The new amendments carried out in the Registration of Births and Deaths Act by the Union government and the Rules by the State government and the second amendment in the West Bengal Panchayat Act have virtually sealed the fate of rural and urban local governments in West Bengal writes Sunil Kumar, a former civil servant.
The controversies surrounding the recent Assembly elections in the State do not show signs of abating even after the new state government led by the BJP assumed office in West Bengal on May 9, 2026. The special drive launched by the BJP to break the 78 MLAs belonging to the Trinamool Congress (TMC), even when the ruling party had received over 200 seats in the Assembly, seems to reflect the desire of the ruling party to pummel the Opposition into silence.
Twin Blows
In less than a hundred days, the local governments in West Bengal have been dealt two stunning blows from which they may never recover. The decision of the State government to first strip the Gram Panchayats and the urban local governments of their power to issue birth and death certificates and give it to a special registration officer appointed by the State government and, then, amend the Panchayat Act to withdraw the financial and administrative powers of the Gram Panchayat (GP) President, without adequate consultation, reflects the tendency to ‘bulldoze legislation’. There seems to be a wide chasm between the stated objectives and the real reasons behind the aforesaid twin policy decisions.
Rewind to 2011
Exactly fifteen years ago, when the TMC led by Ms. Mamata Banerjee had assumed office after ending the 35-year Left Front rule, a very similar scenario had been played out. The TMC government had then set about dismantling the Left parties and the Indian National Congress (INC) as well as the edifice of Panchayats put in place by the Left Front government. The reasons cited then viz. 1) alleged corruption of elected representatives 2) the need to introduce transparency and accountability in the system 3) ensure proper utilization of resources and 4) expeditious implementation of rural development schemes are, again, being cited by the new BJP government as they resort to similar means to attain their objective, which is that of silencing the Opposition.
Party Control of Panchayats over the years
All elections to Panchayats are contested on party lines in West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura. However, in all other States, while the election to GP is ‘apolitical’, in most States, the elections to Block Panchayat (Panchayat Samiti) and District Panchayat (Zilla Parishad) are contested by political parties on their party symbols.
The hold of the Left Front in the Panchayats had started weakening from the 2008 Panchayat elections when the TMC and the Congress had gained control over one Zilla Parishad (ZP) each and the Left Front controlled the remaining 16 ZP. In the 2013 Panchayat elections, TMC (the then ruling party) gained control over 18 ZP and INC and Left Front were left with just one ZP each. In the 2018 and 2023 Panchayat elections, TMC gained control over all 20 ZP. The same story was repeated in the Panchayat Samiti and GP elections. The share of GP controlled by the Left Front fell from about 65 percent in 2008 to less than 2 percent in 2023 and those controlled by the TMC increased from about 30 percent in 2008 to 96-98 percent in the 2023 Panchayat elections. The Opposition parties led by the Left Front, Congress and the BJP had attributed TMC victory in the Panchayat polls in 2018 & 2023 to the ‘reign of terror’ let loose by the goons patronised by the TMC. The virtual non-representation of the BJP in Panchayats, as on date, is strikingly at odds with the overwhelming majority that the BJP has received in the 2026 Assembly polls.
This situation is especially jarring for the state BJP leadership. They feel it would be extremely difficult to implement rural development schemes like the Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rojgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) (VB-GRAM G) and Pradhan Mantri Awaas Yojana (PMAY) if the GP continue to be controlled by the TMC. Ostensibly, it is alleged by the ruling party that work in over 2000 of 3339 GP has come to a grinding halt as the Pradhans are not attending office ever since the new government assumed power and the Upa-Pradhans are also not ready to step in.
Against this background, the response of the new State government in West Bengal requires close scrutiny. During the SIR exercise carried out in West Bengal, names of 90.82 lakh voters were deleted. About 34 lakh voters filed appeals before the adjudication tribunals but about 27 lakh applications remained pending at the time of polls. (Over 90 percent of the adjudicated cases resulted in restoration of deleted names in the electoral rolls.) Without going into the merits of the SIR exercise, suffice it to say that the ruling BJP felt that a large number of birth and death certificates were ‘wrongly’ issued by the Panchayats and Municipalities to so-called ‘infiltrators’ during the ongoing SIR exercise and that needed to be set right.
