CHAPTER-V

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF
RURAL DEVELOPMENT
 CHAPTER- V

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF RURAL

DEVELOPMENT

5.0 Introduction:
Rural Development, as such is not a new topic to the developing countries, because

many developing nations have been practising and promoting rural development for

decades and of course many of them have achieved significant success in their efforts

especially in education, health care and family welfare, poverty eradication, self-

employment generation, farm management and production, rural technologies and so on

and so forth.

The historical background of any activity or programme provides its

genesis, which may direct the authorities for its effective implementation in future.

Many programmes of rural development were conceived and implemented for the

development of Indian society and most of them failed because of either their

inappropriate objectives or wrong implementation. These programmes could not

provide the full benefits to the society. Therefore, the changing theme of rural

development and its associated schemes, which have been implemented by the Central
 118

Government and Nagaland Government for the upheaval of socio-economic status of

the people of the state, should be viewed critically here to understand the salient

features of ruml development schemes implemented for the state.

5.1 Rural Reconstruction Works in India:

In India, the work of ruml reconstruction may be traced back to the middle of nineteenth

century. Several eminent persons have contributed their might for rural development. It

is necessary to know about their past attempts, which have given the present shape of

ruml development programmes. A historical account may give a clear understanding of

• the dynamics of the programmes and changes, which have occurred over the period.

Rambhai (1959) Pandey (1967) categorised the activities of rural reconstruction works

into three well-marked periods.

(i) The British Rule ( 1858 - 1919),

(ii) The Experimental Period (1920- 1950), and

(iii) The Post-Independent Period to the present day.

5.2 Rural Reconstruction during British Rule (1858-1919):

British government took over the governance of India from a trading company called

the East India Company in 1858, after the first attempt to gain Independence by the

Indians in 1857 called the Sepoy Mutiny. The basic British policy in India was

governing political philosophy of Great Britain and was not concerned with the socio-
 119

economic development of the people. But the British government could not adhere to

such a policy for long; it was the famine in India, which forced the British Indian

Government to think about the people of India. The frequent recurrence of famines

forced the state administrative machinery to seize the food grain stocks and make

arrangements for the distribution among the fu.mine-affected people. All this was done

without any apparent legal sanction, motivated as the action purely was by

determination to control profiteering and to alleviate rural suffering.

As Mishra (1983) says, 'Rural development, thus, began as a

humanitarian act, and the practice was not backed by any executive or legal sanction in

the beginning. Legality and legitimacy were provided later. Rural development as a

function to government initially began as a search for an alternative to 'laissez-faire'.

In 1866 as well as 1880, the Famine Commission proposed a separate

department of agriculture in the government. It was Lord Curzon who was Viceroy of

India, during 190 1-05, whose efforts succeeded in establishing department of

agriculture at provincial levels. The Northwest province (at present Uttar Pradesh) was

the first province to set up an Agriculture department and a Central Agricultural

Research Institute at Pusa (Bihar). This was followed by the Indian Agriculture Service,

which was constituted in 1906. Even though the colonial primary objective was on

trade, rural development was a by-product of colonial economy plus welfure.

 120

5.3 The Period of Experiments and Rural Reconstruction (1920-1950):

The period of experimental (or the National Movement period) is marked by various

experiences on rural reconstruction works tested by the nationalists and social

reformers. The Non-Cooperation movement, started by Mahatma Gandhi in 1920, was

the first political attempt in India to mobilise the villagers and ruralise the politics. The

non-cooperation resolution was passed by the Congress in its Calcutta session of

September 1920, articulated the approach to rural development by recommending hand

spinning in every house and hand weaving which was an ancient and honourable

practice of the people. Khadi became India's freedom dress, and its adoption by the

Congress was the first genuine organised concern for the rural poor and the spinning

wheel economy adopted by the Mahatma was the first popular exercise for rural

development in India. Besides, promotion of rural industries, eradication of

untouchables, provision of basic and adult education, women's upliftment and

propagation ofthe national language were some ofthe main programmes started during

this period. Soon, Sevagram and Wardha, where these ideas were translating into action,

became household words in India for upholding a vision of the future.

The new wave of'back to the village' movement quickly spread far and

wide and a spurt in voluntary activities in the field of rural development occurred.

