Examine the provisions of Panchayat Extension Services Act (PESA), 1996. (2018, 20 Marks)
Article 243M kept Fifth Schedule areas out of Part IX, because a uniform elected structure could override working customary institutions. Acting under Article 243M(4)(b) on the Dilip Singh Bhuria Committee‘s report (1995), Parliament passed the Provisions of the Panchayats (Extension to the Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996. It answered the Adivasi demand for self-rule on the community’s terms. Its text is the most radical in Indian local government; its record is among the weakest.
Scope
PESA applies to Scheduled Areas in ten states — Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha and Rajasthan. That covers some 77,500 villages and 22,000 panchayats. Sixth Schedule areas remain under their own district councils.
The provisions: Section 4
- Customary law as the standard — state panchayat law must accord with custom, religious and social practice and the community’s traditional resource management (4(a)).
- The community as the unit — a village is a habitation, hamlet or group of hamlets managing its affairs by custom (4(b)). Each has a gram sabha of all persons on its electoral rolls (4(c)).
- Guardian of identity — the sabha is competent to safeguard traditions, cultural identity, community resources and customary dispute resolution (4(d)).
- Development control — it must approve plans and projects before implementation and identify beneficiaries (4(e)). The panchayat needs its certificate of utilisation of funds (4(f)).
- Land and resources — consultation before acquisition and resettlement (4(i)); management of minor water bodies (4(j)); prior recommendation for minor-mineral leases and auctions (4(k), 4(l)).
- Economic powers (4(m)) — regulating intoxicants, ownership of minor forest produce, preventing land alienation and restoring alienated land, managing village markets, controlling money-lending to STs, and controlling social-sector functionaries and tribal sub-plans.
- Representation — STs get at least half the seats and all chairperson posts (4(g)); unrepresented tribes may be nominated (4(h)).
- Safeguards — higher tiers may not assume the sabha’s powers (4(n)), and district administration should follow the Sixth Schedule pattern (4(o)). Inconsistent state laws lapsed after one year (Section 5).
Testing the text against practice
- Rules came late. Andhra Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh and Rajasthan framed rules in 2011, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh in 2022, and Jharkhand at the turn of 2026. By March 2026 nine of ten states had rules. Odisha, with the most Scheduled-Area villages, had only a 2023 draft.
- Dilution. Many rules equate “village” with the revenue village, not the hamlet, and treat the sabha’s minerals recommendation as advisory. Excise, forest and mining codes were never aligned with the Act.
- Consultation, not consent. Section 4(i) was read as a formality. Illiterate, poorly informed communities saw sabha resolutions recorded where no meeting was held, a charge levelled in Odisha’s mining belt. The Act has no penalty and no forum for enforcement.
- Courts and later laws filled gaps. Samatha v. State of Andhra Pradesh (1997) barred leasing Scheduled-Area land to private non-tribal mining firms. The Forest Rights Act, 2006 and the 2013 land acquisition law (which requires the sabha’s consent in Scheduled Areas) strengthened the sabha. In the Niyamgiri case (2013), twelve gram sabhas rejected Vedanta’s bauxite mining.
- Security cost. PESA districts largely coincide with Left Wing Extremism. The Planning Commission’s expert group under Debabrata Bandyopadhyay (2008) linked that unrest partly to the Act’s non-implementation. Virginius Xaxa‘s committee (2014) urged moving from consultation to consent.
Conclusion
PESA’s provisions reverse the usual hierarchy by placing the community above the council, and Niyamgiri showed they can work. But the Act depends on states that would lose control of land, minerals and forests. For the 8.6% of Indians who are Scheduled Tribes, it will stay a promise until rules match its text, consultation becomes consent and violations carry penalties.