Amendment in Birth & Death Registration Act & Rules
It followed then that the first order issued by the State government related to the replacement of Gram Panchayat Pradhan and urban local government Chairperson as Registrars of birth and death registration by District Magistrates, nodal Health department officials and heads of state-run hospitals. The State government issued the West Bengal Registration of Births and Deaths (Amendment) Rules, 2026 on 8th July, 2026. Subsequently, the Parliament also passed the Registration of Births and Deaths (Amendment) Bill, 2026 on 4th August, 2026 wherein, the procedure for registration of births and deaths after the prescribed period has been revised and a separate mechanism for registration delayed beyond one year and beyond two years has been stipulated.
The newly inserted Section 13(3) in the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 passed by the Parliament stipulates that where information regarding a birth or death is furnished after one year but within two years of its occurrence, registration can be made only on an order of a District Magistrate, a Sub-Divisional Magistrate or an Executive Magistrate authorized by the District Magistrate after verification of the correctness of the birth or death and payment of the prescribed fee. Further, the new Section 13 (3A) provides that if the delay is more than two years, registration can be made only on an order of a Judicial Magistrate First Class after due verification. The stated objective behind the Bill is to ensure timely registration of births and deaths in the country. The state government is empowered to make rules under Section 30 of the Act.
In most countries, the local government authorities are entrusted with the operational responsibility for registering births and deaths, while state and central governments provide legal authority, supervision, coordination, and undertake national record-keeping. In West Bengal, the state government has replaced the local government with officials working under the state government. This is a retrograde step in every which way.
Since births and deaths occur within the Gram Panchayats and/or urban local governments, it is only logical that they are the first place to obtain reports from hospitals, families and crematoriums and issue certificates to residents promptly after quick verification of facts. Any official appointed by the State as Registrar may or may not be as easily accessible to the residents especially in rural areas. The GP Pradhan and Chairpersons of urban local governments are elected representatives (ER) and public servants as well. Maintenance of vital statistics, including registration of birth and deaths, has been specifically mentioned in the Twelfth Schedule which lays down the list of functions which ought to be transferred to the urban local governments. Hence, if there were any deficiencies, they ought to have been inquired into and suitable punishment meted out to the guilty. The amendment passed by the West Bengal State Legislative Assembly weakens the local governments and further empowers the District Magistrate (DM), who has been empowered to appoint Block Medical Officers of Health, rural and urban hospital superintendents and medical college heads to act as registrars for all institutional births and deaths. The amendment appears, prima facie, to be against the logic of citizen-friendly governance.
Amendment in State Panchayat Act
The second blow struck by the State government appears to be even more serious, in that it strikes at the root of governance by elected governments. The West Bengal Panchayati Raj Act,1973 has been amended not only to take away the financial powers that had been conferred to the GP Pradhans but has also given a legal veneer to rule by administrators which, incidentally, goes against the letter and spirit of the 73rd Constitution Amendment Act (CAA).
The West Bengal Panchayati Raj Minister reportedly stated in the Vidhan Sabha that West Bengal was the only state in the country where GP Pradhans had the authority to sign cheques, bills and payment orders from the Gram Panchayat Fund which has led to corruption at the grassroots level and delayed government projects. The proposed amendment sought to delegate the financial powers to government officials as was the case in other states. The issue, however, is more complex.
The financial powers given to the Gram Pradhan to sign cheques, bills and payment orders had been hailed by supporters of Panchayats as a great move to strengthen the Gram Panchayats. However, this power had also emerged as the proverbial noose around the Pradhan’s neck as he/she became personally responsible for adherence to financial rules just like any bureaucrat. This provision has been widely used by the bureaucracy in most states to force Pradhans to toe their line or face suspension. A democratically elected leader has been transformed into a lowly functionary under the control of the District Magistrate.