Rabindra Nath Tagore set up the Sriniketan Institute of Rural Reconstruction in 1921

with the aim of making the rural population self reliant and self-respectful (Sriniketan

Bulletin 1946). In the same year, the Martandam experiment was started under the
 121

leadership of Dr. Spencer Hatch of Young Men Christian Association being about a

complete upward development towards a more complete and meaningful life for rural

people, spiritually, mentally, physically, socially and economically (Randhawa 1951 ).

Mr. F.L. Brayne, the district Collector of Gurgaon, started an experiment of rural

reconstruction in 1927 based on the virtue ofhard work, thrift, self respect, self control,

sclrhclp, mutunl help nnd muhml respect (Rmyne 1946).

In 1932, the princely state of Baroda launched a broad based programme

of rural amelioration to promote the will to live better and a capacity for self-help and

self-reliance. The Firka Development Scheme of Madras government launched the

programme in 1946 based on Gandhian rural reconstruction approach. After

independence near about 7,000 displaced persons were rehabilitated in Nilokheri town,

S.K. Dey, former Minister for Community Development and Cooperation was the

moving spirit behind this project, the scheme was also called as Mazdoor Manzi/.

In 1948, Mr. Albert Mayer conceived a development programme for the

rural areas of Etawah district. The project aimed at an over all development of the area

productivity, social improvement as well as initiative, self-confidence and cooperation

(Mayer 1957). The problem was to ascertain how quickly these results may be attained

and remain permanently a part of the people's mental, spiritual, technical equipment

and outlook after the special pressure is lifted. This project had paid off the investment
 122

in terms of physical benefits as well as it brought about non-tangible improvements of

real values.

5.4 The Post-Independence Period (1950-onward):

The rural concern of the government thus by no means entirely absent under colonial

rule, but it was only after the country's independence that rural development acquired a

high level of priority. The dominant philosophy of our constitution is justice in the

social, economic and political walks of life. Gandhiji was emphatic about rural India

and because of his intervention, local self-government had found place in the Directive

Principles of the state policy and rural reconstruction drawn the attention of central

government and acquired a high level of priority in the Five Year Plans. The various

programmes of rural development adopted by the government under our various Five

Year Plans are presented in Table-5 .1.

Different rural development programmes were launched at different

times in various Five Year Plans. Many of these programmes were planned and

implemented due to the necessity of the situation that had arisen in the country. At the

same time, many programmes were also launched due to the political interest of the

country's ruling parties. However, whatever programmes came in the name of rural

development were implemented by the concerned authorities and agencies for the up-

lifiment of the rural people in the country.

 123

Table-5.1: Plan Period-wise Rural Development Programmes:

Year of
Plan Period Programmes
Introduction
I. Community Development Programme 1952
First Five Year Plan 2. National Extension Service 1953
3. Khadi and Village Industries Programme. 1957
4. Village Housing Project Scheme 1957
5. Multipurpose Tribal Development Blocks Programme 1959
Second Five Year Plan
6. Package Programme
7. Intensive Agricultural District Programme. 1960
1960
8. Applied Nutrition Programme 1962
9. Rural Industries Project 1962
Third Five Year Plan
10. Intensive Agriculture Area Programme 1964
II. High Yielding Variety Programme 1966
Annual Plan, 1967. 12. Farmer's Training and Education Programme 1966. 1966
Annual Plan, 1968 13. Well-Construction Programme 1966
14. Rural Work Programme (RWP) 1967
15. Tribal Development Block 1968
Annual Plan, 1968 16. Rural Manpower Programme 1969
17. Composite Prognunme for women and Pre-School 1969
Children.
18. Drought Prone Area Programme 1970
19. Crash Scheme for Rural Employment 1971
20. Small Farmer Development Agency 1971
21. Tribal Area Development Programme 1972
Fourth Five Year Plan
22. Pilot Projects for Tribal Development 1972
23. Pilot Intensive Rural Employment Programme 1972
24. Minimum Needs Prognunme 1972
25. Command Area Development Programme 1974
26. Hill Area Development Programme 1975
27. Special Livestock Production Programme 1975
28. Food for Work Programme 1977
Fifth Five Year Plan 29. Desert Development Programme 1977
30. Whole Village Development Programme 1979
31. Training of Rural Youth for Self Employment 1979
32. Integrated Rural Development Programme 1979
33. National Rural Employment Programme 1980
34. Prime Minister's New 20-Points Programme 1980
Sixth Five Year Plan 35. Rural Landless Employment Guarantee Programme 1983
(RLEGP)
36. Development of Women and Children in Rural Areas 1983
37. Integrated Rural Energy Planning Programme 1985
Seventh Five Year Plan
38. Special Livestock Breeding Programme (SLBP) 1986
39. Jawahar Rozgar Yoyana 1989
Eight Five Year Plan 40. Prime Minister's Rozgar Yojana(PMRY) 1993
41. Employment Assurance Scheme (EAS) 1993
42. Basic Minimum Service (BMS)
43. Swamjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY) 1996
44. Jawahar Gram Samridhi Yojana (JGSY) 1998
Ninth Five Year Plan
45. Swl\ialdhara (Rural Sanitation & Drinking Water) 1998
2002
Source: Prepared from mnous Five Year Plan documents, Plannmg Comm1ss1on, Government oflnd~a,
 124

