5] Grassroot Democracy

1. Panchayat Raj in Brief

Panchayats are local self-government, established under the 73rd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1992. These bodies function at three levels: village, intermediate, and district. The Village Panchayat, or Gram Panchayat, operates at the village level and is led by a Sarpanch, elected by the villagers. The Intermediate Panchayat, or Panchayat Samiti, governs a block or group of villages, coordinating the activities of various Village Panchayats. At the top is the District Panchayat, or Zilla Parishad, which oversees the Intermediate Panchayats and manages development activities for the entire district.

The importance of Panchayats in Indian politics is multifaceted. Firstly, they represent decentralization, bringing governance closer to the people and ensuring that local needs and issues are addressed promptly. This decentralization of power helps in tailoring solutions specific to local contexts, and also increased public participation in political processes.

According to Indian constitution, Panchayats have been assigned the function of

Preparation of plans for social and economic development at the village level.
Implementation of these plans.
Implementation of the rural development schemes formulated by Union and State governments.

While the 73rd amendment act describes panchayats as institutions of self-government, in reality they are seen only as ‘developmental agencies’ and not as full-fledged government. The government’s role should include both – development as well as the maintenance of law and order, while panchayats are only concerned about developmental works.

Studies show that decentralized planning in India remains nonstarter, and panchayats lack capacity to formulate plans. Hence, they continue to remain as mere implementing agencies. Further panchayats are not the sole implementing agencies at the grassroot level and their role is circumscribed by non-governmental organizations and voluntary sector. There are number of schemes where NGOs are given direct funds and are implementing agencies. All of this undermines the role of panchayats as a third tier of Indian democracy.

1.1 Vision Behind Panchayats

Since India lives in villages, villages have been the worst affected because of colonial policies. India inherited mass rural poverty. Hence Gandhi proposed panchayats as an institution for the revival of Indian villages and to address rural poverty.

Gandhi was an ardent supporter of establishing strong panchayats as institutions of local governance. He had two prominent ideas to handle poverty and to give the life of dignity to the masses living in the villages.

The first was – land reforms. According to him, ‘land to the tiller’ was the only way to handle poverty or hunger.
The second idea of Gandhi was that panchayati raj would give the people of the villages control over the local resources. This would translate to equitable and sustainable development.
Additionally, local government also help people to solve their problems quickly and at minimum cost.

2. Strategies of Rural Development After Independence

Gandhian approach was rejected as traditional and utopian, based on the ‘nostalgic view’ of Indian villages. Ambedkar, chairman of the drafting committee of constitution, had a strong bias against villages. He was critical of Panchayati Raj. He considered villages as ‘den of ignorance’, where caste system is most entrenched. Similarly, Pandit Nehru, a modernist coming from urban background had limited faith in the ability of masses. He preferred bureaucracy led developmental model rather than people led model.

2.1 Community Development Program

This approach of ‘modernist’ Indian leaders led to the conception of Community Development Program as means of rural development. It was the largest such program ever in human history. The approach was, bureaucracy led development i.e. development administration. According to Pt. Nehru, ‘bureaucracy is the most modernized section of the society it will play the role of vanguard (friend, philosopher and guide) in India’s social revolution.’

Under this program, whole country was divided into developmental blocks. Group of villages were placed into blocks, and a block was headed by Block Development Officer (BDO). BDO was assisted by village level workers in his task. His task was to:

To inform the villagers about governments plans, programs,
Provide them with all sort of support,
Distribute seeds, agricultural implements etc., and,
To motivate them to be a contributor in first Five Year Plan.

In reality, Community Development Program was total failure. The only achievement can be said to be the development of administrative infrastructure.

Reasons for Failure of Community Development Program

At the time of independence, bureaucracy was trained only in maintaining law and order. Bureaucrats had no exposure in the developmental role.
Since colonial times, corruption had become the culture of bureaucracy. It continued post-independence as well.
Indian bureaucracy had the colonial mindset. It had been the ‘steel frame’ of the British Raj, class of organic intellectuals, hence they were not suitable for the task.

