pd or pd

8/7/2019 PD or PD

1/13

1

Panchayati Raj Institutions: Participatory Democracy orParticipants Democracy? Case Study of Balekoppa Gram

Panchayat in Shimoga District of Karnataka

Ozmond Roshan DSouza 1

Abstract

The concept of Panchayati Raj has undergone several changes ever since its inceptionfive decades back. These changes have come through various means, amendment to theconstitution, corresponding changes to the various State Panchayati Raj Acts and through both

positive (progressive) and negative (regressive) activities at the grassroots level by the participants themselves.

The present study attempts to capture the political dynamics involved in the runningof a Gram Panchayat. The first part of the paper focuses on the alliances and counter alliances made by the elected members to get elected to the posts of the Chairperson and thedeputy chairperson, contrary to the general research conclusions that caste plays a

predominant role in the Panchayati Raj institutions, especially in the village panchayats. Thisissue gains importance in the state of Karnataka where the top posts in PRIs are held on quotareservation system, (allotment of reservation to SCs/STs and women by rotation to different

panchayat constituencies and various executive posts) something similar to the Americansystem of Gerry(Jerry) mandering . The former is politico-social in nature while the latter is

politico-geographical. The second part of the paper shows how after having made an alliance,the leadership, in informal terms, the ruling alliance, functions, responding to the demands of the alliance on the one hand and keeping at bay the opposition on the other. This paper is aqualitative analysis and shows how weak leaderships based on opportunistic alliancesfunction and who gains from such a political phenomena. Further more, it shows how the

bargaining power of the electorate from the other side(non-ruling alliance) is reduced tomere requests, and how the ruling alliance gets the developmental work done through their own people and for their own people. Panchayati Raj Institutions, which were supposed to beparticipatory in nature is reduced to mere participation of the ruling alliance and how the

people from the other side (both elected members and the common villagers) respond to thedynamics. The paper concludes by showing how such political dynamics at the grassrootslevel weaken the real and original objective of taking governance to the people branding itparticipatory democracy and how the weak leadership plays into the hands of the

permanent executive.

According to the statistics provided by the Ministry of Rural Development andPanchayati Raj, government of India, there are about 231815 Gram Panchayats with a totalnumber of 2186452 elected representatives. Each gram Panchayat is distinctively differentfrom each other. The present paper attempts to analyse not the comprehensive developmentaland political activities of the Gram Panchayat and compare it with other successful

panchayats, but to observe how political dynamics within the leadership effects political and

1Doctoral Student, Department of Political Science, University of Hyderabad. The author can be reached at

[email protected]

Created with Print2PDF. To remove this line, buy a license at: http://www.software602.com/

8/7/2019 PD or PD

2/13

2

developmental activities in the villages and how the grassroots stakeholders respond to suchdynamics.

Though the 73 rd amendment to the Indian Constitution visualized democratizingdeliberative bodies at the grassroots level, the p resent study suggests that this democracy isactually highjacked by some local leaders through various political/social and cultural meansmerely to neutralize the influence of the mandatory provisions of reservations in order to suittheir political interests and to retain their control over the local polity and resources, withouteffecting the provisions of reservation.

------------

Introduction:

Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs), especially the lowest tier of the three tier system, in the rural areas, popularly known as the Gram Sabhas or/and Gram Panchayats

have acquired enormous and unprecedented importance among the researchers,

academics ad policy scientists within India and abroad in the last one decade. This trend

found encouragement with the passing of the 73 rd amendment to the Indian Constitution

in 1992, which provided the Constitutional status to the PRIs at al levels, which was

earlier not the case. But what makes the studies/research on Gram Sabhas /Gram

Panchayats, so interesting and so popular among research fraternity? What makes the

availability of enormous literature by Indian and foreign authors on the issue, while there

is only a negligible amount of literature available on the other two tiers of the PRIs

whether the Zilla Panchayats or Taluk or the Mandal Panchayats ?

The last decade of the 20 th Century witnessed many events of academic interest

for social scientists, in India, to start with it was the policy of Liberalization,

Globalization and Privatization. Then was the growing popularity of parallel community

based institutions like the Joint Forest Management, Watershed Management bodies, etc.

