EVOLUTION OF INDIAN ADMINISTRATION: KAUTILYA’S ARTHASHASTRA; MUGHAL ADMINISTRATION.

EVOLUTION OF INDIAN ADMINISTRATION:

          Indian 'Administration' traces its earliest known form to the tribal system which later emerges as a monarchical system. We gain a lot of knowledge about ancient Indian Administration from ancient religious and political treatises. In the early Vedic period there were many tribes who elected their own chiefs and he handled all their responsibilities and the administration of the tribes and the Sabha( Assembly of elders) and Samiti(Assembly of people) were the tribal assemblies. The chief protected the tribe but had no revenue system or hold over land thus wars were resorted to and the booty shared among the tribes.

          The first form of the 'State' in India can be traced back to the times of Manu(original name Satyavrata) the first King and progenitor of mankind according to Hinduism.People were fed up with anarchy as there was no neutral judge/arbitrator in between to solve issues of society, and so they appointed Manu as King and paid service fees as taxes for looking after them and ensuring mutual benefit and justice to everyone in society owing to his wisdom and philosophical attitude & the King was divine and regarded as descended from God.

          As per the Ramayana and Mahabharata/Later Vedic times it goes to portray the role of the King as the whole and sole of administration being helped by his principal officers who were the Purohit and Senani where the Purohit( Priest) wielded much more authority than the kshatriya(Warrior clan) kings. Other figures of administration were Treasurer,Steward,Spies and Messengers,Charioteer,Superintendent of Dices. This is also mentioned in the Manu Smriti and Sukra Niti.

          No legal institutions were there and the custom of the country prevailed as the law and capital punishment was not practiced but trials took place where justice was delivered by the King in consultancy with the Priest and Elders at times. By the time Kautilya wrote the ArthaShastra the Indian Administrative system was well developed and the treatise of Kautilya gives a very first detailed account of the same. We will discuss that below.

.
.

KAUTILYA'S ARTHASHASTRA:

The Mauryan period was the era of major development in Indian Administration. Decentralisation was prevalent as the village units played a very important role as the base of administration since ancient times.Empires were divided into provinces,provinces into districts,districts into rural and urban centres for efficient administration.

          Kautilya's ArthaShastra is a work on Varta ( Science Of Economics) & Dandaniti(statecraft/Management Of State Administration) existing in the Mauryan rule. It was written sometime between 321 and 300 BC. It was retrieved in 1904 AD and published in 1909 AD by R. Shamasastry. It touches upon topics like functions of the chief executive, hierarchy, bureaucracy, corruption,local administration, supervisory management, motivation, morale and job description.

          The most noticeable aspect of the Arthashastra is its emphasis on Public  Welfare even in an autocratic agrarian State. That is where its timelessness lies.

          It is composed in the form of brief statements called Sutras and is compiled in 15 books(Adhikarnas), 150 sections, 180 chapters (prakarnas), 6000 verses (sutras).

The 15 books could be classified under:

i) Concerning the discipline of economics and statecraft.
ii) Duties of government Superintendent.
iii) Concerning the Law
iv) Removal of thorns
v) Conduct of courtiers.
vi) Sources of sovereign State.
vii) End of six fold policy
viii) Concerning vices of the king and calamities that may arise as a consequence
ix) Work of an invader
x) Relating to a war.
xi) Conduct of a corporation
xii) Concerning a powerful enemy.
xiii) Strategic way of capturing a fort
xiv) Secret means like occult practices and remedies to keep of enemies or traitors.
xv) Plan of the treatise and thirty two methods of treating a subject.

          Kautilya viewed the State as an institutional necessity for human advancement. According to him the State comprises of eight elements - King,Minister,Country,fort,treasury,army,friend and enemy. And State's prime function was to maintain law and order,punishing wrong doers and protecting subjects.

          The empire was divided in to a Home Province(capital territory/administrative unit) under direct control of the central government and four to five outlying provinces(States),each under a viceroy responsible to the central government. The provinces possessed a good amount of autonomy in this feudal-federal type of organisation.Provinces were further divided into districts,districts into rural and urban centres with a whole lot of officials in charge at various levels.Departments to carry out execution of policy were created in all of these divisions with specialists dominating in the Mauryan era. Elites were preferred in job recruitment and the procedure for appointing is the same as it is practiced today. A centralised data bank of all government transactions and records were maintained in an organisation of the centre just like the cabinet secretariat and this performed audit and inspection functions of the three tiers of govt that is local,state and central.

          This set up is very much similar to our present times where Union Territories and National Capital Territory are administrative units under Central rule where representative of the centre in the form of administrators/Lieutenant Governor appointed by the President rule the affairs under the direct supervision of the President & Central government.The states are under a governor(viceroy in olden times) appointed by and reporting to the President(King in olden times). The President is advised by his minister(s) and the sovereign power lies in the country's people. Also, the federal setup of powers given to states under the state list,and the district administration organisation and hierarchy. Audit mechanisms were in place and civil servants were recruited to perform the duties of policy implementation.