Balwant Rai Mehta Committee Observations

Recognizing the failure of Community Development Program, Planning Commission appointed Balwant Rai Mehta Committee in 1957 to review the Community Development Program. The committee made the following observations:

The village Panchayat should be constituted with directly elected representatives, whereas the Panchayat Samiti and Zilla Parishad should be constituted with indirectly elected members.
All planning and developmental activities should be entrusted to these bodies.
The Panchayat Samiti should be the executive body while the Zilla Parishad should be the advisory, coordinating and supervisory body.
The District Collector should be the Chairman of the Zilla Parishad.
There should be a genuine transfer of power and responsibility to these democratic bodies.
Sufficient resources should be transferred to these bodies to enable them to discharge their functions and fulfil their responsibilities.
A system should be evolved to effect further devolution of authority in future.
Irrespective of political parties, Elections has to be constituted for every 5 years in a genuine way.

These recommendations were accepted by the National Development Council in January 1958.

2.2 Evolution of Panchayati Raj in India

It is to be noted that the local government is a subject of state list. Thus, the evolution of Panchayati Raj in India witnesses different progress in different parts of country.

The earliest phase of Community Development was followed by constitution of Panchayats at village level in different states. On occasion of Gandhi Jayanti, on 2nd October 1959, Pandit Nehru inaugurated Panchayati Raj at Nagore district in Rajasthan. After this, almost all the states introduced Panchayats. This was a phase of enthusiasm and a new hope for local self-government.

Unfortunately, after initial enthusiasm, we witness stagnation in progress of Panchayati Raj institutions. Once panchayats were constituted, there were no regular elections. If Panchayat was dissolved, it remained dissolved.

With exceptions of states like Kerala, West Bengal and Karnataka, there was lack of devolution of funds, functions and functionaries. In states like Maharashtra Panchayats did survive but were controlled by the dominant castes.

Reason for Stagnation

There has been centralizing trend in Indian polity because of wars with neighbors, secessionist movements.

Central govt. failed to devolve powers to the state governments. States in India came to be known as glorified Municipalities. Hence, we could not expect Panchayats to have any meaningful existence.

Although the local governance is a subject of state list, the success of Panchayats needs the will of union govt. Until and unless central government do devolve powers to the states, state governments will have least motivation to further devolve powers to panchayats.

Ashok Mehta Committee 1977

In December 1977, the Janata Government appointed a committee to review the working of Panchayati Raj institutions under the chairmanship of Ashoka Mehta. The committee did exhaustive work on Panchayati Raj experiments in India and gave a voluminous report for reform and made 132 recommendations to revive and strengthen the declining Panchayati Raj system in the country.

Unfortunately, the report of this committee has not been tabled in the parliament till date. Ashok Mehta committee highlighted the ‘conspiracy against Panchayats’. It mentioned that Panchayats have not failed, they are made to fail.

The main recommendations of the committee were:

The 3-tier system of Panchayati Raj should be replaced by the 2-tier system.
A district should be the first point for decentralization under popular supervision below the state level.
There should be an official participation of political parties at all levels of Panchayat elections.
The Panchayat Raj institutions should have compulsory powers of taxation to mobilize their own financial resources.
There should be a regular social audit by a district level agency and by a committee of legislators to check whether the funds allotted for the vulnerable social and economic groups are actually spent on them.
Seats for SCs and Sts should be reserved on the basis of their population.1/3rd seats should be reserved for women.

Apart from above recommendations, the committee also made following observations:

Leadership at the state level are the main culprits behind weak panchayati Raj. As mentioned earlier, states themselves are ‘glorified municipalities.’ If strong Panchayats will come into existence, state government will lose relevance. State leadership was fearful that Panchayats will give rise to a new grassroot leadership, they will challenge the hegemony of the existing elites.
Bureaucracy: Different studies starting from Balwant Rai Mehta committee show bureaucracy as the main conspirator. The bureaucracy fears the shift of power and resources from their hands to the people. The biggest reason for failure of Panchayati Raj is the lack of cooperation from bureaucracy towards Panchayati Raj representatives.

Recognizing the ground realities, government of Kerala has introduced ‘model code of conduct’ for both – civil servants and the representatives to be followed towards each other. Unfortunately, 73rd AA ignored the need for such reform which will play the most critical role in the success.

3. 73^rd Amendment Act

With the failure of Community Development Programs and the decentralized efforts to establish panchayati raj, a need was felt to carry out comprehensive, all India reforms of the system of local governance. Consequently, Rajiv Gandhi government brought the revolutionary bills to introduce strong Panchayats and Municipalities.