Table-5.2: Plan Outlay for Agriculture and Rural Development (figures in

Rs.Crores)
Village
Total Outlays Agriculture and Major/ Minor
Plans Small Scale Sub-Total
(Rs. in Crores) allied activities Irrigation
Industries
(1) (2) (3) (4) (S) {6)
First Plan
1,960 290 (14.8%) 583 (29.7%) 42 (2.1%) 915 (46.6%)
1951-56
Second Plan
4,672 549 (11.8) 430 (9.2) 187 (4.0) I ,166 (24.9)
1956-61
Third Plan
8,577 1,089 (12.7) 665 (7.8) 241 (2.8) 1,995 (233)
1961-66
Annual Plans
6,625 1,107 (16.7) 471 (7.1) 126 (1.9) 1,704 (25.7)
1966-69
Fourth Plan
15,779 2,320 (14.7) 1,354 (8.6) 243 (1.5) 3,917 (24.8)
1969 -74
Fifth Plan
40,097 5,229 (13.0) 3,914 (9.8) 611 (1.5) 9,754 (243)
1974-79
Annual Plan
12,601 1,815 (14.4) 1,260 (10.0) 189(1.5) 3,264 (25.9)
1979-80
Sixth Plan 26,479 (27.1)
97,500 14,349 (14.7) 10,350 (10.6) 1,780 (1.8)
1980-85
*Agri & allied *R.D Programmes
Seventh Plan
1,80,000 10,573.62 (14.27) 9,074.22 (5.01) 19,647.84 (19.28)
1985-90
Eight Pian
2,47,865 54,992.00 (12.67) 34,425.36 (7.93) 89,417.36 (20.60)
1992-97
Ninth Plan 8,59,200 1,17,148.00
42,462.00 (4.9) 74,686 (8.7)
1997-2002 (13.6)
Sources: (i) lnd~anAgriculture in Bnef 19'h Ed. New Delhi 1982 (p. 89-92).
(ii) Statistical Outline of1ndiiJ, Bombay Tata Services Ltd. 1982 (p. 18NJ2)
s
(iii) lndiiJ Five Year Plan, Planning Commission, New Delhi.
*Ministries were bifUrcated at the level ofCentral Government.

Agriculture and rural development have been accorded a high priority in

India's Five Year Plans (Table-5.2). This is evident from the high proportion of total

public sector outlay of each plan that is allotted to agriculture, allied activities and

community and rural development, major and medium irrigation projects, flood control

and village and small-scale industries. During the Seventh Plan, some new

departments/ministries were created and a separate Ministry of Rural Development was

 125

established by bifurcation from its parent Agriculture Ministry was established. Out of

the many department and ministries in the country, maximum allocation during the

various plans was given towards rural development (Table-5.2).

5.6 Democratic Decentralization in Nagaland:

(a) The Democratic Decentralized Development: Development planning in India is

particularly known as 'Democratic Planning and growth with justice.' It has been set

forth as the cardinal principle of planned economic development since the

commencement of the Five Year Plans. This democratic planning is based on the active

support of the masses in plan formulation as well as in implementation of the planned

programmes. Thus, in the early 1950s, the Community Development programme was

launched to obtain the active participation of the people in their own development, then,

Panchayati Raj institution was also revitalized to have the fullest cooperation of the

people. Unfortunately, the decentralized planning or the bottom up approach of

development could not be adopted in planning processes to make the democratic

decentralization in subsequent years as known from the review of development scenes.