On the one hand issues like LPG, which had international socio-economic and political

implications and on the other the PRIs, whose influence would hardly be felt in the areas

of its operation. PRIs with a pure political/developmental mandate, has generated so

much interest among social scientists and policy makers and international organizations,

for three major reasons. Firstly, the significance of a Constitutional body, which has to

cope up with the already existing traditional panchayats on the one hand and the parallel


8/7/2019 PD or PD

3/13

3

bodies on the other. Secondly, this phenomena was compounded by the fact that these

institutes had to operate in highly fragmented societies divided on the question of caste

and class and finally, the political dynamics these institutions would pass through in the

course of its functioning and its implications for rural development.

Branding PRIs out rightly as Grassroots democracy, participatory democracy,

training ground for future leaders, etc., would at times lead to belittling the real concept

of democracy, because, the root word as adopted from the original from French

dmocratie , via late Latin and from Greek dmokratia , from dmos meaning the

people and kratia meaning power, rule. Democracy then would not be possible at allwithout the participation of the people. One also needs to note that when the Greeks and

later the Romans spoke of democracy, they meant direct democracy, where by all

people of the concerned city-state got to participate in the decision making process that

affected them.

In this backdrop, it makes the studies on PRIs in India more interesting. Without

generalizing the research findings of the paper, I would like to submit that PRIs

especially, the lowest tier Gram Sabhas or the Gram Panchayats , are more of participants

democracy than participatory democracy, which would call for participation of all the

stakeholders within a given Gram Sabhas or the Gram Panchayats .

Objectives of the Study:

To analyse the functioning of Gram Sabhas or the Gram Panchayats from the

point of view of the elected members.

To understand the political dynamics in the process of development influenced by

various individual preferences like caste and village affiliation.

Significance of the Study:

The present study was carried out in BaleKoppa Gram Panchayat . This

panchayat is made up of a cluster of four sub villages or hamlets, which are for all

revenue purposes are independent villages. Balekoppa, is the biggest among the member


8/7/2019 PD or PD

4/13

4

villages and has the population almost equivalent to the total population of the other three

small villages namely, Hubbanahallli, Chikka Marsa and Chamenahalli. Out of the nine

elected members, Balekoppa being the largest village has four members, Hubbanahalli

and Chamenahalli have two members each and Chikka Marsa has one member. All the

nine elected members are first time contestants, without any record of past political

activities.

Research Methodology:

The present paper is a case study of one Gram Panchayat . The present research

work is an analytical and descriptive study based on both primary and secondary sourcesand data collection. The field work was carried out in three phases during the months of

November-December 2005 and January-February, 2006 in Balekoppa Gram Panchayat

and the four constituent villages. The data was collected through observation method,

formal interviews and informal discussions with all the members of the Gram Panchayat ,

their supporters, individual villagers and beneficiaries. The respondents included

villagers both men and women from different age groups and castes. The respondents

were approached with both structured and unstructured questionnaire with both open-

ended and close-ended questions. Interviews and discussions were also held with

community leaders, local Government Officials associated with the villages.

Study Area:

The present study was carried out in BaleKoppa Gram Panchayat in Shimoga

Taluk and district. This is a district with nature's bounty-landscapes dotted with

waterfalls, swaying arecanut and coconut palms and lush paddy fields. This district is

situated, almost at western-central part of Karnataka. The rivers Tungabhadra,

Sharavathi , Varada and Kumudavathi inundate the luxuriant greens of the region. The

Sahyadri ranges, part of the Western Ghats, feed the rivers round the year, and inundate

the fertile alluvial soil, this nature's blessing makes it the bread basket of Karnataka. The

Sharavathi Hydel Project and Varahi Project provide a substantial portion of the state's

power needs. The enchanting natural scenery of hills, hillocks and green dales, rivers and


8/7/2019 PD or PD

5/13

8/7/2019 PD or PD

6/13

6

total population of Shimoga district as per 2001 census is 16, 39,595 4 (sixteen lakhs thirty

nine thousand five hundred and ninety five).

