Bring out the common and unique features of the 73rd and the 74th amendments to the Constitution of India. Do you think that these amendments would contribute to the achievement of ‘gender’ and ‘social’ justice at the grassroot level? (2002)
The 73rd and 74th Amendments (1992; in force 24 April and 1 June 1993) were twins: Part IX for panchayats, Part IXA for municipalities. Both make the form of local government mandatory and leave its substance to state legislatures — and both name “social justice” as a purpose of local planning (Arts. 243G, 243W). That design shapes the answer to the second question.
A shared constitutional frame
- Status and elections — constitution of local bodies compulsory; direct election to all seats; a five-year term, fresh polls before expiry or within six months of dissolution (243E/243U).
- Reservation — SC/ST seats in proportion to population; not less than one-third for women, and one-third of panchayat chairs (municipal chairs by state law); backward classes left to state law (243D/243T).
- Institutions — one State Election Commission (243K/243ZA) and one State Finance Commission (243I/243Y) for both; audit left to state law (243J/243Z).
- Devolution — a Schedule of subjects the state “may” transfer; Fifth and Sixth Schedule areas excluded; courts barred from delimitation disputes.
Where they diverge
| Point | 73rd (Arts. 243–243-O) | 74th (Arts. 243P–243ZG) |
|---|---|---|
| Structure | Three tiers — village, intermediate, district (intermediate optional below 20 lakh) | Three types by character of area — nagar panchayat, municipal council, corporation |
| Popular base | Gram sabha of every voter (243A) | Wards committees, only above three lakh (243S) |
| Functions | Eleventh Schedule, 29 subjects | Twelfth Schedule, 18 subjects |
| Planning | Panchayat plans feed the district plan | Inserts the District Planning Committee (243ZD) and Metropolitan Planning Committee (243ZE) |
| Opt-out | None | Industrial township proviso (243Q) |
| Scheduled Areas | Extended by PESA, 1996 | No urban extension |
Gender justice: yes, in presence and agenda
- Scale — about 14.5 lakh women, roughly 46% of panchayat representatives; over twenty states, Bihar first in 2006, have moved to 50%.
- Substance — Raghabendra Chattopadhyay and Esther Duflo (Econometrica, 2004) found women-headed panchayats invested more in drinking water, the good women prioritised. Anne Phillips‘s politics of presence is vindicated: the agenda changed because who sat in the room changed.
- But — “sarpanch pati” proxy rule persists: the NHRC asked every state in September 2025 to report on it. Rotation ends careers after one term, and a woman mayor inherits a ceremonial chair beside a state-appointed commissioner.
Social justice: a harder test
- Proportional SC/ST reservation, including chairpersons, puts Dalits and Adivasis at the head of village government — an inversion of local hierarchy no earlier measure attempted.
- Yet B. R. Ambedkar‘s warning about the village as “a sink of localism” remains relevant. Dominant castes field dependants, capture the unreserved vice-chair and use no-confidence motions. OBC quotas rest on state law and the triple test (Vikas Kishanrao Gawali, 2021).
- Redistribution needs power. With devolution at about 43.9% on the 2024 index and funds the weakest dimension, the social-justice planning of Article 243G stays largely on paper.
Conclusion
Yes, but unevenly. In Nancy Fraser‘s terms, the Amendments deliver recognition and representation faster than redistribution. Gender and social justice will follow when states give the room something to decide: obligatory devolution, penalties for proxy rule and enforcement of the Atrocities Act.