However, these bills could not be passed in Rajya Sabha as states felt that the strong Panchayats will result into bypassing the state governments in India. The bills proposed by Rajiv Gandhi govt. were introduced on the recommendations of LM Singhvi Committee. Committee recommended to give constitutional status.

Finally in 1991, officially India adopted the new economic policy and in 1992, 73rd AA was passed. It is to be noted that political reforms and economic reforms have to go parallelly. Unfortunately, we have moved much ahead in economic reforms but political reforms have not been done at all. Hence, we have failed to move ahead with even economic reforms in a smooth manner.

3.1 Provisions of 73rd Amendment Act

The 73^rd Amendment i.e. Panchayati Raj Act contains 2 types of provisions. First are compulsory provisions, which are primarily institutional and creates the structure of panchayati institutions. The second type, i.e., voluntary provisions, deals with subjects where states have discretion in policy making as well as freedom for implementation. This has been done, keeping in mind that local governance is a subject in state list.

Mandatory Constitution of Panchayats in all States

The amendment makes it mandatory to constitute Panchayat in all the states of India. It provides for a three-tier model with an exception granted to the states with less than 20 Lack population.

Since all states have to have similar structure, it becomes convenient for policy making institutions like finance commission to determine what schemes and what amount of funds to be devolved at what level.

On the flip side, the act does not specify which level of panchayat will perform what functions. Since local governance is a subject of state list, states have been given wide space to decide on nitty-gritties. Thus, different states adopted different pattern, essentially defeating the purpose of uniformity. In light of this, Punchhi commission and 2nd ARC suggested ‘activity mapping’ following ‘subsidiarity’ principle.

[Subsidiarity principle: it is considered as the fundamental principle of good governance. According to the principle, what can be done at local level should not be done at state level, what can be done at state level should not be done at central level. Unfortunately, the subsidiarity principle has been ignored in Indian context.]

Gramsabha

The 73^rd AA introduces gramsabha as integral part of panchayati raj. Gramsabha is a heart and soul of the experiment, and it is mandatory to constitute gramsabha for each Panchayat.

However, the amendment does not talk about the powers of Gramsabha. In some states like Madhya Pradesh, gramsabha has lot of powers but in many other states, it lacks substantial powers. According to observations of Manishankar Ayyar Committee,

On an average only one meeting of gramsabha takes place in a year.
There are also instances of bogus meetings.
Gramsabha is supposed to do social auditing. However, either people do not have capacity or the persons employed by the contractors are present in gramsabha.

It has been suggested that Like PESA Act (Panchayats Extension in Scheduled Areas), 73rd AA should also clearly mark the functions and powers of Gramsabha. Additionally, measures like compulsory video recording of gramsabha can also be implemented to increase accountability.

Elections

Prior to 73^rd amendment, lack of regular elections was the major reason for the stagnation in the Panchayati Raj. If Panchayats were dissolved, they were kept in that state indefinitely. There was a lack of regular elections.

Taking account of this, 73rd amendment creates

State Election Commission
Mandates regular panchayat elections

Unfortunately, State Election Commission is not as autonomous as election commission at central level. There is always a question mark on fairness of elections. Whether it is UP or West Bengal. It is suggested to bring State Election Commission under Election Commission to make it more autonomous body.

The act also does not specify the reasons for dissolution of panchayats. This results in lot of arbitrariness and interference from state executives.

Finances

The lack of adequate finances has been the factor behind the failure of earlier experiments; however, this continues to be the case.

The amendment aims to give certainty to the panchayats in terms of finances by

Giving additional responsibility to the finance commission to make recommendations to the union for devolution of funds.
It creates state finance commission to make recommendations to the state governments.

However, as the observation by 14th Finance Commission suggest,

Unfortunately, state govts. do not implement the recommendations.
Even the reports of the State Finance Commissions (SFCs) are not tabled in the legislatures.
There is lack of autonomy to SFC
There is also lack sufficient expertise to SFC

It is recommended to streamline the terms of SFCs and Finance Commission for better assessment and disbursements. As pointed out by Manishankar Ayyar committee, there is a huge corruption at the ground level.

Like Kerala, there is a need to establish Panchayat ombudsman. People can register complains of misappropriation of funds by the panchayati raj officials.

Though the act mentions about auditing requirements, yet it does not talk about the specific institution. Most of the states have given auditing to CAG. CAG has instituted ‘social auditing’. However, social auditing in India continues to remain weak

There is lack of capacity among the people. (financial literacy).
Lack of cooperation from bureaucracy.
The weak implementation of RTI.