The King was head and his functions were military,judicial,legislative and executive,similar to modern state's functions of the President. And he was to be well equipped in all areas of study especially economics,philosophy,statecraft and the three Vedas. kautilya stated that whatever pleases the king only is to be avoided and only that which pleases the people is what needs to be followed.

Kautilya stated that the king was like the Father and all the people/subjects of the country/empire were his children. That is how he is supposed to take care of them. This is conceptualised as Welfare State in Modern times.

Corruption was not tolerated at all and dealt with severely where the ill-earned money was confiscated. Kautilya had his own criteria for selection of officers for the same. Once basic qualifications were met he tested them on their attitude to piety,lucre/revenue,lust,fear. Those who completed this criteria of piety were appointed as judges/magistrates,and those who crossed the test of revenue became revenue collectors, and those pass the test of lust are appointed to the king's harem, The candidates passing the test of fear are appointed as king's bodyguards and personal staff. And those who pass all the tests are appointed as councillors.

There were two courts according to the Arthashastra called the Dharmasthya ( civil cases court) where the matters are disposed off on basis of dharma,procedural law,conventions,royal decree ; and Kantakashodhana ( criminal cases court) where accused is convicted on basis of testimony and eye witness of spies,etc. Similar to today's times where there are separate courts having the subject matter jurisdiction of civil or criminal issues.

Agriculture was the mainstay and taxes on the goods produced as well as its imports and exports were the source of revenue and the expenditure focused on public administration,national defense,army,salaries of govt. officials. Agriculture plays an important role even today in our country.

Therefore,as one can see Kautilya's arthashastra deals with a proper strategy and system of centralised autocracy with a welfare objective in mind before performing any function by the king and his ministers.

WEAKNESSES OF THE KAUTILYAN STATE:

i) Over charged with supervision - too much of checks and balances.
ii) Prominence on individuals instead of institutions.
iii) Fundamental mistrust of officials.

The Guptas carried forward the Mauryan legacy of administration in many respects.

.
.

LINKS BETWEEN KAUTILYAN ADMINISTRATION AND MODERN PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION:

1) Personnel Administration: A system of recruitment was there and job description as well. Salaries were clearly spelled out of ministers and government officials. It also stated a view of job permanency and increment in salary/position(promotion) if the official concerned provided extraordinary service. Personnel were to be transferred from time to time as per Kautilya because it would avoid corruption and misappropriation of government funds.
Removal and tenure of officials and ministers were at the pleasure of the King just like the Governor and Attorney General,etc. hold office at a term that specifies ' pleasure of the President'.

2) Public Administration: The King is the sole source of authority and appoints and dismisses personnel and divides the work of govt. into different ministries under several ministers and officials.  Kautilya stresses on the need for specialist and generalist personnel at different levels of administration with full accountability to the King,thus talks about division of labour and coordination between them for efficient administration. As discussed above there was a clear system of recruitment,pay,and terms and conditions of service very much resembling the modern State.

Modern state is more concerned about development whereas the Kautilyan model talks about collecting revenue and employing activities to help in expediting and ensuring revenue,so it talks mainly of control instead of development.

It talks about local self government  that very much resembles a precursor to the Modern State local self government model.

Kautilya's Arthashastra is more about political science that is how to conduct State affairs rather than focusing on the philosophy that underlies it. He is very practical in his approach with a strict focus on amorality(no moral principles or religious diktat) so that the King's rule & administration are neutral without offending anyone, and also on rationality and an organised as well as efficient way of running a system with a greta deal of focus on accoutability and honesty and vigilance.

.
.

MUGHAL ADMINISTRATION:

 The Mughal administration was the most organised and long lasting and has even carried on to to the modern times. The reason for this stability was the long lasting more than 3 centuries rule of the Mughal sultanat. Akbar was the architect of this system since his grandfather and father Babur and Humayun respectively had their hands full with battles and socio-economic uncertainties leaving little time for administrative activities.

A very detailed,reliable and brilliant account of Akbar's empire,society and administration is given in the famous detailed document/text by Abul Fazl titled Ain-i-Akbari(Constitution Of Akbar).

The Mughal administration did carry forward a lot of the earlier traditions in political and administrative matters already existing in India as mentioned above but they upheld greater centralisation and a rigid structure without paying much interest to social services of health and welfare as also morals as compared to the Mauryan rulers. Their's was an islamic state and right from the principles of government,church policy,taxation rules,departmental arrangements to the titles of officials all was imported wholesale from the Perso-Arab crescent of khalifs of Iran and Egypt. However, even though the recruitment was mainly based on caste and kin they also did recognise merit and talent and did open up the civil services for Hindu people. It's source of revenue was taxation on land and agriculture and was highly urbanised. In the lower levels like of politics,village and lower levels of officials the Indian usage and customary practices were allowed whereas at the court/darbar and in higher official circles the foreign imported model of policy prevailed.

