(a) Discuss the contribution of the Dalit struggle to establish egalitarianism in Indian society during freedom movement. 20 (b)…

(a) Dalit Assertion and Egalitarianism in the Freedom Movement

The anti-caste struggle fundamentally democratised the Indian national movement by transforming the demand for freedom from a mere political transfer of power into substantive social emancipation. Rooted in Jyotirao Phule’s Satyashodhak Samaj (1873) and anti-caste ideology, the early movement challenged Brahmanical social hegemony, with regional currents such as Ayyankali's struggle for access to roads and schools in Travancore and Mangoo Ram's Ad-Dharm movement in Punjab (1926). Under B.R. Ambedkar, the struggle matured through organisations - the Bahishkrit Hitakarini Sabha (1924), the Independent Labour Party (1936) and the Scheduled Castes Federation (1942) - and mass direct actions like the Mahad Satyagraha (1927) for equal civic rights to public water resources and the Kalaram Temple entry movement (1930) asserting human dignity.

The Dalit movement altered nationalist discourse by foregrounding the abolition of untouchability and institutional safeguards. Ambedkar’s advocacy for separate electorates at the Round Table Conferences exposed the Indian National Congress’s historical reluctance to prioritize structural caste reform over elite political unity. While Mahatma Gandhi’s Harijan campaign addressed untouchability through moral penance and internal Hindu reform, Ambedkar demanded rights-based socio-legal guarantees, culminating in the Poona Pact (1932) as a negotiated compromise for reserved legislative seats. By forcing the nationalist leadership to confront internal hierarchies, the Dalit struggle expanded the freedom movement's social base beyond urban elites and embedded egalitarianism into the foundation of Indian constitutionalism.

(b) Gram Swaraj: The Gandhian Perspective on Planning

Mahatma Gandhi’s blueprint of Gram Swaraj provides an alternative framework to modern developmental planning by anchoring it in decentralized, self-sufficient village republics governed by Panchayat Raj. Gandhi rejected Western industrialism, centralized mechanization, and relentless consumerism, warning that they lead to structural exploitation and urban-rural disparity. Instead, he conceptualized planning around ethical consumption, local production, khadi, and village cottage industries, elevating moral self-realization over material accumulation. This was systematised in the Gandhian Plan (1944) of Shriman Narayan Agarwal and in J.C. Kumarappa's "economy of permanence", which proposed village-level planning for basic needs rather than national targets for heavy industry.

Central to Gandhian planning was the doctrine of trusteeship, which sought to bypass violent class conflict by urging wealth owners to act as ethical custodians for the collective good. This model stood in stark contrast to the Nehruvian planning paradigm, which privileged state-led heavy industrialization, mega-projects, and centralized technocratic planning via the Planning Commission. While Gram Swaraj offered an ecologically sustainable, human-centric vision of development, its critics highlight structural limitations regarding scalability, capital accumulation, and the capacity to drive rapid economic modernization in an interdependent global economy, and Ambedkar famously dismissed the village as "a sink of localism". Its partial legacy lies in Article 40, the 73rd Amendment (1992) and decentralised district planning.

(c) Role of Pressure Groups in Decision-Making

Pressure groups serve as vital conduits between civil society and the state in a pluralist democracy. Business associations like the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI) and Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) exert significant influence on fiscal and industrial policy through pre-budget consultations and formal lobbying. Agrarian lobbies such as the Bharatiya Kisan Union (BKU), along with trade unions and rights-based civil society organizations, influence state action through public campaigns, mass mobilizations, and public interest litigation. Their impact is visible in landmark enactments like the Right to Information Act (2005), pressed for by the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan, and the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA, 2005) (now succeeded by the VB-G RAM G Act, 2025), as well as in the repeal of the three farm laws in November 2021 after the Samyukt Kisan Morcha's year-long protest.

Critically, the operation of pressure groups reveals a persistent tension between democratic pluralism and elite capture. Asymmetrical access to financial resources and institutional networks often allows corporate lobbies disproportionate sway over policy relative to unorganized labor and marginalized communities. Moreover, while pressure groups frequently succeed in shaping legislative formulation, systemic administrative implementation gaps remain unaddressed. Fostering equitable participation requires institutional transparency, regulation of political financing (the Supreme Court struck down the electoral bond scheme in February 2024 for its opacity), and the effective use of mechanisms like the Right to Information (RTI) Act.