Shimoga district is rich in flora and fauna, the dense forest and green shrub

jungles are main producers of sandalwood, rosewood, teak and other exotic timber.

Mango, Jackfruit, Tamarind etc., are the other important trees found around the district

with rich yields. The dense forests of the district is home for wild animals like Elephant,

Tiger, Lion, Leopard, Wild boar, Bear, Antelope, Bison, Porcupine, Monkeys, wolves

and many other animals. Birds migrate from all over the world and travel down to

Shimoga. The eastern part of district comes under the semi- Malnad ( Aremalanadu ) zone

with plain topography and occasional chains of hills covered with semi-deciduous

vegetation.

Shimoga is a place of origin for rivers Kali, Gangavathi, Sharavathi and Tadadi .

The other major rivers which flow through the district are Tunga, Bhadra and Varada .

Agumbe , a small place, around 95 kilometres from the district headquarters known for its

highest rainfall (8000 mm/annum) in south India is in this district.

The present Gram Panchayat , where the study was conducted is Balekoppa,

where the Gram Panchayat Office is located. It is also officially called Balekoppa Gram

Panchayat . This panchayat is made up of a cluster of four sub villages or hamlets, which

are for all revenue purposes independent villages. Balekoppa, is the biggest among the

member villages and has the population equivalent to the total population of the other

three small villages namely, Hubbanahallli, Chikka Marsa and Chamenahalli.

Hubbanahalli is around seven kilometers from the Gram Panchayat office through pucca

road and around three kilometers through kaccha road. Chikka Marsa is around three

kilometers from Balekoppa, while Chamenahalli is around seven kilometers. Balekoppa

being the largest village has four members out of the allotted nine members,

Hubbanahalli and Chamenahalli have two members each and Chikka Marsa has one

member. One SC member from Hubbanahalli won the reserved seat (for SCs) unopposed.

4 ------- (2004): Manorama Year Book , Malaya Manorama, Kottayam. Original Source : 2001 KarnatakaCensus Report


8/7/2019 PD or PD

7/13

7

Table 1

General Statistics (Population and Caste Composition of the participatingConstituencies/Villages)

The above table details the basic statistics regarding the four participating villages

of Balekoppa Gram Panchayat . It can be noticed that there is a difference between the

records of the 2001 Census report and the data collected by the Gram Panchayat.

Balekoppa has a total of 280 households, with a population of 1399. The population of

SCs and STs is 296 and 8 with a share percentage of 21.15 and 0.57 respectively. The

overall literacy rate is 65.68%. Hubbanahalli, which is the second largest village in the

cluster has a total of 146 households, with a population of 733. The population of SCs

and STs is 161 and 9 with a share percentage of 13.91 and 1.22 respectively. The overallliteracy rate is 73.26%. Chamenahalli, the third largest village has a total of 125

households, with a population of 661. The population of SCs and STs is 262 and 103 with

a share percentage of 39.63 and 15.58 respectively. The overall literacy rate is 70.36%.

One can notice that this village has the largest concentration of the SCs and STs, which

amounts to more than 50% of the total population. Chikka Marsa the smallest village has

a total of 87 households, with a population of 415. The population of SCs 83 is share

StatisticsSl.No.

Head

Balekoppa Hubbanahalli Chamenahalli Chikka Marsa Total

- Total Households2001 Census

280 146 125 87 638Panchayat Data 405 Khatas/

350 Households244 Khatas/ 150Households

247 Khatas/ 170Households

98 Khatas/65Households

994/735

1. Population 1399 733 661 415 3208

1.A Population Under 6years 180 102 108 50 440

2. SC: 296 (21.15%) 161(13.91%) 262 (39.63%) 83 (20%) 802(25%)

3. ST: 8 (0.57%) 9 (1.22%) 103 (15.58) 0 120(3.74%)

4. Schools(/PrimaryHigher Primary)/ Anganwadis

1 /2 1/1 1/1 1/1 4/5

5. Literacy rate 65.68% 73.26% 70.36% 59.30% 67.15%


8/7/2019 PD or PD

8/13

8

percentage of 20. This village has not a single ST family. The overall literacy rate is

59.30%.

