LEGACY OF BRITISH RULE IN POLITICS AND ADMINISTRATION - INDIANIZATION OF PUBLIC SERVICES, REVENUE ADMINISTRATION, DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION, LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENT.

LEGACY OF BRITISH RULE IN POLITICS AND ADMINISTRATION - INDIANIZATION OF PUBLIC SERVICES:

Though many of Indian administrative and political features evolved post 1947 but there still are certain features that we can see as a legacy of the British times continuing for the sake of its efficient practices and no other better alternative to the same till now.

Under the charter ( official paper) of the British crown the East India Company came to India with the sole objective of making profit through commercial exchanges. The established factories here and for their protection set up a small base of soldiers. They started looking for monopolising their profits in India as her market and resources were unmatched. This led to the initial tussle with Bengal Nawab and the event of Battle of Plassey paved the way for the same. The company officials convinced the company directors that if they interfered and got a say in local policy making in india then it would lead to a lot of profit and surplus.

Lord Cornwallis developed the Civil Services Code and so he is aptly known as the Father Of Modern Civil Services. He regularised and specified the office of the District Collector and estabilished the office of the District judge. This helped the company achieve a well organised personnel administration through which control over territories/provinces in India could become more comprehensive.

Lord Wellesley's rule period saw the emergence of the office of the Chief Secretary(1799). The doctrine of Subsidiary Alliance was an aggressive policy that resulted in the active interest of company officials in political and administrative affairs of local kingdoms governed by local Rajas. The early 1800s could be seen as an era where company officials focused all their strategies in gaining interference rights in political,commercial and military policies of local kingdoms for their profit.

.
.

The office of the Commissioner and sectional arrangement in the Secretariat saw the light of the day under Lord Bentick's rule. Under the Charter Act of 1833,the Governor General of Bengal was appointed as the Governor General of India and policy formulation was centralised for all territories under the company at the council of the Governor General Of India(Head of the British Administration In India). Also there was an estabilishment of communication between the Governor general's office which was the headquarter and its various field units and formal units of organisation. 1844 established 4 departments of Finance, Home, Foreign and Military as well as a little later on under Lord Dalhousie the setting up pf Post and Telegraph Services,Railways and Public Work Departments. The Doctrine Of lapse theory of Dalhousie very blatantly spelled out the objective of the company in India as to have absolute control over the policy process in Indian  States.

Thus all these establishments and policies helped the English to set up a strong base in India along with rights of revenue by means of strong organisational infrastructures and institutions,and interference in legislation and policy making even in the remotest of areas.

The Revolt of 1857 then shook up this system and that led to the end of the British East India Company's rule in India. The govt of India Act 1858 passed in the British parliament led to the company's dissolution and all powers transferred to the British Crown which then created an India Office in India and a Secretary Of State post was established with Indian governance and policy formulation matters. the Governor General was converted to Viceroy General of India(chief administrator of the British Crown in India) who implemented the policies devised by the India office which actually only had the role of passing on orders of the British Parliament. Military was reorganised and more higher caste officials were appointed at the higher levels and lower level occupied by lower caste as well as Europeans held the titular positions in the army. All this was done to avoid another mutiny so that communication is minimum considering the caste biasedness prevalent in India.

So,in short the British East India Company paved the way for the British government to enter. As soon as the Company outlived its utility,it was removed and the British govt. directly entered the Indian domain.

Impey devised a civil procedure code and Macaulay devised the Indian Penal Code,Contract Act and Indian Council Act.The enactment of the Criminal procedure Code by the British Parliament in the 1860's brought immense joy to the local rajas and people as they thought that now all the English officers would function under a code of conduct and there will be uniformity in treatment. There was also formulation of Arms act,Vernacular press act,Relationship codes,Transfer rights,etc. Thus, this era of late 1800's could be seen as one that was dedicated to establishing a legal environment for the smooth functioning of the British officials as they felt that no rules and regulations earlier led to the situation of disarray and sepoy mutiny/revolt.

.
.

