Social Change

The Republic's founding fathers had a vision that went beyond national unity and political stability. Indian society had to undergo a social transformation. ‘The state shall strive to promote the welfare of the people by securing and protecting as effectively as may be a social order in which justice, economic and political, shall inform all institutions of national life,' stated Article 36 of the Constitution in the section on the Directive Principles of State Policy. This vision of the new social order was encapsulated in the phrase "socialistic pattern of society," which was officially accepted by the Congress at its Avadi Session in 1955 and later included as a goal in the Second and Third Five Year Plans. 

 

•    Land reforms, the start of planned economic development, and the rapid expansion of the public sector were all crucial in this regard. Furthermore, far-reaching labor legislation was enacted, including recognition of collective bargaining, the right to form trade unions and strike, job security, and health and accident insurance. Through progressive and steep income-tax and excise-tax policies, there were also moves toward a more equitable distribution of wealth. Education, health, and other social services were also sought to be expanded.

 

•    Nehru and other leaders were also concerned that Indian social organization change, resulting in the social liberation of previously oppressed and socially backward sections of society. 

•    Untouchability had already been abolished by a provision in the Constitution. In 1955, the government added to this provision by passing the Anti-Untouchability Law, which made untouchability a punishable and cognizable offence. 

 

•    The government also attempted to put constitutional provisions in place that favor Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs), and other marginalized groups in educational institutions and government employment. 

 

•    Other necessary measures, such as the provision of special facilities in the form of scholarships, hostel accommodations, grants, loans, housing, health care, and legal-aid services, were taken to raise their social status. 

 

•    A Commissioner of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes was appointed to ensure that all of these measures and constitutional provisions were carried out effectively. Despite these efforts, the SCs and STs remained backward, and caste oppression remained widespread, particularly in rural areas, where the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes made up a large portion of the landless agricultural labor force and thus faced class oppression. 

 

•    There was also little effort made to eradicate the caste system's ideology, as well as caste inequality and oppression, allowing casteism to spread from the upper castes to the lower castes, and from rural to urban areas.

 

•    Women's groups and organizations had been active in the national movement for years, demanding revision of laws regarding women's rights in the family, and they had a strong ally in Nehru. 

 

•    When the Hindu Code Bill was introduced in the parliament in 1951, it was a major step forward in this direction. The bill was met with fierce opposition from conservative groups, particularly the Jan Sangh and other Hindu communal organizations. Despite strong support from prominent members of the Congress party, as well as female MPs and other activists, Nehru decided to postpone the bill's enactment in order to garner more support. He was, however, adamant about passing the bill and made it a campaign issue in 1951 and 1952.

 

•    After regaining power, the government passed the bill in four parts, which gave men and women the right to monogamy and divorce, raised the age of consent and marriage, and gave women the right to maintenance and inheritance of family property. 

 

•    Women's liberation had thus taken a revolutionary step, though its full implementation would take decades. A significant flaw in this regard was the lack of a uniform civil code that applied to people of all faiths. This would have necessitated changes to Muslim personal law, particularly in the areas of monogamy and inheritance. The Muslim orthodoxy was outspoken in their opposition. 

 

•    In the modern era, the process of social reform among Muslims lagged far behind that of Hindus, and as a result, even among middle-class Muslim women, social change was slow. Nehru was adamant about not alarming the Muslim minority, which he believed was already under siege. He planned to amend Muslim personal law and enact a uniform civil code, but only when Muslims were ready.

 

•    The founding fathers were well aware of the importance of better and broader education as a tool for social and economic progress, opportunity equality, and the development of a democratic society. This was all the more important because, in 1951, only 16.6% of the total population was literate, and the percentage was even lower in rural families, at only 6%. 

 

•    To address this issue, the state was required by the Constitution to provide free and compulsory education to all children under the age of fourteen by 1961. Later, the deadline was pushed back to 1966. 

 

•    During the Nehru years, education expanded rapidly, particularly for girls. Between 1951 and 1961, the number of boys enrolled in school doubled and the number of girls enrolled tripled.

 

•    There were eighteen universities with nearly 300,000 students enrolled at the time of independence. By 1964, there were fifty-four universities, about 2,500 colleges, and 613,000 undergraduate and post-graduate students, excluding intermediate students. The number of female students more than doubled, accounting for 22% of the total. 

 

•    However, while progress in primary education was evident, it did not correspond to the needs or intentions, particularly because the number of eligible students was rapidly increasing due to the high rate of population growth. The constitutional goal of providing all children with free and compulsory education was first pushed back from 1961 to 1966, and then to the far future. Only 61 percent of children aged six to fourteen were in school by the end of the Third Plan in 1965-66, with only 43% of girls in school. As a result, widespread illiteracy persisted; only 52 percent of Indians were literate in 1991.

 

•    These figures, however, do not tell the whole story. In 1965, 5% of the rural population had no access to any kind of education. Furthermore, the existing schools' facilities were deplorable, with the majority of them lacking a pucca building, blackboards, or running water. 

 

•    In nearly 40% of primary schools, only one teacher was assigned to three or four classes. The high rate of dropouts in primary school was a particular affliction. By the time they reached class IV, nearly half of those enrolled in class I would have dropped out and been reduced to illiteracy. 