The following tables help in understanding the dynamics of reservation policy

provisions of which are provided under Karnataka Panchayati Raj (Reservation) Rules,

1995.

Table 2

Members of Balekoppa Gram Panchayat , Age, Ward, Gender and Caste Composition

Those names against which there is the (+) plus symbol below theserial number are the ruling alliance, while those with (-) minussymbol are the opposition alliance.

Table 2 provides the details of the members of the present Gram Panchayat , age,

their wards, gender and the caste composition. One can find that out of the nine members,

four belong to Balekoppa, two each to Hubbanahalli and Chamenahali and one member

belongs to Chikka Marsa. Of the nine members, four are women, two members belong to

the SC category and one member belongs to the ST category. All the three members were

elected from reserved seats. It is to be noted that Reservation was based on the provisions

Sl.No.

Name, (Age) and Post Ward(Village/Hamlet)

Gender Caste/Category Reservationof Seat

1.(+)

A.K. Nagaraj (36)Chairman

Balekoppa Male SC (Madiga/AK) SC (General)

2.(+)

Meenakshi Chandrashekar (30)Vice- Chairperson

Chikka Marsa Female Lingayat General(Woman)

3.

(+)

B.H. Eashwarappa (37)

Member

Balekoppa Male Devanga General

4.(-)

A.N. Manjappa (46)Member

Balekoppa Male Lingayat General

5.(-)

K.V. Manjunath (40)Member

Balekoppa Male Lingayat General

6.(-)

AnnapoornaParameshwarappa (34)Member

Hubbanahalli Male SC (Madiga/AK) SC (Woman)

7.(+)

Komala Prabhakar (28)Member

Chamenahalli Female ST ST (Woman)

8.(+)

Malathi Kumar (27)Member

Hubbanahalli Female Devanga General(Woman)

9.

(-)

M. Revappa (56)

Member

Chamenahalli Male Lingayat General

10. S.G. Dodde GowdaSecretary

N.A.Executive Post

Male Vokkaliga N.A.Executive Post


8/7/2019 PD or PD

9/13

9

of Karnataka Panchayati Raj (Reservation) Rules, 1995. According to which, reservation

will be provided in proportion to the size of the population of the community. In case of

Balekoppa Gram Panchayat , the division of wards was made so as to meet the

requirement of the provisions. Hence, Balekoppa and Chamenahalli, with a population of

1814 was notified as one ward and Hubbanahalli and Chamenahalli with a population of

1394 the other ward. Reservations thus made, means member belonging to one ward

cannot contest from another ward. This also means that inspite of the reservation,

members of a village with lesser population of reserved communities have lesser chance

of winning the seat against member of the same community hailing from a village with

bigger population. This happened in two cases, first for the SC reserved seat inBalekoppa-Chikka Marsa Ward. It is not possible for an SC from Chikka Marsa to win

even from the SC Reserved seat, because, His/Her opponent though is from the same

community, hails from Balekoppa, which has a slightly higher SC population. The

second, case is of an ST seat in Hubbanahalli-Chamenahalli Ward. The population of STs

in Chamenahalli is more than 10 times the ST population in Hubbanahalli, it invariably

so happens that this seat is captured by an ST from Chamenalli, STs from Hubbanahalli

dont even bother to contest the elections. These two instances provide an example for

how within caste, the Reservation policy can play an adverse role when the question of

village prestige is involved. As suggestive method all STs and SCs within Gram

Panchayat need to be clubbed under one ward.

Average age of the members of this Panchayat is 37.1 years. All the nine members of

this Gram Panchayat are first time contestants.

Table 3Past Presidents of Balekoppa GramPanchayat

PeriodSl.No.

