in the north-western region of Punjab, Haryana and Western Uttar Pradesh.

Second phase of the Green Revolution: This happened from 1970-73 to 1980-83 with the extension of HYV [High Yielding Variety] seed technology from wheat to rice, this time the technology spread was in Uttar Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh particularly the coastal areas, parts of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu and soon regions like Maharashtra, Gujarat, improved their production too.

Third Phase: Third phase was from 1980-83, to 1992-95 showed very significant and encouraging results. This time Green Revolution spread to the low growth areas like Orissa, West Bengal, Madhya Pradesh, and Rajasthan. During the last phase, Southern region registered higher rate of growth than Northern region. By the end of this phase, the ‘coefficient of variation’ of the output growth levels and yield [per hectare] level between the various states dropped down substantially compared to earlier decades.

By the end of the last phase, there was considerable reduction in regional inequality by increase in the prosperity in rural India.

Government’s other positive initiative during Green Revolution Period:

• Government investment in agriculture rose significantly. Institutional finance in agriculture sector doubled from 1968 to 1973.
• The agricultural prices commission was set up in 1965 and efforts were made to assure the farmers a sustained remunerative price.
• Public investment, institutional Credit remunerative prices and availability of the new technology at low prices raised the profitability of private investment by farmers.
• The result of government’s initiative was that the rate of increase in the gross irrigated area rose from 1 million hectares per annum in Pre Green Revolution to about 2.5 million hectares per annum during the 1970s.

Positive impact of Green Revolution:

• Throughout the three phases of Green Revolution food grain production rose significantly. By the 1980’s not only was India self sufficient in food with buffer food stocks of over 30 million tonnes, but also it was exporting food to pay back its earlier loans and to loan to deficit countries.
• The critical impact of the Green Revolution was it maintained the agricultural growth rates plus it generated a rapid increase in the marketable surplus of food grains.
• The liberation from dependence on PL–480 or other imports was a major step in the direction of self reliant independent development for India.
• The new Green Revolution technology proved not only scale neutral but also evolved an inverse relationship between scale and productivity. Small farmers applied more inputs per unit of land compared to large farmers.

Small farmers became relatively more viable and did not sell out their land to large land holding farmers in distress.

• The Green Revolution not only generated employment in agriculture but also non agricultural rural and semi-urban employment through the development of agro industries, transport industry, and other agriculturally allied sectors. Increase in income of farmers led to the demand for factory produced consumer durables like radios, watches, TVS, Sewing machines etc.
• The surplus stocks of food-grain helped government to launch employment generating poverty alleviation programmes in backward areas.
• In conclusion, the Green Revolution had a major impact on rural poverty level which declined sharply through food availability, and it resulted in decline in relative prices of food, generating employment in agricultural sector and agriculturally allied areas, rises in wages etc.

Negative impacts of the Green Revolution:

• Huge disparity and polarization between classes and regions resulted in favourable conditions for left wing organisations to organise the poor peasants to follow extreme paths (seeds of Left Wing Extremism) for their rights; the green revolution also resulted in the rise of middle peasant sections. These middle peasants with medium size holding hugely benefitted from the changes and later emerged as politically influential in many parts of the country.
• The negative environmental impact of excessive use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides as well as plateauing of the growth rates in areas like Punjab. The excessive withdrawal of groundwater for irrigation in many areas without adequate recharging of the sub soil aquifers is environmentally unsustainable. • Tenants and share croppers who did not have security of tenure were perhaps the only losers.
• To appease the Farming Community in Green Revolution belt, many political parties provided electrical power with subsidy or totally free which led to misuse of it and adversely affected the overall health of the Indian economy.

1. Operation Flood and Cooperatives Background to operation flood:

Peasants of Kaira [Kheda] district, Gujarat which supplied milk to Bombay felt cheated by the milk traders and then they met Sardar Patel who was from the same region to redress their grievances.

At the initiative of Patel & Morarji Desai, the farmers organized themselves into a cooperative union, pressurize the Bombay government with “Milk Strike” to buy milk directly from their Union. These farmers registered themselves in Anand, Gujarat in Dec, 1946.

Gandhian freedom fighter Tribhuvandas K.Patel, convinced the farmers to form milk cooperatives, later became its chairman and remained so for 25 years. Dr. Verghese Kurien was CEO of this Union from 1950 to 1973. Meanwhile in 1955, the Union chose “Amul” the name for its range of products, which competed with MNC companies of dairy products like Glaxo and Nestle.

The “Anand Pattern” of Kaira cooperative union gradually spread to other districts in Gujarat in 1974. The Gujarat cooperative Milk Marketing Federation Ltd. Anand was formed as an apex organisation of the unions in the district to look after marketing, According to one estimate, due to the activities of cooperative, 48% of the income of rural households came from dairying. The Kaira cooperative success made the movements spread to the rest of the country inevitable. In the 1964, the then PM Shastriji wrote to the all (CM’s of the country to set up cooperative dairies on the “Anand Pattern” to perform this task NDDB (National Dairy Development Board) was created in 1965–Mr. Verghese Kurien was at its helm as its honorary chairman.

Beginning of Operation Flood: Drawing heavily from the Kaira Union for personnel, expertise and much more, the NDDB launched “Operation Flood”, a programme to replicate the “Anand Pattern” in other milkshed of country. Operation Flood had organised cooperatives of milk producers into a nation-wide milk grid with the purpose of increasing milk production, bringing the producers and consumers closer by eliminating middlemen and assuring the producers a regular income throughout the year.