There was also the demand of indianisation of the Civil services that was first totally occupied by Europeans and was causing a lot of discontent among Indians and Indian associations. Thus,for this purpose the Aitchison Commission recommended the induction of 25% Indians into the ICS,but this only remained on paper.The Islington Commission was appointed in 1912 and its repirt,submitted in 1915 recommended a scheme of 2 entry paths to the civil services. One was for insuring induction of natives of India through competitive exams and the other exam for superior ICS and Home services preliminary exam to be conducted in England was open to all. The Civil services was under the control of the Secretary Of State.

The Govt. Of India Act in 1919, created the All India Services replacing the imperial civil services format. This act also advocated the setting up of Public Service Commissions in India. The provincial civil services were under the control of the provincial governments.

Lee Commission and the Royal Commission on superior civil services specially recommended for the establishment of central services. Subordinate services were advocated for removal from the classification of civil services and transferred to the regional levels for conducting exams and filling up of positions only by Indians. So,basically it was a system to prevent Indians from entering the higher civil services as everybody could not afford to go to England for training and exam purpose and the lower levels were more approachable and attainable by the Indians.Also English as a compulsory language offered little scope of success for non-westernised Indians.On the recommendation of the Lee Commission,the first Public Service Commission was setup at Allahabad in 1925. The Lee Commission recommended a 40-40 percent of Europeans and Indians to fill up the superior ICS and the rest 20% to be filled up with promotions from the provincial Indian sub ordinate services. thus he advocated 60% Indians. This led to the Britishers losing interest in joining the services as they feared a monopoly of Indians and so the number of Indians in the services increased gradually.The Govt. Of India Act 1935 provided for the setting up of federal Public service commissions and also recommended for similar institutions at the state levels. This was the realisation of giving the All India Service an Indian flavour and towards the Indianisation of Civil Services.

Portfolio system was introduced in the Central Secretariat under Lord canning and arrangement of departments under Lord Mayo,Lord Lytton and Lord Ripon. Tenure arrangement was introduced under the Secretariat staffing scheme of Lord Curzon in 1905.

A special mention needs to be made here of the administrative systems/features passed on: Judicial administration system of the Mughal period still exists in Indian administration.

.
.

REVENUE ADMINISTRATION & DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION UNDER BRITISH RULE:

After the battle of Buxar ended with the treaty of Allahabad,the company obtained "Diwani" rights from Shah Alam II and was legally authorised to issue dastaks in the name of the King thus paving the way for the company officials to enter revenue assessments and collection duties.

This very event began the evolution of the system of district arrangement that we see today. The District Collector's office was established in 1772 and it played a leading role in stabilising the company's hold over the revenue at local levels. 1780 saw the establishment of a Revenue Board created as the apex advisory body for suggesting scheme of Land Revenue Settlement. This is where we see the shift of the company majorly from commercial activities to administrative control in india. The revenue Board's recommendations culminated into : Permanenet Settlement Act in Bengal,Orissa and areas of Assam, Ryotwari arrangement in Presidencies of Maharashtra and Bombay, Mahalwari system in areas under the control of North India.

.
.

LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT UNDER BRITISH RULE:

This term originated during British rule. Lord Ripon is called the father of local self government in India but was unable to push for major reforms. They lacked autonomy and gradually declined by way of establishment of local civil and criminal courts,revenue and police organisations,increased communication, and starting of the Ryotwari system where peasants paid directly and individually instead of collectively or under the zamindar.Panchayats maintained the local social order according to the socio-political norms prevailing.

The Montague Chelmsford reform in 1919 made it a transferred subject under the dyarchy that led to the establishment of a number of panchayats in all villages to have a proper and efficient local self government/administration as well as revenue collection for the British but was still under the total control of the District collector and red tapism and corruption plagued it and funds crunch was always there as a deliberate attempt by the British to stranglehold the provincial Indian governments from having control over them and so had to depend on the centre/British government for everything.

So, the local self government though had control over certain aspects but in the others it was just a pawn of the British government for their colonial benefits.

.
.