This was explained by Jaya Prakash Narayan, who observed and said, "There is so

much talk of building from below, building from the lower levels, planning from the

lowest levels. Everybody is preparing these phrases because each five-year plan used

them, but who is there to build from below, to plan from below? Everybody runs to
 126

Delhi, everybody runs to Bombay, no one seems inclined to go down to the people

except at election time perhaps. So words are being uttered without conviction."

Planning has essentially remained centralized (or vertical) rather than

decentralized (or horizontal), and in such type of vertical planning local problems never

receive adequate attention. All programmes are planned and directed by the centre, the

implementation and machinery are uniform while the situation at ground level is

diverse, leading to poor results and it defeats the objectives of the programmes. The

quality and quantum of development are far from satisfactory in substance and speed.

Despite the plethora of schemes and the huge amounts of money being spent on it, the

efforts of rural development have failed to generate a significant improvement in rural

situation, such as infrastructure facilities, income generation facilities, rural poverty,

unemployment etc. Regional disparity is widened as developed areas become more and

more developed while backward regions remain backward. The gap between 'the haves'

and 'the have not' is also widened. As a consequence, the social fabric itself is under

severe strain. The worst hit is, of course, the poor people for whom development is

supposedly meant.

Nagaland, a tiny state in the Indian union, is in the eastern most part of

the country. Its remoteness and the mountainous conditions of the state have made the

region difficult to approach, and for the economic development, it is necessary to

consider the imperatives of both geography and its history. The state had experienced
 127

the process for socio-economic development plans directed by the Central Government.

It is felt that this process now needs to be modified and preparation new guidelines to

suit the local situation in the state. It is felt that without suitable changes, the process of

planning may end up causing irreparable damage to the rural structure. The planning

structure at village level is very much necessary.

(b) The ViUage Council: Traditionally, villages in Nagaland are located on hilltops,

which are steep with high altitudes ranging up to nearly 3,000m of elevation. Naga

villages are, infact, have inherited an age-old history of self-governance. (Mills 1926)

remarked that which is the real political unit ofthe tribe and it is the village government

that governs and administers over the entire people of the village. While another

European, W. C. Smith wrote that Naga villages were bound together by social,

political and religious ties. The village society had been largely egalitarian and there

exists a strong sense of community feeling and self-reliance through self-help. It is a

politically organized society having a "council of elders", a supreme decision making

body in matters relating to people and the village, which is the oldest institution in all

Naga villages (Nakhro 1997). This in official parlance came to be known as "Village

Council" under an act passed by the state government known as the Nagaland Village

Council and Areas Council Act in 1973, and it was further amended in 1978. The

Village Council consists of members representing each "khel" (or clan). All members of

the clans in the village choose their representatives. Members of clan's representatives

appoint the head of the Village Council. Disputes, if any are settled according to the
 128

customary laws of the land with Do Bashi (interpreter) and Gaon Burah 's (Village

headman) assistance. The Village Council is the sole custodian and manager of the

community property that belong to the whole village. Functioning ofthe village council

is consensus among members and not necessarily by majority rule but with deep anxiety

to maintain harmonious human relationships within the clans I khe/s and the village as a

whole. Sharing of resources (land) in the name of clan community, khel community

land, village community land and individual land is yet another notable feature. All

members of the village have invariably a piece ofland to cultivate; there are neither rich

people nor wage earners in the village. Each and every village is independent. The value

system is such that even a poor person can become the chief provided he deserves it.

Thus, the traditional Naga Village Council was the local powerful structures and they

are strongly regimented with both regulatory and judiciary functions.

(c) The Village Development Board: The strong community based local self-governance

of the Village ·council in Nagaland, the common property (lands) and its usage systems

made the planners rethink on the development plans and administration and they decided

that the money for various development programmes be kept as community fund

(common property). The villagers themselves were given chance to formulate schemes I

plans for the development and progress of the village or help the needy persons in the

village. It is found here that the decentralized planning and implementation of the

development programmes are taken care of by the grass-root level itself. Consequently,

the name Village Development Board (VDB) was formulated under provision of "The
 129

Nagaland Village and Area Council Act 1978. " The Act empowers the traditional

institution of Elders CouncilNillage Council to constitute VDB as an executive wing of

the Village Council to undertake development works of the village. VDB is entrusted

with development and management of community funds. The Village Council concerned

chooses the members of the VDB and their tenure is usually three years unless decided

otherwise by the Village Council. The minimum members ofthe VDB should not be less

than five and the maximum would not exceed twenty-five. At least one fourth of the

members should be women and twenty five per cent of the fund is reserved for

development ofwomen.

