In the misplaced euphoria of creating a straitjacket administrative system, our post-Independence leaders ignored successful, pre-existing, time-tested systems. A good example is the House of Mewar which still cares for its people as the trustees of Eklingji, the reigning deity
The cacophony in the months preceding an election is understandable; missing the crucial issue is not. After 65 years of independence, we have succeeded in making Mr Poverty the biggest employer in the country. In roughly 12 to 15 per cent of the nation's districts, there is reportedly no visible or identifiable governance, as we understand it. This includes significant sections of the North-East, the Maoist belt, and even parts of Uttar Pradesh where the height of display of personal power is riding a horse on to the railway platform! Some smile at it, others pretend they have not seen it and in the ultimate analysis, nothing is done about such grotesque aberrations.
The nation survives because there is a large part of the population, outside the regulatory systems of the governance. life for them is just ‘normal’. Consider the significant role which small and medium size undertakings play in the country’s economy, consider their contribution to Indian exports.
The exponential growth of the film industry is not in the least because there is no regulation governing its financing or delineating the rules of casting, for example. Similarly, the IT sector has grown exponentially without the wisdom of a regulator. Whether it is equity or accessibility — all words from the current administrative lexicon — the core issue remains of governance.
In the misplaced euphoria of creating a straitjacket administrative system, a majority of people who ruled India post-Independence threw to the wind, almost as a conscious choice, all locally present forms of governance. The traditional form, even when time-tested, was ignored while the new system, which was not sufficiently thought through, could not take root.
An illustration will help. Recently, I was invited to the wedding of the son of the 76th custodian of the House of the Mewar, Shriji Arvind Singh Mewar. I have great admirations for this House which has cared for the people of Mewar in the true spirit of trusteeship of Eklingji. This is nothing unique because other territories in India, say Travancore, Cochin, were also run by the predecessors of Marthand Verman much in the same spirit as trustees of Pudmanabham.
I was happy to be in Udaipur for part of the celebrations because Arvind Singhji has many hues and one of them is definitely pedigree. Elsewhere, I have noted how this House has worked on the trusteeship principles for well over a millennia. I was curious to see and learn how the 76th custodian of the House used the wedding to live up to this principle, and not just to display splendour.
The aircraft in which I was to reach Udaipur was just behind one carrying Shriji, the bride, the groom and others. The two aircraft landed about 15 minutes apart. The newly married couple was getting into the city in almost a cavalcade form because of the number of people who got out of their aircraft.
I noticed periodically how people would stop the car to garland the groom and wish him well. He would obligingly stand at the entrance of the car trying his best to cope with the crowd. I had never seen anything like this and have no memories of a baraat returning home in this manner. Here was a young man being wished well by the people who loved his family, which, on its part, had ensured the people’s welfare. Here was a contemporary reflection of the principle of custodianship.
I wondered why this custodian principle could not be incorporated in the functioning of Block Development Officers, District Magistrates and Collectors. Clearly, to govern India successfully and effectively, the people-centric local modes of governance, their values and ethos have to be understood. Incorporating them may show the way for a successful India.