Planning

Decentralized planning is the heart and soul of new amendment. Panchayats are the institutions to prepare the plans for social and economic development at the village level. 74th AA provides for District Planning Committees. The idea is to have integrated district level plan.

As observed by the Manishankar Ayyar Committee, decentralized planning remains the weakest feature in implementation of 73^rd amendment. Decentralized planning in India remains nonstarter. Initially states were reluctant even to create the mechanism for it. Furthermore, planning is an expert job, which requires training and capacity building. Bureaucracy is also not interested in empowerment of masses. Thus, no steps have been taken so far.

Reservation

The act provides for reservation at all the three levels, including for the post of chair persons. The reservation provided is meant for the members of SC, ST community and women.

However, it is to be noted that mere reservations do not ensure representation or participation. Studies from Tamil Nadu show that the members of upper caste have not even allowed Dalit chairperson to attend the panchayat meetings.

Empowerment of the vulnerable sections is of course a necessity but it is a long-term measure, in immediate context

We can make it mandatory that no resolution will be passed without the presence of the members of Dalit community and women representatives.
Video recording of the meetings should be made necessary.

Bureaucracy

It is unfortunate that the act does not make any provision related to bureaucracy. The lack of cooperation by bureaucracy as a reason for failure remains ‘well-documented fact’. However, the act neither creates a separate cadre for Panchayats nor impose any obligation on bureaucracy towards Panchayat representatives.

Like Kerala, there should be a model code of conduct (MCC) in all states. This code of conduct should clearly define the dos and don’ts for both – bureaucracy towards the representatives and representatives toward bureaucracy.

4. Analysis of the Panchayati Raj Act

Above analysis shows that the 73rd amendment act remains halfhearted attempt. Panchayats continue to lack funds, functions and functionaries. Besides the loopholes in the act, various other policies contribute to the weakening of system.

Presence of parallel agencies like DRDAs (Dist. Rural Develop. Agency).
In many states, instead of devolving funds to Panchayats, there is a direct transfer of funds to NGOs.
One of the continuing paradoxes is MPLAD and MLALAD scheme, which increases the interference of legislatures in local governance.
Within 73rd AA, there is a provision for the presence of MPs and MLAs in panchayat bodies. This makes them highly unequal bodies, affecting free and open speech, discussion and decision making.
There is no political will to carry out devolution of power.

Thus, the whole experiment of Panchayati raj has remained ‘supply driven’ i.e. top-down. There is a need for grassroot movement, bottom-up approach for good governance and sustainable development.

Punchhi commission recommends creation of legislative councils in all states. Restructuring and empowering the institution to represent local bodies. In this way, pressure can be made on state executives to devolve funds at the local level. Further, a watchdog body like National Commission and State Commissions for Panchayats can also be created.

It is said that 73rd AA introduces just a skeleton. Flesh and blood have to be added to make it successful. 73rd AA is a ‘compromised document’. Rajiv Gandhi govt. tried to bring strong Panchayati Raj, however there was opposition from the state govts. They thought that central govt. is trying to bypass the states. Hence 73rd AA, a compromised document was brought.

It is to be noted that govt. publicized 73rd AA as a huge step towards decentralization, but the careful analysis will show that it is a step, which is not more than devolution. The act creates the skeleton. It leaves on states to provide flesh and blood.

As discussed earlier, act provides for compulsory and voluntary provisions. The voluntary provisions are related to the empowerment of panchayat, the flesh and blood of the act. However, these have been left to the states. It is suggested that the provision on which state had objections have been in fact turned into voluntary provisions.

Thus, there is huge variation in the experiment among states. e.g. Kerala, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Sikkim, Madhya Pradesh present examples of strong panchayats whereas those in in UP, Bihar continue to remain extremely weak institutions.

It is also suggested that it was never the need of decentralization or greater governance which pushed for 73^rd and 74^th amendment act. It was the external agencies, international communities that compelled government to act. The Structural Adjustment Programs that came after 1991 Balance of Payment Crisis, introduced conditionalities, the introduction of good governance. Consequently, bare minimum institutions that will qualify as panchayats were created. The actual devolution of power was never the true intention of government.