As per the Nagaland Village and Area Council Act 1978, many

administrative, executive and judicial functions and powers are given to the Village

Council. The salient features of the act provide strength for the micro-level potential

leadership, dovetailing with self-reliant rural development programmes. The functions

of the VDBs are multifarious; however, the primary objectives are-

(i) to identify, select and formulate the village development schemes as per

requirement of the people in the village.

(ii) as the most popular and unique institution of the state that is assigned with

the role of identification, selection, formulation of schemes at grass root

level for bringing about socio-economic transformation in rural areas. It has

 130

the responsibility of organizing the common fund as well as other funds

received from time to time and implements all the development programmes

of the village.

The VDB operates its funds under Grant-in-Aid, Matching Cash Grant,

Jawahar Rozgar Yojana (JRY) and other programmes through suitable accounts in the

bank. The Chairman and Secretary ofthe Management Committee ofthe VDBs operate

accounts jointly. It is also the duty of VDB to implement all development I social

welfare programmes of the Government, launched from time to time. The Board

functions under the directives issued by the Village Council and the State Government.

The Deputy Commissioner/ Additional Deputy Commissioner is the ex-officio

Chairman ofthe VDB and the management Committee ofthe VDB in their respective

district and independent sub-divisions.

The Rural Development Blocks is the principal agency to oversee the

functioning of VDB programmes at the state level. At the district level, the Deputy

Commissioner looks after all such activities in the blocks as well as in the village

villages. He is the ex-officio-chairman of the District Planning Board. He also

technically approves all plans after concerned Block Development Officer verifies the

same. The BOO has to look after all the VDB works and provide guidance to the

villagers from time to time in preparation of village development plans by way of

providing model plans, which are prepared under guidelines issued by the Government.
 131

(i) Resources of the Village Development Board: There are two sources of funds for

VDll. The first and the foremost source is the common fund of the village raised from

the contribution from the villagers themselves. As stated earlier, the Common Fund is

the root of the emergence of the VDB programme. And the Matching grant is the

Government contribution to the village common fund, which is equal to the amount of

common, fund raised by the village and invested in minimum 5 years Fixed Deposit

account in the bank. The matching grant is given subject to two conditions. First, it

should be invested in a fixed deposit of not less than 5 years duration. Second, it should

be reinvested continuously, so that, the common fund of the village invested in fixed

deposit should always grow through continuous reinvestment. This scheme was initially

introduced in 1978 in Phek District and slowly covered all the villages in Nagaland. In

order to have a balanced distribution of resources among the villages, an upper limit of

Rs.75,000/- was fixed by the Government, which was later raised to Rs.l,OO,OOO/- in

1990. With good performance of the VDBs and the villager's interest on it, state

Government has once again raised the amount to a maximum ceiling limit of

Rs2,50,000/- during 1995-1996. This amount serves as security for the villagers with

the financial institutions for obtaining loan. This is one of the best schemes, which is

operating successfully under VDB. The state Government has a financial crunch at

present situation but the VDBs have enough money in their fixed deposits and grant-in-

aid accounts against which they can borrow any amount from bank. According to

reports, there are about Rs.l 0 crores in the bank accounts of VDBs in Nagaland, which

in itself speaks ofthc success ofthe scheme in resource mobilization.

 132

All the VDBs have to operate suitable Bank account for different sources

such as Grant-in-Aid, Matching Cash Grant, Jawahar Rozgar Yojana and other

programmes as provided in VDB Model Rules 1980. Each and every VDB has to keep a

current bank account and Fixed Deposits in bank and no VDB shall be allowed to

withdraw their Fixed Deposits, as it is the main basis fur the existence of the VDB.

When the term deposits expire, the concerned DCs I ADCs shall direct the VDB to

renew their Fixed Deposits term for another five years.

Other sources such as Employment Assurance Scheme and Jawahar

Rozgar Yojana funds form other major sources of funding which are distributed to the

VDBs at the rate of Rs.750 and Rs.400 per household of the tax paying villages. The

number of households recorded in 1991 census was taken as the basis for fund

allocation to the VDBs.