West Bengal Panchayat (Second Amendment) Act, 2026
The stated objectives of the Bill (introduced in the State Legislative Assembly in July and passed in August 2026) include inter alia ensuring stability of Panchayat bodies for providing time-bound services to the people, ensuring regular meetings of Gram Panchayat and Gram Sabha and, the effective functioning of Panchayat bodies. This is sought to be achieved through the following measures:
i. Provision for appointment of Administrator: If both a Pradhan and Upa-Pradhan are absent for more than 15 days, the State can appoint an extension officer as administrator to run the body for up to 30 days.
ii. Transfer of Cheque Signing Authority: The West Bengal Panchayat (Second Amendment) Act, 2026, removes the exclusive power of elected Pradhans to approve expenditure from the Gram Panchayat Fund. Now they cannot sign cheques, bills, and payment orders from the Gram Panchayat Fund jointly with the Secretary.
iii. Enhanced Bureaucratic Control: Financial disbursement right, tender approval, and power to accord administrative sanction to projects have been shifted to designated officials like Panchayat Secretaries, Executive Assistants, or Block Development Officers (BDOs).
Rule by Administrators
The West Bengal Panchayat (Second Amendment) Act, 2026 notified on 7th August, 2026 has added in sub-section (6) of section 9 of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973 the proviso that “.. in case of non-availability of Pradhan and Upa-Pradhan for more than fifteen days, affecting the public services and unwillingness of any of the members to take the charge of Pradhan and Upa-Pradhan, the Prescribed Authority may appoint an officer, not below the rank of an Extension Officer, to be designated as Administrator for a period of thirty days at a time to remove the hardship of the people and stagnation of the Gram Panchayat.”
In the explanation thereof inserted in the Act it has been stated that ‘during the incumbency of the Administrator, the Gram Panchayat body and the Upa-Samitis will be in a state of temporary moratorium and all the powers, duties and functions of the Pradhan, Gram Panchayat or its Upa-Samitis shall be exercised, discharged or performed by Administrator.’
The use of the term ‘at a time’ is significant. There seems to be no limit to the number of times this power can be used during the five-year term of the elected representatives. It all depends on the State government acting through the departmental officers in the district and the Block.
The bureaucratic stranglehold over the Gram Panchayat is complete through the amendment in sub-section (1) of section 16 of the principal Act with the insertion of the third proviso autho rizing the Secretary to convene meetings of Gram Panchayat if meetings could not be convened for two consecutive months due to absence of the Pradhan and Upa-Pradhan after taking approval of the BDO. The BDO may assign an observer not below the rank of an Extension Officer to attend such meeting. The Executive Assistant shall mandatorily attend the meetings of Gram Panchayat and participate in the deliberation thereof.
In sub-section (5) of section 16B of the principal Act, the provisos inserted authorize the Administrator to select one of the senior member of the Gram Sabha present in that meeting to preside over the meeting in absence of Pradhan, Upa-Pradhan and any of the elected representative. This enables the State government to hold meetings of the Gram Sabha even when the GP is in a state of temporary moratorium.
Amendment in section 214 (1) of the principal Act dealing with the power of the State to supersede the GP, Panchayat Samiti or the Zilla Parishad completes the bureaucratic take-over of the Panchayats in West Bengal. The amendment in Section 214 empowers the state government to supersede a Gram Panchayat, Panchayat Samiti or Zilla Parishad if more than two-thirds of elected members resign for any reason. Earlier this power was restricted to their incompetence or default in the performance of statutory duties or abuse of powers. In both situations, the onus would have been on the State to prove the bona fide of its orders. Now the state machinery can be used to get members to resign and then the Panchayats can be easily superseded.
Bureaucratic Control over Financial Powers
The assault on the financial powers of the Gram Pradhan is absolutely debilitating. All powers have been virtually conferred to the Executive Assistant. The power to approve expenditure from the Gram Panchayat Fund is now devolved upon the Executive Assistant. The payment orders are to be jointly signed by the Executive Assistant and the Panchayat Secretary.
First, through the insertion of explanation after clause (e) of sub-section (1) of section 34 of the principal Act, the Executive Assistant has been made the key official in the Panchayat. For discharging his responsibility and exercising administrative supervision and control, the Pradhan has to operate through the Executive Assistant (as referred to in clause (8b) of section 2).