The sovereign was the king who was paternalistic and he had supreme authority over everything. He did have a number of ministers to help,advise and assist him in the discharge of his functions,out of which the more important were four - the Diwan who was in charge of revenue and finance,the Mir Bakshi at the head of the military department,the Mir Saman in charge of factories and stores, and the Sadr-us-Sudur who was the head of the ecclesiastical and judicial department.

Administration was based on coercion in the name of the King by the officials. The main functions of the officials were to maintain law and order,safeguard the King's interests from internal uprising and revolts,defend and extend boundaries of the empire and collect revenue and taxes.

Every officer of State held a mansab ( official appointment of rank and profit and expected to supply certain number of troops for State military service),thus the bureaucracy was essentially monetary in character.  The officials ranged from Commanders of 10 to 10000 and were classified into 33 grades. Each grade carried a certain rate of pay,from which its holder was to provide a quota of horses,elephants,etc and the State service was neither hereditary nor was it specialised. Grading system is practiced even today in recruitment matters.

The pay was received in form of either cash or jagir for a temporary period from which he could collect revenue equivalent to his salary. Thus,the jagirs though having no hold over the land extracted revenue at their whims and fancies from the land.

The Army of the Mughal empire must be understood in terms of the Mansabdari system. And apart from that there were the knights who were called the gentleman troopers and owed exclusive allegiance to the King. The cavalry was the most important unit,the infantry was made up of townsmen and peasants and the artillery with guns and the Navy.
The corruption within the army where the soldiers payed more allegiance to the immediate boss rather than the king proved to be its undoing and thus could be easily overpowered by the Marathas during the time of Jahangir.

The Policing system of the Mughals was entrusted to village headman's and subordinates in villages and to Kotwals in cities and towns. And at the district level the faujdars took over. It was a precursor to modern policing system of India.

The administration at the Centre was personal and paternal and operated with a fair degree of efficiency as long as the King kept an eye and controlled effectively. The two highest officials were the Vakil and the Wazir of which the former was higher in position and functioned as the regent of the State and maintained over all charge of the same.
The Wazir was the head of the revenue department and was known as Wazir when he acted as a Prime Minister.

Chief Diwan supervised revenue collection and expenditure and was the head of the Government's administrative wing supervising work of all high officials. All provincial diwans and their subordinates reported to him and he signed and authorised all government transactions. A Musatufi audited the income and expenditure of the government and the Waqia Navis kept a record of all important farmers.

The Khan-i-Saman was the high steward of the royal expenditure and the Mir-i-Bakshi who was the paymaster General of the empire.

The Provincial or State Administration was also known as Subahs(for states/provinces) and was headed by the Subedar or the Governor. He was appointed by the King and was given a office insignia and instrument of instructions which defined the powers,functions and responsibilities. As executive head he was in charge of provincial administrative staff and ensured law and order there. He also handled local civil intelligence agencies and controlled the local zamindars and contained their political influence.

Provincial Diwan was appointed by the central diwan and was next in the line of importance after the Provincial governor. He appointed kiroris and tehsildars to extract revenue from the ryots in time. He also exercised audit functions and had full control over public expenditure. He was assisted in office by the Office Superintendent,head accountant,treasurer and clerk.

The provincial Bakshi performed the same function as the central bakshi.
The Sadr and Qazi were two officers at provincial level who were sometimes united in the same person but the Sadr was basically a civil judge but did not handle all civil cases and the Qazi was concerned with civil suits in general and also with criminal cases.

.
.

DISTRICT AND LOCAL ADMINISTRATION UNDER MUGHAL RULE:

The Subah/Province was further divided into Sarkars which were of two types. One was ruled by officers appointed by the emperor and those under the tributary rajas. Each Sarkar was headed by Faujdar,he was the executive head who had policing and military functions and could surpass the provincial rulers to speak directly to the imperial government.

The Amalguzar was in charge of the revenue and the other head of the Sarkar. The Kotwal did the policing. The qazi performed the judicial duties. The Sarkars were further divided into parganas and the parganas further divided into Chaklas headed by officials called Chakladars. Qanungos kept the revenue records and the Bitikchi was the accountant and Potdar was the title of the treasurer.This was the hierarchy for a sound and efficient administration.

Akbar kept the land revenue at 1/3 and Todar Mal brought in reforms as in a standard system of land revenue collection that included survey and measurement of land,classification of land based on its fertility and fixing the rates.

Justice was administered based on the Quranic Law as the Mughal state was a Muslim State. Fatwas were issued when required and ordinances by the emperor. The principles of equity were followed and the Emperor's interpretations only was allowed till the point it did not run contrary to the sacred laws.

.
.