(ii) Planning and Implementation Mechanism: Even though, Village CouncilsNDBs

are nodal agencies for planning and implementation of the various development

programmes; BOO, District Planning Board and Rural Development Cell help and

provide necessary guidance. The Deputy Commissioner starts the process first by

sending the list of villages oflast year that paid house tax on whose basis the allocation

of grant-in-aid amount was made. The Village Council I VDB, upon receiving the

amount available for the year, can decide upon what activity would be taken up, and

then schemes are prepared as per their needs and the necessity of the village as a whole,
 133

and submit the proposed schemes to the BOO for scrutiny and onward transmission to

the District Planning Boards. The Directorate, Rural Development Blocks, provides

model schemes for grant-in aid, JRY and EAS to the VDBs in advance. Though the

officials assist in planning, the kind of works to be taken upon priority basis is purely

the prerogative ofthe VDB.

The schemes I projects undertaken by the VDBs were mostly related to

creation of durable assets and village infrastructures. Youth welfare schemes and

women's schemes with earmarked budgets are redeeming features of the VDBs. The

activities are mostly towards social aspect; however, income-generating schemes are

also incorporated. For example, Community Multi-Purpose Building in some towns is

earning a monthly income of more than Rs.20,000/- as rent by some VDBs. To some

villages, the Community Bus, purchased from VDB fund is the only means oftransport

to their district headquarters. They transport vegetables, fruits, animals and other

household products to market and in return they bring essential commodities, household

items etc. back to their villages. The following are some of the activities of VDBs;

construction of community building, community granary, approach road, foot path,

public well, water reserve tank, play ground, school building, minor irrigation, drainage,

community latrine, rest houses halfWay between the village and the khetis (fields of

cultivation), suspension bridge, rice mill, community bus, maintenance of village road,

construction of youth welfare center, library hall, multi-purpose building for

womenfolk, fishery ponds, social forestry, horticulture farming, rural housing etc. In
 134

addition to the above activities for the village communities, nearly l 00 percent of the

houses have been converted to CIG or RCC roofed houses from thatch roof. It is rather

slow but there is a change in appearance of the village itself after the introduction of

VDB programmes in the state.

The VDB programme has made a remarkable progress in the state when

judged by the speed with which it has spread to all the recognized villages of the state.

The remotest and inaccessible villages are also at par with the rest of the villages in the

state because there is VDB in their village. In spite of the turbulent and volatile politics

in the state, VDB programme did not suffer any set back. Even if the state Government

is begging loan for financial deficits from the Central Government, each and every

VDB has kept a fat wallet in the bank. There has been a tangible improvement in the

conditions of the villages particularly in respect to community infrastructures in a short

span of time, which is not possible without the involvement of the VDB.

(iii) The VDB Model schemes: The State Government of Nagaland has framed rules

known as VDB Model Rules for identification of the schemes for individuals or

households. These model schemes include the following items along with the cost

amount of the scheme (bank loan and subsidy amount for those people below poverty

line). The following schemes are, Land development, Minor irrigation, Horticulture,

Fishery, farm forestry, Animal power, Sericulture, Bee keeping, Poultry, Dairy,

Piggery, Goatery, Duckery, Knitting & tailoring, Agricultural tools & implements,
 135

Carpentry, Blacksmithy etc. These are some of the model schemes the Department of

Rural Development has laid down for the people but the importance given to a scheme

is according to the interest and choice of the people. The department also has given

some schemes for community development such as Suspension bridge, Footpath or

steps in the village, Village approach road, Public wells/water tank, Community

granary, Community orchard/garden, Community halls, Community bus service and

other experimental schemes.

(iv) People's Participation: People's participation in rural development is the most

important point to be noticed. Without people's involvement in the process, it is bound

to be a failure. Whether in planning, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation and in

benefit sharing, active involvement ofthe people is also required for the success of the

development programmes. Success or failure of any development programme is entirely

dependant on how the people take initiatives for the implementation of the programme.

As mentioned earlier, Nagas, in general, are very cooperative in any kind of

development programme. Community involvement is very strong and also the feeling of

oneness is a prestige for the Nagas. Thus, the success ofVDB in the state is because of

the total involvement of all the people in the programmes.

 136

(d) State Allocation for Different Rural Development Programmes:

The state Government and the Department of Rural Development in particular is taking

keen interest in the activities of rural development at grass root level and the decision

was taken to allocate part ofthe Government ofNagaland's annual plan fund village-

wise instead of mere sector-wise as is the common practice all over. The village-wise

allocation was introduced from 1980-81 (financial year) under which every village

receives grant- in- aid at a specific rate for carrying out schemes of community

development as mentioned in the VDB activities of the state.

