How Tamil Nadu changed after 1967

The focus on increased representation of other classes in jobs brought diversity in the administration

July 23, 2018 12:15 am | Updated 01:26 am IST

M. Karunanidhi (left) became the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu when C.N. Annadurai passed away in 1969.

M. Karunanidhi (left) became the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu when C.N. Annadurai passed away in 1969.

After 1967, as changes swept through Tamil Nadu following the election of the first regional party government in the State, S. Narayan had a ringside view, first as a student and later as a part of the State administration. Before stints at the Centre, including being Economic Adviser to Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee in 2003-04, Mr. Narayan spent two decades in Tamil Nadu. “I saw ideology being translated into policies, programmes, and their delivery. I do not think such a change happened elsewhere in India,” he writes in his new book, The Dravidian Years: Politics and Welfare in Tamil Nadu, explaining why he wanted to chronicle what happened. An excerpt:

Annadurai passed away in 1969 and M. Karunanidhi became Chief Minister. The Cabinet consisted of ideologues of the erstwhile anti-Hindi, anti-Delhi movements as well as young, educated, and articulate persons keen to show that the government could do as well, if not better, than earlier governments for development. The policies between 1969 and 1976 were a mix of these ideas.

There was strategic use of state patronage, and the use of local party cadres in administration. As a young officer, I witnessed representations from the public spearheaded by local party functionaries. This was a change. Earlier, I used to meet Panchayat Union Chairmen accompanied by their officers on matters pertaining to development. Now, there were district and local party functionaries bringing representations on the availability of irrigation, water, foodgrains, or the functioning of schools. Suddenly, we had to deal with representations from the party, rather than from the hierarchy. Upwardly mobile interest groups emerged, seeking the support of the party now in power. Initially, they pointed out public grievances for redressal, short-circuiting the established channels of administration, and, over the years, these have grown into assertive demands from the district administration. Representations from party cadres in administration are now the norm rather than an exception. While this serves to articulate public demands and grievances, it constrains the administration into looking at things only from a particular point of view.

Changes based on caste

There was focus on increased representation of other classes in jobs and in the party cadre. Data from the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission indicates that between 1960 and 1980, the caste composition of those entering government service changed considerably, with a substantially greater proportion coming from the backward classes. Action for government recruitment from the backward, most backward, and Dalit castes ensured that the structure of the bureaucracy underwent a change. Several of the new personnel were from non-urban areas and could understand village-level conditions. The new dispensation was more in tune with the expectations and aspirations of the party in power.


In administration, at the level of the lower rung of police and revenue authorities, the representation of Dalits and other backward classes was more marked. The mere introduction of recruitment based on numerical strengths of the communities in society ensured that forward caste representation in new appointments went down drastically, while opportunities for backward castes and for Scheduled Castes and Tribes increased significantly. The proportion of Brahmins recruited into government jobs became smaller in tune with their proportion in the population. As a result, the number of entrants into government jobs became much more representative of the diversity of classes and castes in the population. This was a very significant change. On the one hand, it brought to fruition the proportional representation that EVR [E.V. Ramasamy] had aspired to right from the days of the Kanchipuram Congress in 1925. At the same time, it brought into government people from different backgrounds and aspirations as well as from small towns and rural areas, who were more in tune with the sentiments of the Dravidian parties, as were the students of Madras in my time. This was, and continues to be, a very important step forward in ensuring social balance in State administration and is instrumental in delivering the social welfare and social benefit services in succeeding administrations. The class composition of government service today is totally different from what it was when I joined service in 1965, and is definitely more representative of the diversity of groups in Tamil Nadu.

There was greater reliance on the district administration and on District Collectors. Collectors were the implementing arms of government policies at the district level, and the continuity from colonial days ensured that the administration remained committed to this. Senior members of the service at the Secretariat level were people who had worked under colonial rule, and the systems and processes that continued were a reflection of those standards. I remember that during my probation at the training academy in Mussoorie, multiple sessions were devoted to the importance of the role of the District Collector in ensuring coherent administration and planned development based on policies laid down hierarchically.

Influence of cadres

In Tamil Nadu, the situation changed after 1967. The DMK was a party that had emerged from a mass movement. It was important for them to, while in power, listen to and satisfy the expectations of the people. The DMK was also a disciplined organisation in which district secretaries had direct access to the top leaders. The district secretaries started interacting with District Collectors directly on matters pertaining to day-to-day administration. The post of District Collector became a powerful and coveted one. There were seasoned collectors like S.P. Ambrose, who had been at the helm of several districts, and was in Coimbatore in 1967. Ambrose initially found the change of having to deal with the new MLAs difficult, and mentioned several cases of attempts by newly elected politicians to take the law and administration in their own hands. He said that he had the support of the Ministers from the district, and the Chief Minister.

Gradually, this changed, especially after 1971 when the DMK came back to power with an overwhelming majority and the party cadres had more influence. The Collectors and the party district secretary became the most powerful arms of the State administration in the districts. There was naturally a trend towards State patronage in postings and the politicisation of administrative cadres. Senior members of the civil services retired in these years or were deputed to the Central government in senior positions, and the changes in State bureaucracy at the field level were quite palpable. This was true for the subsequent AIADMK regime as well.

Excerpted with permission from OUP

Top News Today


Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.