According to Amartya Sen, ‘until and unless some issue becomes a matter of public discourse/debate, governments will not respond.’ Similarly, Habermas suggested the need for public sphere and communicative action.

4.1 Manishankar Ayyar Committee Report

Manishankar Ayyar committee [2012-13] which was set up to analyze the 20 years (1992-2012) of the working of panchayats came to the conclusion that bad panchayati raj has been worse than no panchayati raj. Committee remarked that disillusionment is prevailing with panchayats. Even after 20 years of existence, Panchayats could not bring any qualitative improvement in the life of the people. Hence there is a disillusionment. It would have been better if government had not introduced panchayat at all. At least people would not have questioned the idea of decentralization. According to committee, what we have achieved is actually the ‘decentralization of corruption’. Nexus has developed between the members of Panchayat (chairpersons), local bureaucracy and politicians. Hence it is better to call it as ‘Sarpanch Raj’ rather than Panchayati Raj.

It is to be noted that gramsabha has been ‘soul’ of the experiment. Gramsabha continues to be a weak institution. There has been lack of empowerment of the people at the grassroot level. Hence capacity building of the people at grassroot level is key to success for Panchayati Raj.

What is the biggest factor for the poor Panchayati Raj in India?

Ultimately it is the failure of people. Especially the advanced section of civil society. Panchayati Raj experiment in India has entirely been supply driven. There has never been any demand for good governance from the people in India. We need grassroot movements (social movements) for good governance.

4.2 Panchayati Raj and Women Empowerment

The 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments, enacted in 1992, were designed to strengthen local self-government in India’s rural and urban areas, respectively. These amendments played a crucial role in decentralizing governance and specifically empowered women by reserving one-third of the seats for them, ensuring their substantial representation in local bodies.

Increased Women’s Participation: While the amendments provide for 33% reservation, women currently make up 46% of all members in practice. The reservation of seats has significantly boosted women’s political engagement, enabling many to contest and win elections, and serve as elected representatives in Panchayats and Municipalities. This platform allows women to voice their concerns, influence decisions, and contribute to community development.
Emergence of Women Leaders: The reservation policy has nurtured grassroots women leaders. Women who have served as elected representatives have gained valuable experience, honed leadership skills, and become role models, inspiring more women to engage in politics and governance. In some states, women initially elected due to reservations, often represented by their husbands (“Pradhan Pati”), have shown greater determination when running for re-election.
Gram Sabha Participation: Gram Sabhas provide women with a platform to raise local issues such as access to water, health, and electricity. In many areas, these meetings have seen significant participation from women, who voice their concerns and demands.

However, despite positive developments, challenges, such as social and cultural biases, limited access to resources and education, lack of support systems, and entrenched patriarchal norms, persist. Overcoming these obstacles through capacity-building programs, awareness campaigns, and women empowerment initiatives is crucial to further enhance women’s participation and influence in local governance.

5. 74th Amendment Act (Municipal Government)

Historically India has been known for excellence in urban administration. Indus valley civilization can be called as one of the first and highly advanced urban civilization.

Urban centers have been the source of wealth in India, playing the role of trading centers. The age of Mahajanpads, Mauryans, Vijayanagara, is known for its achievements in urbanization. At present, while cities and towns occupy only 2% of total land, they contribute 70% of GDP. Urban centers have been recognized as engines of economic growth.

5.1 Current Situation

Unfortunately, the state of urban administration at present remains worse than that of villages. Urban administration has been the most neglected area. The British tried to introduce some reforms. However, after independence, there was hardly any attention towards municipal governance. At least Panchayats were mentioned in directive principles, municipalities were even missing.

There has been the neglect of urban administration because Loksabha is dominated by rural constituencies. Urban areas are sources for generating funds, hence there is greater reluctance among politicians to devolve power to municipalities.

5.2 Need for Stronger Urban Local Bodies

India is passing through the phase of demographic transition. Now 40% of the population is living in urban areas. India aspires to become major power. It requires faster economic growth. Faster economic growth will require revamping of Indian cities.

We should learn from China. China has revamped municipal administration. China has been successful in attracting foreign investment. It is a paradox that India is democracy, yet municipalities lack power. On the other hand, China lacks democracy, yet provincial as well as local govts. enjoy lot of autonomy. The mayor of Shanghai is as powerful and prestigious post as mayor of London. China has even involved representatives of municipalities even in diplomatic initiatives.