Table-5.3: Statement Showing Plan Expenditure under Rural Development Block

(Rs. in lakh)

Sl. Programmes Implemented 1995-1996 0

/o 1999-2000 %
No.
1 Integrated Rural Development 280.00 12.14 120.00 3.87
Grant-in Aid to VDB for Community
2
Development Scheme - - 1125.00 36.30
Addl. Grant in Aid Resource for Misc.
3 11.00 0.47 21.28 0.69
Community development schemes
4 Matching Grants to VDB - - - -
5 E.A.S 780.00 33.82 558.00 18.0
6 Improved Chullah 2.78 0.12 - -
7 I.R.E.P. 20.00 0.87 22.50 0.73
8 B.M.S. (Housing) 518.00 22.46 669.00 21.59
9 B.M.S. (Road) 199.00 8.63 228.00 7.36
10 TRYSEM 35.38 1.53 - -
11 DWCRA - . - -
12 Indira Awas Yojana (rural housing) 200.00 8.67 145.00 4.68
13 Jawahar Rozgar Yoiana 260.00 1127 210.00 6.78
Grand Total 2306.16 100 3098.78 100
Sources: Dll'ectorate of Rural Development Blocks, Government ofNagaland, Kohuna
Where: EAS- Employment Assurance Scheme
BMS- Basic Minimum Scheme
IREP-Integrated Rural Energy Programme
TRYSEM-Tmining ofRuml Youth for Self-Employment
DWCRA- Development of Women and Children in Rural Areas
 137

A total amount ofRs.2306.16 lakhs and Rs.3098.78 lakhs were allocated

under different heads of rural development programmes during 1995-1996 and 1999-

2000 respectively. It is indicated that the maximum share 36.3% (Rs.ll25.00 lakhs)

went to Gmnt-in-aid to VDBs for community development work at village level during

1999-2000 followed by EAS, 33.82% share in 1995-96 and 18.0% in 1999-2000. BMS

for rural housing is another important scheme, which got a major share in the allocation

of fund for development, 22.46% share in 1995-96 and 21.59% share in 1999-2000.

Where as BMS for road development was 8.63% share and 7.36% share in 1995-96 and

1999-2000 respectively. There is no separate allocation of fund for TRYSEM, DWCRA

etc., which were some of the important schemes in the 80s and 90s. Under Indira Awas

Yojana (rural housing scheme), Rs.200 lakhs in 1995-96 and Rs.l45 lakhs in 1999-2000

were allocated. Under Jawahar Rozgar Yojana an amount of Rs.260 lakhs (11.27%)

during 1995-1996 and Rs.210 lakhs (6.78%) during 1999-2000 were allocated (fable-

5.3).

The State Government have proposed the Ninth Plan for Central

Government approval, and the same was approved and allocation was made as shown in

Table-5.4. During the Ninth Plan, there was a total allocation of Rs.2006.43 crores to

the state government, out of which 25.66% share of the fund was kept under the head of

Social Service, 15.22% of the share for Tmnsport and Communication and only 14.39%

of the share for Rural Development followed by Agriculture and Allied activities with a

share of 12.96%.
 138

Table-5.4 The Ninth Five Year Plan (1997-2002) Outlays for the State of
Nagaland under Different Major Heads of Development:
SI.No. Major Heads for Development Total Outlays Percent
(Rs. in crore} to total
1. Agriculture & Allied activities 260.00 12.96
2. Rural Development 288.80 14.39
3. Special Area Programme 27.00 1.35
4. Irrigation & Flood control 57.00 2.84
5. Energy 119.65 5.96
6. Industry and Minerals 121.00 6.03
7. Transport and Communication 305.40 15.22
8. Science & Tech. and Environment 5.00 0.25
9. General Economic services 204.00 I 0.17
10. Social services 514.79 25.66
11. General services 103.79 5.17
Grand total 2006.43 100.00
Source: Five-Year Plan, Planning Commission, Govt. of India, New Delhi.

5.7 Concluding Remarks:

Rural development through VDB initiations is doing well as far as village community is

concerned. But it is also equally important that whether there is any improvement in an

individual person or family in his/her standard of living.

