SARDAR PATEL AND THE INDIAN ADMINISTRATION (lnaugural lecture in the.'sardar Patel Memorial lecture Series' delivered at the South Gujarat Universiry Sural on 15 December. 1986) LP. Singh . Under the Auspices of Centre for PolicY Research UPPAL PUBLISHING HOUSE NEW DELHI.IIOOO2 UPPAL PUBLISHING HOUSE 3, Ansari Road Daryaganj, New Delhi-ll00OZ @ Centre for Policy Research New Delhi-r10021 1987 rsBN 81-85024-17-0 Published by B.S. Uppat for Uppal publishing Housq New Delhil10002. phototypeset by Esi Bee Printers, Bl7, Sector-8, Noida and printed at Efficient Offset Printers, New Delhi-11002g. FOREWORD The formation of the post independence narion out of the loose political structure of India after the departure of the British was a crucial phase in the modern Indian History. Sardar Vallabhai Patel can truly be described as one of the key architects of this phase even though Sardar Patel's govern- mental tenure in Delhi was a relatively short one. In the present lecture Shri L P Singh describes Sardar Patel as "the greatest statesman-adminis- trator of Independent India-" Shri Singh "rariks him with Ashoka.and Akbar, as a unifier of the country'. This interpretation of Sardar Patel's role covered in this brief lecture stands as a testimony to the emergence of the administrative state in India. The strength and weakness of the Indian States have been of some debate in recent years and perhaps the debate will occupy more space as the adequacies and inadequacies of the state in India begin to affect our national growth and performance. Shri L P Singh s lectu4e will be useful input in assuming both the role played by Sardar Patel and the evolution of the modern Indian state' May 1987 V A Pai Panandiker Director SARDAR PATEL AND THE INDIAN ADMINISTRATION I consider it a great honour to be invited to inaugurate a lecture series on Sardar Patel, who has been without doubi the greatest statesman- administrator of independent Indiq indeed the ' greatest in rnY view that our country has pro- iuced during the last four centuries. He ranks with Asoka and Akbar, as a unifier of the coun- try. That is, the bulk of it, once the political for- cis set in motion towards the end of the last century strengthened by imperial policieg and finally fed by urge towards power, had led inex- orably to the creation of Pakistan' That the Sar- dar, ilready past seventy, should have had less than five years to accomplish his mission makes the achievement the more remarkable' Akbar, for instancg had ruled for more than four decades; and -the British had taken a hundred years to extend thcir direct rule over Indi4 and ititl wittr only paramountcy over a third of it And never 6eiote in our history since the Mauryan bureaucracy, did we have a uniform ry.t"- of administratiorl from which no part of tire country was excluded Nor was the country ever before unified as an unrestricted democracy' Even at the last election under British rute (1946) only about ten percent of the population had the ,franchise. t To what the Sardar, the great statesman, achieved as a unifier, and as i principal con- tributor to the building up of the democratic constitutional structure, he adde{ as a superb administrator, signal contributions in meeting the formidable problems created by the violent upheaval accompanying the partitioq and the extraordinary enerry with which he attended to the complex and sensitive business of the parti- tion council. While consenring the frame of tne administration in British India built through the experience of a century and a half, tre nia the creative imagination and the will to extend it to the princely states, which had had diverse patterns of administration, far removed. in the vast majority of cases from the system in British India. I have advisedly referred to Sardar patel as statesman-administrator., Even an outstanding administrator may not have vision; absorption in the mechanics, procedure, and minutae. and the achievement of immediate objectives tend to shackle the imagination and to limit projection of vision to the problems emerging on the horizon and requiring timely preparation for dealing with them. Curzon is an excellent exam- ple. Inspite of his exceptional administrative abilities he failed to see the progressive growth of Indian nationalism in a correct perspectivg or to deal with Indian aspirations with sensitivity and imagination Herbert Hoover is another exam- ple. He was perhaps the ablest administrator atrrong the Presidents of the United States during the present century; but he failed to appreciati the dimensions of his country's unprecedented economic depression, or to deal with it A states- maq in contrast, may have ideas and visiorl understanding of a country's historical and cultural traditions, and the social forces current and developing He may have all the right aims and perspectives; but he may not have mastery of the means, or a sound strategy of