View Article - Institute of Development Studies

27office as a consequence of election. Stated otherwise, it is not the least of democracy’sattraction that it is a government, which makes dominance strictly impermanent (Kaviraj,1996). Yet in the State of West Bengal no serious contestation or competition amongpolitical parties seems to be taking place and accordingly no alternation in office happens.We are inadequately equipped to comment on this any further. But the implications of allthis for decentralisation as well as for the responsiveness of the LBs to the poor stand inneed of close scrutiny.From Administration Raj to Panchayati Raj? Before we close this section, we wishto touch upon the subject of PRI-administration relationship, as it has unfolded over theyears in the State of West Bengal. Prior to 1978, the District Magistrate was the ultimateauthority at the district level and the BDO was in command at the block level. After 1978they were required to work alongside elected members of PRIs and to implement thedecisions passed by them. It is worth examining how the relationship between these twosets of actors has evolved during the long, uninterrupted, rule by the Left front coalition inthe State. 19 At the initial stages of decentralisation reforms, some conflicts and tensionsremained between bureaucrats and locally elected politicians. A former minister for finance,for example, notes that during this time problems developed if a ‘haughty politician’ cameto power or an ‘egotistical IAS officer’ was placed in the local administration (Seshiah,2003). Also, during the initial years of the Left front rule, the bureaucracy did not thinkthat the government would last long in power. But now after five consecutive panchayatelections, politicians and administrators have accepted each other. Moreover, tension orfriction is not uniform; instances of synergy of action and mutual cooperation are alsovisible, as one experienced bureaucrat observes. 20 Several interviews concur that the presentrelationship of bureaucrats and politicians may be described as one of ‘grudging respect’and ‘mutual learning’. They further argue that the bureaucracy has accepted its place as‘second in command, ‘as their wings are clipped’. Some express concern that the relationshipat times is too close for comfort. For example, there is an excessive readiness among someyoung administrators to ‘toe the line’ of local political bosses. These comments indicatethe intricacies of the relationship between politicians on the one hand and bureaucrats onthe other. Also, just as politicians constitute a motley group, bureaucrats also are not ahomogeneous category. The IAS officers have very different equations with their politicalbosses, as compared to those between local politicians and the BDO or the ‘street-level’bureaucracy. In short, at different layers of government there exist different sorts andshades of the ‘Neta-Babu’ relationship.