Name Village

From To1. Mr. S Parameshwarappa Hubbanahalli 01-04-1994 27-03-20002. Mr. H. Darmappa Hubbanahalli 28-03-2000 03-12-20013. Administrative Officer 03-12-2000 10-01-20024. Mrs. Nagaratnamma Lakshamanapa Balekoppa 11-01-2002 18-12-20025. Mrs. Nagaratnamma Lakshamanapa Balekoppa 19-12-2002 29-03-2005


8/7/2019 PD or PD

10/13

10

Table 4Past Vice Presidents of Balekoppa GramPanchayat

Conclusion:

Yet to Conclude

References

1. Articles, Journals and Books

Abrahamsson, Bengt (1977): Bureaucracy or Participation: The Logic of Organisation , Sage

Publications, Beverly Hills.

Bajpai, P.K. (1998): Participation in Development- A Critical Analysis, Indian Journal of Public Administration , Vol. 44, No. 04, pp 815-823.

Beteille, Andre (1999): Empowerment, Economic and Political Weekly , Vol. 34, No. 10-11, pp

589-597.

Blomkvist, Hans and Ashok Swain (2001): Investigating Democracy and Social Capital in India,

Economic and Political Weekly , Vol. 36, No. 8, pp 639-643.

Carrol, Thomas F (1992): World Bank Workshop on Popular Participation , World Bank,

Washington, D.C.

Chopra, Kanchan (2002): Social Capital and Development Processes: Role of Formal and

Informal Institutions, Economic and Political Weekly , Vol. 37, No. 28, pp 2911-2916.

Coleman, James S (1980): Individual Interests and Collective Action- Selected Essays , Cambridge

University Press, Cambridge.

Dachler, Peter H. and Bernard Wilpert, (1978): Conceptual Dimensions and Boundaries of

Participation in Organizations: A Critical Evaluation, Administrative Science Quarterly , Vol. 23,

pp 1-39.

D.N (1989): Reservation for Women in Panchayats, Economic and Political Weekly , Vol. 24,

No. 23, pp 1269-1270.

PeriodSl.No.

Name Village

From To1. Smt. Renukamma Balekoppa 01-04-1994 27-03-20002. Smt. Neelamma Balekoppa 28-03-2000 03-12-20013. Administrative Officer 03-12-2000 10-01-20024. Smt. Sarojamma Hubbanahalli 11-01-2002 18-12-20025. Mr. H. Darmappa Hubbanahalli 19-12-2002 29-03-2005


8/7/2019 PD or PD

11/13

11

Dreze, J and Amarthya Sen (1995): India: Economic Development and Social Opportunity ,

Oxford University Press, New Delhi.

Dreze, J and Amarthya Sen (2002): India: Development and Participation , Oxford UniversityPress, New Delhi.

Editor (Commentary) (1994 ): States Role in Womens Empowerment: For Better or For

Worse?, Economic and Political Weekly , Vol. 29, No. 51, pp 3187-3190.

Harriss, John (2001): depoliticising development- The World Bank and Social Capital , Left Word

Books, New Delhi.

Isaac, T. M Thomas and Harilal K.N (1997): Planning for Empowerment- Peoples Campaign for

Decentralised Planning in Kerala, Economic and Political Weekly , Vol. 32, No. 01, pp 53-58.

Jary, David and Julia Jary (eds) (2000): Collins Dictionary of Sociology , Harper Collins

Publishers.

Jayalakshmi, K (1997): Empowerment of Women in Panchayats- Experiences of Andhra

Pradesh , Journal of Rural Development , Vol. 16, No. 02, pp 369-378.

John, M.S and Jos Chatukulam (2002): Building Social Capital Through State Initiative:

Participatory Planning in Kerala, Economic and Political Weekly , Vol. 37, No. 20, pp 1939-1948.

Joseph, Siby K and M.S. John (2001): The Gram Sabha Experience of Tamil Nadu: The difficult

Road Ahead, Journal of Rural Development , Vol. 20, No. 02, pp. 253-272.

Marshal, Gordon (1994): Oxford Dictionary of Sociology , Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Mathew, George, and Ramesh Nayak (1996): Panchayats at Work: What it Means for the

Oppressed, Economic and Political Weekly , Vol. 31, No. 27, pp 1765-1771.

Mathew, K.M. (2003): Manorama Year Book, Malaya Manorama, Kottayam.

