Essay on the Policy Implications Power the District Collector

Creation of institution of Collector as an agent of government is an example of outstanding innovates by the British. Although they did it with a selfish motive to collect land revenue from the far-flung village spread over the nook and corner in India, this office was, has been, is and will be a permanent feature of Indian Administration.

Only the significance of Collector’s position has eroded due to multifarious functions that he has been involved over time. It is the only contacting point both for the officer as well a general public for understanding the effect of public policy pursued by the government of the day. That said, collector’s position has become more cumbersome due to government’s involvement in several different kinds of welfare activities for which he functions as a conduit.

In the post-73rd Amendment phase, the democratic organisations at the lower echelon have armed with constitutional buttress; and thereby promoting reorientation planning process in a decentralised setup.

The point is whether the collector should be allowed to administer welfare administration. But these functions are not very much different from the other functions he performs as the coordinator par excellence.

In fact, welfare and development are inextricably interwoven maintenance or regulatory administration. For instance, ‘land reforms’ as a subject has been entrusted to the PRIs but anything dealing with this subject has a nexus with regulatory administration also. Thus, this position cannot be seen in total isolation with other aspects of district administration.

For the implementation of externally aided infrastructure development programmes, especially land development and modernisation of irrigation and drainage systems, his presence would ensure better progress.

However, states like Gujarat, Maharashtra, and Kerala have kept him out of the purview of PR theatre. But in states like West Bengal, he has been made the Chief Executive Officer of the 21a Parishad.

The moot question is, when PR was introduced throughout the country in 1994, why the policy makers at the highest level have not spared a thought with regard to the role of Collector under the new dispensation. This could have made matter clearer with regard to his involvement in PRIs.

It has been noticed that his position has undergone a sea change during the past four decades as a consequence of the introduction of planning process. When there is a consensus to recognize his supremacy in the district administration for its smooth sailing, aberrations here and there did not stand the test of time as they could not.

One glaring example has been the introduction of the office of the Chief Secretary of the Zila Panchayat in Karnataka during 1986-92 which was dispensed with, when it was found inconvenient to the powers that be.

The interesting point to be noted here is when the same political party (Janata) came back to power, it did not reintroduce the position of chief secretary, for which if claimed credit for the ushering in of district governance for the first time in the country. On this, one can say that either the political leaders do not have a broader vision or the officialdom do not want to legislate themselves out of power.

Another reason for the aforementioned development could be the gradual process in the form of assertion of people’s will. But in the post-Independence period, as in the past, the approach adopted was paternalistic in nature.

The position of the District Magistrate could only be restored in case of its reinforcement of democratic ethos, which paved the way for responsiveness. Another feature which reinforced this kind of thinking was the need felt for planning from below, in which the institutions at the grassroots have an important place.

Thus, it was realised that PRIs would help facilitate the smooth process of district administration, of course under Collector’s leadership, or of any official, who may be designated as the Deputy Commissioner of the rank and seniority of the District Collector and in no way subordinate to him.

Over the years, development administration has acquired deep roots, as opposed to the traditional administration. As this was happening all along, even the role of Collector and the District Magistrate had also undergone a metamorphosis.

Although strong arguments were advanced for delinking him from development, his eminent position was never in doubt.

A possible solution could be to have a strong separate development wing at the district level and the Collector could still be a part of it, if only to implement the policies of the government of the day rather than assuming an arbitrary role. S.S. Khera, had thoughtfully remarked; ‘Administrative leadership is more necessary in the new field of economic development than in the more routine, traditional, of vital tasks of law and order and collection-of the revenues.’ Thus the changing contours of district administration under the leadership of the collector, has assumed greater significance in recent times. A realistic view on his role in the PR theatre is the need of the hour.