 

•    Furthermore, the dropout rate for girls was higher than for boys. Clearly, there was no equal opportunity in education, and as a result, there was little equalization of opportunity in work and employment for the poor and those living in rural areas, who made up the vast majority of Indians. 

 

•    The decline in educational standards was a major flaw that crept in. Despite the fact that the problem was recognized, the educational system was left untouched and unreformed, and education quality continued to deteriorate, first in schools, then in colleges and universities. The ideological content of education remained unchanged from the colonial period.

 

•    Nehru was aware of the country's poor educational progress and, near the end of his prime ministership, began to place a greater emphasis on its development, particularly primary education, which he now stressed should be developed at all costs. 

 

•    In 1952 and 1959, the Community Development Program and Panchayati Raj, respectively, were introduced as major programmer for rural uplift. In the villages, they were to lay the foundations for the welfare state. Despite being designed for agricultural development, they had a strong welfare component; their primary goal was to change the face of rural India and improve the people's quality of life. 

 

•    In 1952, the Community Development Program was launched on a small scale, covering 55 development blocs, each with about 100 villages and a population of 60,000 to 70,000 people. By the mid-1960s, most of the country had been covered by a network of community blocs, with over 6,000 Block Development Officers (BDOs) and over 600,000 Village Level Workers (VLWs or Gram Sewaks) assisting in the program's implementation. 

 

•    The programed aimed to improve all aspects of rural life, from agricultural methods to communications, health, and education.

 

•    The programed placed a strong emphasis on people's self-reliance and self-help, as well as popular participation and responsibility. It was supposed to be primarily a people's movement for their own good. The basic goal, as stated by Nehru at the outset of the programmer in 1952, was to "unleash forces from below among our people.

 

•    The programed yielded significant results in extension work, such as better seeds, fertilizers, and other materials, resulting in agricultural development in general and increased food production in particular, as well as the construction of roads, tanks, and walls, as well as the expansion of educational and health facilities. Initially, there was a lot of public enthusiasm, but it faded over time. 

 

•    It was clear early on that the programed had failed to achieve one of its main goals: involving people as full participants in developmental activities. Not only did it not encourage self-help, but it also raised government expectations and reliance. 

 

•    It gradually gained an official orientation, became a part of the bureaucratic framework, and was administered from above as a routine activity, with BDOs replicating traditional sub-divisional officers and Village Level Workers serving as administrative underlings. 

 

•    The program's flaws were exposed as early as 1957, when the Balwantrai Mehta Committee, tasked with evaluating it, harshly criticized its bureaucratization and lack of popular participation. The Committee proposed democratic decentralization of the rural and district development administration as a solution. 

 

•    On the Committee's recommendation, it was decided to implement an integral system of democratic self-government throughout the country, with the village panchayat at its core. The new system, known as Panchayat Raj, was to be made up of three tiers: directly elected village or gram panchayats, indirectly elected bloc-level panchayat samitis, and district-level zila Parishads. 

 

•    It was to be implemented in various states starting in 1959. The Panchayat Raj was to be integrated with the Community Development programed, with significant functions, resources, and authority devolved to the three-tiered samitis to carry out development schemes. Thus, the Panchayat Raj was created to compensate for a major shortcoming in the Community Development programed by allowing citizens to participate in the decision-making and implementation of development projects through officials working under the supervision of three-level samitis. 

 

•    Thousands of cooperative institutions, such as cooperative banks, land mortgage banks, and service and market cooperatives, dotted the countryside at the same time, all of which were independent of the bureaucracy because they were run by elected bodies.

 

•    Panchayati Raj and cooperative institutions reawakened Nehru's enthusiasm, as they represented yet another radical step toward societal change. They would hand over control of development and rural administration to the people, accelerating rural development. They would thus serve as instruments for people's empowerment, not only leading to greater self-reliance, but also as an educational tool for changing people's attitudes. 

 

•    Above all, they would begin the process of developing better people. These expectations, however, were dashed. Although the state governments adopted Panchayati Raj in some form or another, they showed little enthusiasm for it, devolving no real power to the Panchayati samitis, curtailing their powers and functions, and starving them of funds. 

 

•    The bureaucracy did not relinquish control of rural administration at various levels. Panchayats were also politicized and used by politicians in the villages to gather factional support. As a result, while the foundations for a system of rural local self-government were laid, democratic decentralization as a whole was stunted, and it was unable to fulfil the role entrusted to it by the Balwantrai Mehta Committee and Jawaharlal Nehru.

 

•    Furthermore, the benefits of community development, new agricultural inputs, and extension services were primarily enjoyed by wealthy peasants and capitalist farmers, who came to dominate Panchayati Raj institutions. The Community Development Program, the Panchayati Raj, and the cooperative movement all had one major flaw: they ignored the rural society's class division, which left nearly half of the population landless or with small holdings, and thus powerless. The capitalist farmers and the rich and middle peasantry dominated the village socially and economically, and neither the dominant rural classes nor the bureaucrats could become agents of social transformation or popular participation.