Mathew, P. M. (ed) (1997): Women in Panchayat - The More Relevant Questions, Economic

and Political Weekly , Vol. 32, No. 23, pp 1362-1363.

MC Cracken, Jennifer Rietbergen and Deepa Narayan (1998): Participation and Social

Assessment: Tools and Techniques , International Bank for Reconstruction and Development,

World Bank, Washington, D.C.

Milbrath, Lester W (1965): How and Why Do People Get Involved in Politics , Rand MC Nally

and Company, Chicago.Misra, Suresh (2002): New Trends in Community Initiatives, Journal of Rural Development ,

Vol. 21, No. 03, pp. 395-410.

Nagel, Jack H (1987): Participation , Prentice Hall Inc, New Jersey.

Narayanan, Pradeep (2003): Empowerment Through Participation: How Effective is This

Approach?, Economic and Political Weekly , Vol. 38, No. 25, pp 2484-2486.

Pai, Sudha (2001): Social Capital, Panchayats and Grass Roots Democracy, Economic and

Political Weekly , Vol. 36, No. 08, pp 645-654.


8/7/2019 PD or PD

12/13

12

Paul, Samuel (1987): Community Participation in Development Projects: The World Bank

Experience , World Bank Discussion Paper No. 6, Washington, D.C.

Putnam, Robert D, et al (1993): Making Democracy Work- Civic Traditions in Modern Italy,Princeton University Press, Princeton.

Rao, Vasudeva D and C Chakrapani (1997): Stakeholders Role in Developmental Programmes ,

Spellbound Publications, Rothak.

Rau, S.K. (2001): Gram Sabha, Journal of Rural Development , Vol. 20, No. 04, pp.779-802.

Sen, Amarthya (1999): Development as Freedom, Oxford University Press, New Delhi.

Singh, S.P. (2000): Gram Panchayats: Assessing Developmental Goals, Motivational factors and

Orientation Evidences from a Field Study Journal of Rural Development , Vol. 19, No. 03,

pp.371-397.

Venugopal G, V. Annamalai (2003): Relationship between Panchayati Raj Institutions and

Community Based Organizations: Issues of Convergence, Journal of Rural Development , Vol.

22, No. 04, pp.455-486.

Vyasulu, Vinod (2002): Development and Participation- What is Missing?, Economic and

Political Weekly , Vol. 37, No. 37, pp 2869-2871.

Wehmeier, Sally (ed) (2002): Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary of English , Oxford

University Press, Oxford.

Gellar, Sheldon, (1985): The Ratched-McMurphy Model Revisited: A Critique of Participatory

Development Models, Strategies and Projects, A Journal of Opinion , Special Issue on Africanist

Opinion, Vol. 14, pp 25-28.

2. Government Documents:

3. Unpublished Papers

-------- (2002): Panchayati Raj and Natural Resources Management: How to Decentralize

Management over Natural Resources? Karnataka: Situation Analysis and Literature Review, This

report is based on the ongoing study of Panchayati Raj and Natural Resources Management, jointly being carried out by Overseas Development Institute (London), Social and Economic

Research Associates (London), TARU Leading Edge (New Delhi and Hyderabad), Centre for

Budget and Policy Studies (Bangalore), Centre for World Solidarity (Hyderabad) and Sanket

(Bhopal), and supported by Ford Foundation, New Delhi.

Meenakshisundaram, S. S (2001): Panchayati Raj Institutions in Natural Resource Management,

A Paper presented at the workshop, "Policy Frameworks to Enable Successful Community Based


8/7/2019 PD or PD

13/13

13

Resource Management Initiatives," held at the East-West Center in Honolulu, Hawaii between 5

February and 2 March 2001.

Subash Chandra Babu, P.V. (1998): Common Property Resource Management in Haryana State,

India: Analysis of the Impact of Participation in the Management of Common Property Resources

and the Relative Effectiveness of Common Property Regimes, Paper submitted to the Biennial

Conference of International Association for the Study of Common Property (IASCP), Vancouver,

Canada.

4. Web Sites

www.deccanherald.com

http://www.worldbank.org