Second, all orders for payment from the Gram Panchayat Fund are now to be approved by the Executive Assistant and not the Gram Pradhan and pursuant to those orders, cheque or digital payments are to be jointly signed by the Executive Assistant and the GP Secretary as per the amended section 45 of the principal Act.
It has been further added through sub-section (6) to section 45 of the principal Act that the EA will place the monthly income and expenditure report before the Pradhan who will be responsible for placing it before the Panchayat while the EA would be responsible for placing it before the Block Development Officer.
Panchayats under the TMC rule (2011-26)
It seems to be instructive to examine as to how the TMC responded to the situation in 2011 when it wrested control of state administration from the Left Front after thirty-five years of Left Front rule. The BJP has similarly gained control of the state after 15 years of TMC rule.
The TMC had then similarly alleged that GPs had become hot-bed of corruption and could not be trusted with huge amount of funds flowing into the GPs through the MGNREGS and other schemes of Union and State governments. The State government had reportedly toyed with the idea to appoint executive officers at the Panchayat level to implement development programmes armed with powers to sign and release funds from the Gram Panchayat Fund (Bakshi, 2011). The power to appoint and dismiss the executive officers was to remain with the state government. The TMC leaders had then advocated that the Pradhans would have more time to concentrate on the development of their constituencies if they were divested of their financial duties.
However, the TMC had ultimately addressed the political challenge by lowering the anti-defection threshold in 2014 and increasing its presence in the Panchayats in the subsequent Panchayat polls. It had also used the coercive powers of the state machinery to bulldoze political opponents in the Panchayats and make proper functioning of the GPs virtually impossible through the strong-arm tactics employed by the TMC party cadre with the state police looking the other way.
Consequently, while the Panchayat structure so assiduously built by the Left Front, comprising of Gram Sansad (rural ward), Gram Unnayan Samiti (village development council) as the implementation arm, the five upa-samitis (standing committees) of the Gram Panchayat and the maintenance of the gram panchayat income and expenditure accounts in accordance with the West Bengal Panchayat (Gram panchayat Accounts, Audit and Budget) Rules 2007 and, the practice of disclosing the accounts at annual meetings of the Gram Sansad in May every year, survived on the statute books, in practice, the Panchayats became considerably weak. They were seen more as implementing agencies of schemes rather than as autonomous decision-making institutions. The weakening of the Gram Sabha, Gram Sansad, Gram Unnayan Samiti, and the standing committees of the GP continued unabated during TMC rule.
Stoppage of funds to panchayats by the Union government for nearly three years (2022-25) under the then MNREGS dealt a big blow to the functioning of GP in West Bengal. The deficiencies pointed out by the audit reports were not generically different from what was highlighted in case of other states. However, West Bengal was singled out because of the state being under the TMC which was not politically aligned with the Union government. The brunt of this political shadow-boxing was borne by the panchayats.
Panchayats under the Left Front Rule (1977-2011)
This is not to suggest that signs of weakness in panchayats were not visible during the long Left Front rule. However, before delving into the weaknesses that had crept into the working of the panchayats during the Left Front rule, it would be useful to look into the new rural institutions created by the Left, which were a distinctive feature of Gram Panchayats in West Bengal.
New Rural Institutions
The Gram Sansad is something akin to the Ward Sabha which is found in a few State Panchayati Raj Acts although its role in the formulation of Panchayat development plans and budget is a distinctive feature. Likewise, the practice of having a separate person (other than the Pradhan) as the presiding officer of the Gram Sansad also differentiates it from Ward Sabhas and Gram Sabhas in most other States.
The Gram Unnayan Samiti (village development council) comprised of the “elected member or members to the GP from the Gram Sansad, the opposition candidate obtaining second highest vote in the last GP election, three representatives of Non-Governmental Organizations / Community Based Organizations, three representatives of active self-help groups with at least two members from women-led self-help groups, one serving or retired Government employee, one serving or retired teacher (all being voters of the area, i.e. members of the Gram Sansad), and another 10 members or 1 per cent of the total number of members of the Gram Sansad, whichever shall be higher”. This was truly an innovation which is not seen in any other State.