action; and he may not have the gift of getting the best out of his instruments-the bureaucracy. It is rare in his- tory to have a combination of outstanding states- manship with genius for administration It was India's good fortung at the most crucial stage of its modern history to have in Sardar Patel a combination of the vision of a statesman with the sagacity and practical outlook of an adminis' trator, without which the Indian administrative system might not have been revitalize4 and ils standards might well have fallen below what the critical times and the new nation required Recruitment to the Indian Civil Service and the Indian Police had been frrst slowed down and then stopped because of the war hnd ,i likelihood of constitutional changeg resulting in wide gaps in those services. In the meantime there had been considerable dilution of stan- t dards as a result of large numbers of ad-hoc appointments to the other services; and preoc- cupation with work connected with the war and civil supplies had caused neglect and dislocation of the normal activities of government The administrative structure was therq but in a wcakened statq and the administration was generally in a rundown condition. Uncertainty. about the picture that might emerge from the impending constitutional changes, and its effect on their own future had tended to affect the zest and self-confidence of the senior civil services. There was, further, the rising tide of com- munalism with ominus potential of violence. Such briefly was the background of the adminis- trative situation which the Sardar as Home Minister in the interim government faced in 1946. As the year 19.45 advanced and the con- stitutional negotiations were taking their tor- tuous coursq Sardar Patel started thinking of the future. The first momentous step he took wag in October of that year, to have a resolution adopted at a conference of the Congress Chief Ministers (inspite of opposition initially from some of them) authorizing the setting up of two all-India services, the IAS and the IPS, to suc- ceed the ICS and I.P. The Muslim League's firm thinking was that if India was to remain united it could only be on the basis of a weak Centre, with its jurisdiction limited to External Affairs, Defence, and Communications,, with no scope in such a constiutional arrangement for any all- India Adrninistrative or Police Service. If there was partition the question of such services would obviously not aries. Going through the relevant documents of the period., one is left with the impression that by October 1945 Sardar Patel had corne to the conclusion that with the intran- sigent attitude-of the League partition was pro- bably unavoidable, and that India must have new seryices, as successors to the ICS and IP, 4, which, apart from filling the existing wide gaps in these services, would contribute to the unify of the country and the strength of the administra- tive structure, and make for a high standard of efficiency and uniformity. The Sardar had a deep understanding ofthe lessons of lndian history. Regional and other narrow loyalties, leading to chronic divisiveness, had had free play in periods of absence of a central authority or its weakness. He was convinced that all-India services for general and law and order administration would be valuable adjuncts of a strong constitutional authority at the Centre, which however was to be consistent with the federalism of our Constitution, of which he was to be one of the main architects. The contemporaneous documents also indi- cate that Sardar Patel was acutely conscious of the historical and cultural factors, and of the debilitating effect of a long period of subjection on the moral fibre of the Indian people, which were likely in combination to make India a "soft" state, prone to vacillation in critical situations or when faced with hard options. His experience of dealing with the Congress organisatiorl and of the Provincial Ministries had strengthened his apprehensions. (l may mention, in passing that a group of civil ser- vants, asked by Wavell to study the relative pros- pects of India and China had reported even in 1944 that India would go for softer options; and as is well known many years later, Gunnar Myrdal categorized India as a "soft state"). The Sardar did therefore believe that it was essential for independent India's administrative machinery to have a strong frame. capable of withstanding stresses. and of maintaining dis- cipline in administration and peace and order in society. For decades the ICS and IP had been referred to pejoratively as the steel liame of imperial rule. This was a just enough description of their role as instruments for preserving nritish rule against the rising tide of lndian nationalisrn But the Sardar conceived of the successor ser- vices in a role fundamentally different in objec- tives and style of functioning but retaining the element of firmness.