Revision summary
Irregular polls, missing 3Fs, capture, and parallel schemes restricted panchayat success. The 73rd Amendment added Part IX, SECs, SFCs, reservations, and the Gram Sabha. Elections and women’s/SC/ST entry are the clear successes. Funds and functionaries remain State-held; Article 243-G is permissive. Parallel CSS and collector raj still bypass the Gram Sabha. The Amendment is a partial counter: strong on institutions, weak on devolution.
Model answer
Introduction
Panchayati Raj was meant to be democracy at the village door. Success has been restricted by irregular elections, thin funds, borrowed functionaries, and social capture. The Seventy-Third Amendment (1992) constitutionalised the third tier; how far it countered those problems is a score of partial, not complete, success.
Body
Problems that restricted success
- Irregular or suspended elections before 1993 made many panchayats paper bodies under collectors.
- The three Fs—functions, functionaries, and funds—stayed with line departments; panchayats planned on posters and implemented little.
- Elite and caste capture, proxy women pradhans, and sarpanch-pati culture emptied representation.
- Parallel bodies, MP/MLA local area funds, and Centrally Sponsored Schemes bypassed the Gram Sabha.
- Weak Gram Sabha quorums, poor accounts, and no independent cadre left the system administratively anaemic.
- State laws varied wildly; some States created tiers without devolution, which Ashok Mehta and G.V.K. Rao had already warned against.
What the Seventy-Third Amendment did
- Part IX, Articles 243 to 243-O, and the Eleventh Schedule (29 subjects) gave panchayats a constitutional house, not a State gift that could be dissolved at will.
- A five-year term, a State Election Commission, and a State Finance Commission attacked irregular polls and empty treasuries on paper.
- Reservations for SC, ST, and not less than one-third women (many States later 50 per cent) attacked social exclusion.
- Gram Sabha as a constitutional forum, district planning committees under Article 243-ZD, and bar on courts in electoral matters tried to lock the process.
How far it has succeeded
- Success is high on elections: SECs have made polls a habit in most States, including Uttar Pradesh, which is a real counter to pre-1993 freeze.
- Success is high on inclusion numbers: millions of elected women and SC/ST members entered offices that had been closed.
- Success is only medium on funds: SFCs sit, but their awards are often delayed or ignored; own tax base remains tiny.
- Success is low-to-medium on functions and functionaries: activity mapping is incomplete; teachers, ANMs, and engineers still look up to State bosses.
- Parallel schemes and district collector-centric delivery still restrict the Gram Sabha’s success.
- Article 243-G uses “may” for devolution, so the Amendment created a floor of institutions, not a uniform transfer of power.
Balance
- The Amendment countered the legality and election problems more than the 3F and capture problems.
- Remaining success depends on State political will, activity maps, and SFC compliance, not on another line in Part IX.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD P[Pre-1993 freeze capture thin 3Fs] --> X[Restricted success] A[73rd Part IX SEC SFC reservation] --> Y[Elections and inclusion] R[May in 243G parallel schemes] --> X Y --> Z[Partial counter] X[X] --> Z[Z]
Conclusion
Panchayati Raj failed earlier mainly for missing elections, missing 3Fs, and social capture. The Seventy-Third Amendment has largely countered the election and representation deficits and only partly the funds-functionaries deficit. It is a constitutional success with an administrative remainder.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Examine the role of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) in India as the custodian of public money.
Next question in the 2021 paper (Q17). View answer →
-
Did the 73rd Amendment transfer the 29 subjects automatically?
No. The Eleventh Schedule is a list of possible subjects. Actual transfer needs State law and activity mapping.
-
Are scheduled areas under the same Part IX?
The Amendment allowed exceptions; PESA, 1996, extends panchayat provisions to scheduled areas with Gram Sabha primacy.
Same topic · past papers
UPPSC has asked this before
These previous-year questions sit on the same topic. Open one to practise the earlier ask.
-
2022 · Q18 · UPGS2 · 12 marks
Write a critical note on problems and reforms of administrative system in Uttar Pradesh.
More from this paper
Q1 · UPSC Mains 2021 · UPGS2 · 8 marks · Solution
Discuss the role of Non-Government Organizations in the process of policy formulation.
Government policies for development
NGOs bring neglected social and environmental facts into the policy agenda. They feed research, model drafts, and working-group notes into design. Last-mile delivery and social audits return implementation failure to ministries. Litigation can force the state to rewrite guidelines. They cannot legislate; FCRA and capture remain limits on their role.
Q2 · UPSC Mains 2021 · UPGS2 · 8 marks · Solution
‘Citizen charter in India could not become effective. There is a need to make it effective and meaningful’ – Evaluate.
Indian Constitution
A citizen charter publishes service standards, timelines, and grievance routes. Most Indian charters stayed ineffective because they lacked staff, publicity, and penalty. Overlap with RTI and guarantee Acts reduced the charter to a poster. Statutory time limits, Sevottam-type quality, and compensation can make it meaningful. The evaluation agrees that reform must add sanction, not only a new document.
Q3 · UPSC Mains 2021 · UPGS2 · 8 marks · Solution
How are the issues related to hunger and poverty in India impinging upon electoral politics?
Policies of other countries
Parties treat food, work, and pensions as core manifesto goods for poor voters. Food and fuel inflation turns hunger into an anti-incumbency charge. Poverty geography influences tickets and caste–class coalitions. Ration and job delivery is sold as proof of a caring government. Identity and leadership still share the verdict; hunger is a major, not sole, driver.