The Gram Panchayats played a stellar role in deepening agrarian reforms introduced by the Left Front Government in the 1980s and had emerged as a vibrant, responsive and pro-poor institution. However, with the passage of time and the growing importance of non-agricultural activities in rural economy and rural life, new challenges emerged which put tremendous strain on the rural institutions as well as the ability of the new rural leadership to manage the inherent contradiction of claims and counter-claims.
Party Society
As has been pointed out by Partha Chatterjee, the ‘party’ is a ubiquitous presence in the rural areas of West Bengal. It was not confined to the constituent parties in the Left Front alone but also the Congress and the TMC (in their areas of dominance) and increasingly the BJP in the last fifteen years or so. The ‘party’ has been described as the institution which mediates almost every single aspect of social activity in rural Bengal. To quote Chatterjee, “The party and its local functionaries are the principal arbitrators in all social, family and personal disputes and the principal facilitators when individual villagers need help in matters of health, education, finances, employment or travel…” The ‘salishi’ or arbitration by the party and panchayat leaders is widely accepted by the people who want to steer away from the formal mechanisms of the police and the law courts to the extent possible. The latter are seen as expensive, time-consuming, corrupt and insensitive to local traditions and idea of fairness or justice. No wonder, the competition to exercise control over the panchayats assume so much significance in West Bengal.
Management of Illegalities
The panchayat leaders also play a very important role in disbursement of benefits under various welfare schemes of the State and Union governments. The Zilla Parishads have been known to favour the Panchayats governed by the same party and, consequently, control over the Zilla Parishad too becomes very important. In addition, there is the curious phenomenon of ‘managing illegalities’ wherein the local party cadre and panchayat functionaries exercise a stranglehold over not only who receives the benefits of numerous ‘anti-poverty’ schemes of government but also access to government jobs and appointment as teachers. Regulation of the largely unregulated informal sector had meant collecting money from roadside shops, eateries, trade in agricultural commodities, rice-husking industries (that dot the countryside) and even new civil constructions. Such regulation was left to the party cadre and the panchayat functionaries. This is a unique arrangement put in place in West Bengal to keep the party cadre happy.
Present Scenario
Thus, the ‘party society’ which came into existence during the Left Front rule, the functioning of the ‘party’ and the methods to ‘manage illegalities’ put in place then, ultimately sowed the seeds of the current political crisis that we are witnessing in West Bengal. Under the TMC, the state witnessed a ‘wholesale transfer’ of the party cadre and panchayat leaders from the Left Front to the TMC in the face of police oppression and corrupt practices adopted by the then TMC government. The same is being paid back to the TMC by the BJP now. This is hardly a surprise given that a vast majority of BJP leadership and cadre today in West Bengal are drawn from the TMC, INC and some from even the Left parties.
Given the large stakes involved, the state BJP is not willing to wait for new elections to be held after two years before it gains full control over the local government apparatus in rural and urban areas. It also wants quickly to roll out the VB-GRAMG scheme in the State and use its political clout with the Union government to secure release of funds under the new employment guarantee scheme as also the past arrears under the erstwhile MGNREGS. This is why the State government has not only used the template perfected by the TMC to great effect (elected panchayat functionaries are scared to function) but also gone one step further and changed the law itself.
As brought out in the earlier paras, the new amendments carried out in the Registration of Births and Deaths Act by the Union Government and in the Rules by the State government, together with the second amendment in the West Bengal Panchayat Act have virtually sealed the fate of rural and urban local governments in West Bengal. The local governments would now not only function as mere implementing agencies of the State government, they would be under the complete control of the District Collector as well as the BDO apart from the senior officers of various departments of the state government. The autonomy of local governments would now be history. Technology is likely to be used to further the trend towards centralization of power in the Chief Minister’s Office. The troika of ‘PM-CM-DM’ will become as much powerful in West Bengal as in, say, a state like Uttar Pradesh.