It was not just a dairy programme, but a path to development, generating employment & income of rural households and alleviating poverty. By 1995 there were 69,875 village dairy cooperatives spread over 170 milkshed all over the country with a total membership of 8.9 million farmers. Impact of operation Flood

• The obvious impact of operation Flood was the considerable increase in milk supply and consequent increase in income of the milk producers, particularly the poor. It was estimated that 60% of the beneficiaries were marginal or small farmers and landless labourers. Milk cooperatives proved to be a significant anti-poverty measure. Cooperatives All the leader of Indian freedom struggle, from Mahatama Gandhi to Nehru, the socialists, communists, past independence agreed that co-operativization would lead to major improvement in Indian agriculture and benefit the poor. The congress Agrarian Reforms Committee also known as Kumarappa Committee made the recommendation for compulsory promoting cooperatives.

The congress party in their 1959’s Nagpur Session passed Nagpur Resolution which visulaize an agrarian pattern based on Joint cooperative farming in the future, it specified that such a pattern was to be achieved within three years, However, there were some leaders like C. Rajagopalachari, N.G. Ranga and Charan Singh who opposed such move hence Nehru in Feb 1959 assures the Parliament of not using any coercion to introduce cooperatives.

• The chief beneficiaries of this scheme were the landless people from SC &ST communities and deprived sections of other communities. Operation Flood and the accompanying dairy expansion has been instrumental in the establishment of an indigenous dairy equipment manufacturing industry ; an impressive body of indigenous expertise that includes animal nutrition, animal health, artificial insemination management information systems (MIS), dairy engineering, food technology.
• Operation flood was instrumental in empowerment of women. Operation flood with the help of NGOs like SEWA helped in establishing about 6,000 Women dairy cooperative societies.
• Operation Flood had spillover effect on other cooperatives too. Cooperatives for fruits and vegetable producers, oilseeds cultivators, small scale salt makers and tree grower were doing excellently well which were initiated by NDDB. Limitations of Co-operativization Danial Thorner, the noted economist during his observation of cooperatives between Dec 1958 to May 1959 found many weaknesses on the cooperative movements.

 He observed two types cooperatives movements. He observed two types cooperatives in case of joint farming. One was of rich and landowning farmers. They formed such cooperatives to evade land reforms and access incentives offered by the state.

These were bogus kind of cooperatives where big farmers enrolled their labourers and ex-tenants as members. The other, second type of cooperatives was state sponsored cooperative forms where uncultivated lands of the government made available to the landless labourers and underprivileged groups.

These cooperatives didn’t live up to their expectations in terms of benefits of scale. The service cooperatives fared better than the farming cooperatives. There were many shortcomings too in service cooperatives. Service cooperatives reinforced the casted based hierarchical structure. Leaders of such cooperatives mostly drawn from traders and money lending communities. Hence no benefits to poor.

In 1971, the National Commission on Agriculture confirmed the virtual exclusion of the landless from securing credits from credit cooperatives. Instead of promoting people’s participation in cooperative movement, very soon it became overstaffed with government officials and became inefficient. Credit cooperatives suffered from major drawback of failure of repayment of loans, which led to large percentage of over-dues. Contrary to common perception, rich and landowning community were largest defaulters than the poor and small farmers.

India’s External Relations

1. Introduction to India’s Foreign Policy:

At the world level, situation around the world in general was very grim. The world had just witnessed the devastating World War II, attempt of creating new international body for peace, emergence of new nations with the collapse of colonialism, twin challenges face by new countries; welfare and democracy for all. In Indian context, the bitter partition, the legacy of British India left behind many difficult challenges. India’s efforts to pursue an independent foreign policy were highlight of post 1947 politics.

Nehru used foreign policy as an instrument to defend and strengthen India’s independence and to safeguard her national interests, to develop the self reliance, self confidence and pride of the masses while serving the cause of world peace and anti colonialism.

India decided to conduct its foreign relations with an aim to respect the sovereignty of all other nations and to achieve security through the maintenance of peace.

This aim finds an echo in the Directive principles of state Policy, in the Article 51 of constitution: “Promotion of international peace and security” The state shall Endeavour to:

1. a) Promote international peace and security.
2. b) Maintain just and honourable relations between nations.
3. c) Foster respect for international law and treaty obligations in the dealings of organised people with one another.
4. d) Encourage settlement or international disputes by arbitration.

The three major objectives of Nehru’s foreign policy were:

1. To preserve hard earned sovereignty.
2. Protect territorial integrity.
3. Promote rapid economic development. During Nehru’s era, a basic objective of India’s foreign policy was extending support to colonial and ex colonial countries in their struggle against colonialism. Another objective was that of promoting peace. Nehru constantly emphasized that peaceful co-existence of countries with different ideologies, differing systems, was a necessity and believed that nobody had a monopoly on the truth and pluralism was a fact of life.

In this context, he outlined five principles which were called “Panchsheel” of India’s Foreign Policy; these were

1. mutual respect for each other’s territorial integrity and sovereignty,
2. nonaggression,
3. non-interference in each other’s internal affairs,
4. equality and mutual benefit, and
5. Peaceful co-existence. Major function of Indian foreign policy was to promote and protect Indian economic interests. Nehru played a crucial role in setting the national agenda. He was his own foreign minister hence, both as the Prime Minister.

 

 

For more such notes, Articles, News & Views Join our Telegram Channel.

https://t.me/triumphias

Click the link below to see the details about the UPSC –Civils courses offered by Triumph IAS. https://triumphias.com/pages-all-courses.php