The state is still lagging in development of infrastructural facilities in all

respects. The absence of industrial sector in the state is another blow to the present

generation, where educated youth as well as school and college dropouts are unable to
 139

go for employment. As these groups of people are not in the position to go for

agricultural operation/labourers, facilities for self-employment and small or medium

type of industrial units can help to some extent, which can generate employment

facilities for the youth.

There is hardly any revenue for the state government to generate its own

resources (income) and thus, the state is fully dependant on Central Government for

financial assistance. Even though, crores of rupees has been spent in the name of

development every year, under different heads as shown above, there is very little

improvement being seen on the face of the rural people, especially those in the remote

areas. Village Development Boards are there at grass root level, but with this pace of

development, it is not much helpful to the individual person. The identification of

remote areas and approach to infrastructure facilities for the development are major

aspects for consideration.

Notes:

1. Government of Nagaland has directed all the V .D.Bs to operate a joint account

(Saving Account), and all transaction is made through this bank account. Each

and every V .D.B in Nagaland has got a Fixed Deposit Scheme with a minimum

amount ofRs. 1 lakh.

 140

References:
Brayne, F.L. (1946): Better Villages, Oxford University Press, Bombay, p. 268.
Gokhale, A. M. (1984 ): A New Approach to Rural Development, Rural Development in
Action, Department of Rural Development, Kohima.
Gokhale, A. M. (1988): Common Fund Programme Experiment in Nagaland, Kurukshetra,
Vol36 (8), pp 29-33.
Krishan, Ram (1986): Remodelling Villages; A Challenge, Yojana, Vol. 30 (22) p. 19.
Maithani, B.P. and K. Haloi (1987): Implementation of Integrated Rural Development
Programme: the Nagaland Experience, Journal of Rural Development, Vol. 6, (No. 5), p.
501.
Maithani, B.P. ( 1997): Local Self Government of System in North-East India- an appraisal,
NIRD, Hyderabad.
Maithani, B.P. and A. Rizwana (1992): Nagaland's Village Development Board Programme,
Journal ofRural Development, Vol. ll (I), pp. 17-34.
Maheshwari, Shriram (1995): Rural Development in India, Sage Publications India Pvt.
Ltd., New Delhi.
Mayor, Albert (1958): Pilot Project in India, University of California Press, California, p.
37.
Mills J. P. (1926): The Ao Nagas, Macmillan and Co. Ltd., London, p. 176.
Mishra, B.B. (1983): District Administration and Rural Development, Oxford University
Press, Delhi. p. iv
Nakhro, K.H. (1997): Cooperative Movement in Nagaland, paper presented in the Workshop
on Cooperative Development in NE of India, Sponsored by Cooperative Foundation of
India, (Nov .20-21 ), Guwahati.
Narayan, Jaya Prakash: Communication Society and Panchayati Raj, Vaikunth Mehta Trust,
Bombay, p. 133
Pandey, V.P. (1967): Village Community Projects in India, Bombay.
Pyarelal (1963): Mahatma Gandhi-The Last Phase Vol. II, Navjivan Publishing House,
Ahmedabad.
 141

Venkadri, S. (2000): Empowerment of Community Based Traditional Organisation- Village

Development Board (VDB) ofNagaland: A Case in Point, Journal of Rural Development,
Vol. 19 (1), pp. 81-102.
Rambhai, B. (1959): The Silent Revolution, Jiwan Prakashan, Delhi, p. 10.
Randhawa, M.S. (1951 ): Developing Village India, Orient Longman, Bombay, pp. 39-42.
Sahay, B. N. (1989): Decentralisation the Nagaland Way, Yojana, Jan. 26.
Santhanan, M. L. & M.P. Jahagirdhar (1985): VDB: Nagaland Experiment in Community
Particition, Journal ofRural Development, Vol. 4 (3) pp. 377-391.
Santhanan, M. L. (1984): Community Participation- A case study, Social Change, Vol. 14
(2)
Sharma, P. N. (1987): Participatory Planning for Village Development, Yojana, Vol. 31
(17) pp. 16-70
Singh, Hoshiar (1995): Administration of Rural Development in India, Sterling Publishers
Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi.
Government of Nagaland (1984): Rural Development in Action; Department of Rural
Development, Kohima, Nagaland.
Government ofNagaland (1980): The Village Development Board Model Rules, Department
of Home, Kohima, pp 3-8.
Government of Nagaland (1989): Department of Rural Development, Notification, Dated
Kohima, the 21"1• November.
Government of India/Planning Commission for various Five Year Plan documents, New
Delhi.