While the Constitution does not provide any scope for rule by administrators after the expiry of the term of elected members to both rural and urban local governments, the state laws in different states have provision for rule by administrators if, for some valid reason, elections cannot be held in time. Where West Bengal has gone one step further than the rest is in introducing the concept of temporary rule by administrators even when the Pradhan and Upa-Pradhan continue to occupy their posts. It seems the ‘real’ political message to all elected representatives (ER) behind these amendments is that if they do not switch sides and begin to toe the line of the State Government, then their future would be at stake. This step is in addition to the ploy to foist scores of criminal cases against ERs in police stations, encourage arbitrary use of bulldozers to raze properties of ‘errant’ leaders and mobilize the public against them on grounds of allegations which could be totally unfounded. This strikes a deadly blow to grassroots democracy.
Likewise, the power to approve expenditure from the Gram Panchayat Fund should have been kept with the Pradhan and/or the heads of the five sub-committees of the Panchayat even if the power of the Pradhan to sign cheques or payment orders were withdrawn and handed to a bureaucrat. But to hand over the power of approval of expenditure to the Executive Assistant (who is a State Government appointee/nominee) is a totally retrograde step. It is unlikely to curb corruption either. There is no escaping the fact that there is a wide chasm between the stated objectives of the twin amendments and the real issues at stake.
Citizen-centric Governance
The amendments in the Births & Deaths Registration Act and Rules as well as in the State Panchayati Raj Act cannot be justified on grounds of providing citizen-centric governance. The official appointed as the Registrar would be more inaccessible to residents. By handing over the power to condone delay beyond two years in registration of birth and death to the Judicial Magistrate First Class, the poor and ignoramus have been placed at the mercy of a judicial system which is expensive, time-consuming and more inaccessible. This provision seems to make things difficult and not easy for the people. All talk of ensuring ‘ease of living’ seem to be mere hog-wash.
Impact on Devolution Index Score card
It may be worthwhile to note that West Bengal had largely remained among the top three States in the country based on its Devolution Index score card till 2011. Despite slippage to the eighth position in the Status of Devolution to Panchayats in States Report 2024, it remained a ‘high-performing State’ largely on account of the rural institutions put in place by the Left Front government. However, the state has slipped out of even the top ten States on the sub-indices related to framework and functions. It was ranked 9th on sub-indices related to functionaries and accountability and 10th in respect of capacity building. West Bengal was ranked sixth on the sub-indices related to finance. The current amendments considerably weaken the institutional structure and diminish the democratic system of checks and balances in the Panchayat. The state is likely to slip further on the Devolution Index in the future.
Conclusion
Thus, the only conclusion that seems plausible at this stage is that the weakening of local government in West Bengal has gathered pace as the political commitment of the ruling party to strengthen local government has waned in recent years. This is an unfortunate development especially when seen from the citizens’ point of view. Through the institutions of Gram Sansad and Gram Unnayan Samiti, the citizens could keep an eye on the goings-on in the Panchayat and, to a degree, safeguard their interests. However, even this would become difficult in the rule by administrators. If democracy at grassroot level is defined by the ability of weaker sections to negotiate an outcome which safeguards their interest, then rule by administrators appointed by the State government is hardly likely to facilitate negotiation among competing interests in the Gram Panchayat. It is doubtful if there would be any improvement in the quality of delivery of services or any reduction in corruption either.
It seems that the ruling dispensation is more interested in finishing off the political base of the TMC rather than strengthening local government. It is then most unlikely that any effort would hence be made to curb the working of the ‘party’ or stop the illegalities that have come to be formalized in rural West Bengal over the past three decades. With ‘party society’ and ‘management of illegalities’ firmly in place, the BJP is likely to continue the policy of ‘clientelism’ where access of villagers to benefits of Government schemes is dependent on their continued electoral support to the ruling dispensation. The more things change, the more they seem to remain the same if not to deteriorate further.
(Sunil Kumar is a visiting Senior Fellow associated with the Centre for Cooperative Federalism and Multilevel Governance in Pune International Centre and a former civil servant. Views expressed are personal.)