On the other hand, the status of municipalities has hardly improved even after introduction of 74th AA. Municipalities suffer from similar weaknesses like Panchayats. Municipalities are more backward in the sense that there is no institution of direct democracy at urban level (akin to gramsabha at panchayat level).

According to Isher Judge Ahluwalia, ‘we fail to even imagine the amount of loss we are incurring because of neglect of urban administration.’ There cannot be smart city without smart municipality. There are three fundamental roadblocks

A federal system which does not empower the 3rd tier.
Political system is heavily biased towards rural areas.
There is lack of adequate institutional framework for metropolitan planning and governance.

5.3 Problems with Urban Local Governance

Urban administration is more chaotic because of existence of parallel agencies with overlapping jurisdictions. There is lack of uniformity. There are multiple variations in municipalities i.e. Nagarpanchayats, Nagarpalikas, Municipal corporations, Notified Area Committee, court authorities, cantonment boards etc.
Whether Mayor is directly elected or indirectly elected, the office is ceremonial. The power continues to remain in bureaucracy. Unfortunately, even in 21st century, India continues to be ‘overdeveloped state’, a state where the government is more advanced that society.
Municipal corporations are denied of their political role by continued operations by various parastatal agencies created by state govt. These agencies, having certain autonomy are accountable only to state govts. and not local govt.
Urban planning and land use regulation also lie with state-government controlled development agencies. Globally these are quintessential local body functions.
Central govt. programs such as ‘Smart City’ program seek to ring fence itself from local govts. This program mandates creation of SPVs (Special Purpose Vehicles) for smart cities which will have ‘operational independence and autonomy in decision making and mission implementation’. This also further encourages state governments to delegate powers available to ULB (Urban Local Body) to Chief Executive Officer of SPV.
Not enough independence e.g. Even for certain functions which are in its purview like levying taxes or civil projects above certain budget – ULBs need permission from State govt.

While ‘India used to live in villages’, the picture is rapidly changing. There is transition of Indian society from agrarian to technological society. Smart cities without smart urban local bodies will not do. Stronger institutional and policy mechanisms that will ensure funding, autonomy, and increased public participation are needed.

6. Recommendations of the 15th Finance Commission for 2021-26

The total grants to local bodies will be Rs 4.36 lakh crore (a portion of grants is to be performance-linked)
The grants to local bodies will be made available to all three tiers of Panchayat- village, block, and district.
Grants other than health grants will be distributed among states based on population and area, with 90% and 10% weightage, respectively.
The Commission has prescribed certain conditions for availing these grants (except health grants). The entry-level criteria include:
- Publishing provisional and audited accounts in the public domain
- Fixation of minimum floor rates for property taxes by states and improvement in the collection of property taxes (an additional requirement after 2021-22 for urban bodies).
- No grants will be released to local bodies of a state after March 2024 if the state does not constitute State Finance Commission and act upon its recommendations by then.

7. Short Note on Grassroot Movement

According to D L Sheth – Grassroot movements or micro movements have become active in different parts of the country since 70s. They represent the desperate struggle of economically marginalized and socially excluded sections of society. Many micro movements have combined together to form national level alliance to fight against Indian state on the issues of globalization. There is an impression that Indian state is increasingly getting aligned with foreign capital. Micro movements are countervailing forces against global political and economic power.

Rajni Kothari mentions the rise of micromovements is a symbol of the dissatisfaction with representational politics and institutional decline. There is a decline of parliament and disconnect between people and their representatives. There is a decline of political parties. Political parties have long abandoned movement aspect of politics and have reduced themselves to the electoral machines. Political parties operate at the grassroot level only at the time of elections. Trade unions in India have been junior partners and bargaining counters of political parties. Thus, micromovements led by educated middle class have emerged in India.

According to Smitu Kothari, globalization have revived the grassroot movement around the world because of the destructive forces of development. Globalization have also promoted the growth of movements for peace, human rights and movements against corruption.

Amrita Basu suggests the growth of grassroot movements in India is because of capitalist model of development on one hand and the availability of democratic space on the other hand.

Ranjitha Mohanty has suggested that grassroot movements have served following tasks. It has replaced the exclusionary narrative of state led development with counter narrative of inclusion. It has expanded non-party political spaces for social actions. Public space is constantly democratized. Grassroot movement have renegotiated people’s relationship with the state.