Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
The Indian administrative system, initially modeled on the British parliamentary system, has gradually evolved towards a more centralized structure, particularly post-independence. This centralization is often linked to the authority and decisiveness emanating from the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO). The PMO, acting as the principal advisor to the Prime Minister, plays a crucial role in policy formulation, implementation, and coordination across various ministries. The assertion that a dominant centralized administration correlates with decisive leadership from the PMO holds considerable weight, evidenced by the administrative styles of several Prime Ministers since 1947, though the extent and nature of this correlation have varied significantly.
Early Years: Nehruvian Centralization (1947-1964)
Jawaharlal Nehru, India’s first Prime Minister, established a strong precedent for centralized decision-making. He believed in a strong state and a planned economy, necessitating tight control over administration. The PMO under Nehru directly oversaw key policy areas like foreign policy, defense, and economic planning. The Planning Commission, directly reporting to the PM, became a powerful instrument of centralized control. This resulted in decisive policy initiatives like the Five-Year Plans and the non-aligned movement, but also led to bureaucratic delays and a lack of responsiveness at the state level.
Indira Gandhi and the ‘Syndicate’ (1966-1977)
Indira Gandhi further strengthened the PMO, but in a different manner. She bypassed established bureaucratic channels and relied on a coterie of advisors, often referred to as the ‘Syndicate’. This allowed for quick decision-making, exemplified by the nationalization of banks in 1969 and the abolition of privy purses in 1971. However, this also led to increased centralization of power, erosion of institutional norms, and ultimately, the imposition of the Emergency in 1975. The Emergency demonstrated the potential for authoritarian tendencies when a strong PMO is coupled with a dominant political personality.
The Janata Party and the Morarji Desai Era (1977-1979)
The Janata Party government, a coalition, represented a temporary departure from strong centralized control. Morarji Desai, as Prime Minister, attempted a more decentralized approach, but the inherent instability of the coalition and conflicting ideologies hampered effective governance. The PMO lacked the authority and coherence it had enjoyed under Nehru and Indira Gandhi, resulting in policy paralysis and administrative inefficiency.
Rajiv Gandhi and Modernization (1984-1989)
Rajiv Gandhi attempted to modernize the administration and reduce bureaucratic red tape. He focused on strengthening the PMO’s technical capabilities and promoting computerization. Initiatives like Operation Flood and the establishment of Navodaya Vidyalayas demonstrated decisive leadership. However, the Bofors scandal and allegations of corruption highlighted the risks of centralized decision-making without adequate checks and balances.
The Era of Coalitions (1990s - 2014)
The 1990s and early 2000s witnessed a period of coalition governments. Prime Ministers like P.V. Narasimha Rao, Atal Bihari Vajpayee (in his shorter tenures), and Manmohan Singh had to navigate complex political dynamics. While the PMO remained important, its authority was often constrained by the need to accommodate coalition partners. Manmohan Singh, despite being a technocrat, faced challenges in implementing reforms due to coalition compulsions. The PMO under him focused on economic liberalization but struggled with issues like corruption and administrative delays.
Narendra Modi and ‘Maximum Governance, Minimum Government’ (2014-Present)
Narendra Modi has significantly strengthened the PMO, adopting a highly centralized and proactive approach. His government emphasizes ‘Maximum Governance, Minimum Government’, aiming for efficiency and accountability. The PMO directly monitors the implementation of key schemes like Swachh Bharat Abhiyan, Make in India, and Digital India. The use of technology, such as the PRAGATI platform (Pro-Active Governance And Timely Implementation), facilitates real-time monitoring and decision-making. This has led to faster project clearances and improved service delivery in some areas, but also raised concerns about the marginalization of state governments and the erosion of federal principles. The abrogation of Article 370 and the implementation of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) are examples of decisive actions taken under a strong PMO, though they remain politically contentious.
| Prime Minister | Administrative Style | PMO’s Role | Key Examples |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jawaharlal Nehru | Centralized, Planned Economy | Direct oversight of key policies | Five-Year Plans, Non-Aligned Movement |
| Indira Gandhi | Strong, Personalized | Bypassed bureaucracy, relied on advisors | Nationalization of Banks, Emergency |
| Narendra Modi | Proactive, Technology-driven | Direct monitoring of schemes, PRAGATI platform | Swachh Bharat Abhiyan, Digital India, Article 370 Abrogation |
Conclusion
In conclusion, the correlation between a dominant centralized administration and decisive leadership from the PMO is demonstrably evident throughout India’s post-independence history. While a strong PMO can facilitate swift decision-making and effective implementation of policies, it also carries the risk of authoritarianism, erosion of institutional norms, and neglect of federal principles. The optimal balance lies in a centralized PMO that is accountable, transparent, and respects the autonomy of other institutions and state governments. The evolving role of the PMO reflects the changing political landscape and the ongoing quest for effective governance in India.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.