Beyond a Colonial Relic

A senior journalist, in one of her recent columns, has gushed effusively about the Trump-Musk DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency) initiative and propounded the need for similar measures in India. She has mentioned several proposals, some of which appear quite logical at first glance. Particularly enticing is her suggestion regarding district governance:

"Can we please abolish the post of the Collector? These unelected despots not only have the power to control all development in their districts, but they also live in grander style than we can afford. Why does this colonial post continue to exist 75 years after the colonial masters have departed?"

The impression one gets is that the journalist has not had the privilege of directly observing the district Collector in recent times. The Collector of today is a far cry from his pre-independence or even post-independence (until the mid-seventies) predecessors. This institution no longer operates in a top-down, autocratic manner, performing the colonial-era task of collecting lagaan (bhoo-rajaswa) on agricultural land. Nor does it retain any colonial-era trappings and symbols.

The institution of the Collector remains one of the most crucial and grounded pillars of India's social and economic development process—despite its antiquity dating back to 1772 and the fact that the British themselves have not replicated it in the UK. The Collector serves as the coordinating head of a phalanx of government agencies at the field level, including the police, forest, agriculture, education, health, food and civil supplies, land management, and various infrastructure development agencies such as irrigation, drinking water and sanitation, public works, and roads. As the overseer of all development activities in the district, the Collector develops a grassroots-level understanding of the various challenges confronting the region. This helps build trust and positions the Collector as an overarching ombudsman and people’s watchdog.

While one of the traditional roles of the Collector was indeed to collect land revenue for the government, that role has been entirely diminished due to the overall policy of not taxing agriculture and the fact that collections from land revenue no longer justify the enormous paperwork and tedium involved. However, the Collector continues to be the pivot for the Land Revenue Code, which lays down the regulations for resolving disputes related to land matters and ensures the effective governance of the administrative machinery from the district to the tahsil to the village level through a chain of command that includes Deputy Collectors, Tahsildars, Kanungos, and Patwaris.

Abolishing the institution of the Collector would mean dismantling the mechanisms that handle, in a quasi-judicial manner, land transfers, land acquisition, mutations, and dispute settlements between landholders—issues that are only growing due to the increasing value and pressure on land. The lower judiciary is already choked with a logjam of cases, making it unimaginable for them to take on land revenue disputes as well. On the contrary, it makes more sense to further empower the administrative machinery under the Collector by enhancing their judicial powers, allowing them to dispose of petty cases related to lesser crimes such as motor vehicle violations, state excise, legal metrology, and negotiable instruments. Doing so alone could unclog the lower judicial system by about 50 per cent, enabling it to focus on weightier matters and help move the needle on the pendency of four crore cases.

The Collector and his subordinates also perform magisterial functions. India is essentially a rural country, with 70 per cent of its population residing outside cities, unlike the United States, where almost 90 per cent of the population lives in urban areas. The Collector, therefore, performs the role of a magistrate and maintains oversight of law-and-order administration for much of the district that does not have a Police Commissioner in charge—on average, about 85 per cent of the district.

None of the key programmes of the government—elections, the census, or disaster management—can succeed without the coordinating role of the Collector. In fact, there is currently a fragmentation of the Collector’s powers, preventing him from exercising complete authority over the various arms of the government at the district level. This issue has been exacerbated by the 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments, which decentralised power to panchayats, janpads, and municipalities as local self-governing bodies.

What are the skill sets required to better manage a district? An ability to multitask and handle a multifarious number of tasks is the need of the hour. A mere subject matter or sectoral specialist cannot do that. Collectors require stability of tenures and protection from political vagaries. The introduction of the mandate for Collectors to be “responsive” in the 20-Point programme was the first nail in the politicisation of the bureaucracy because suddenly every field level decision was open to public scrutiny and influence in the 20-Point forum. So, for instance, an encroachment removal drive could get stymied and deferred indefinitely because the 20-Point leadership at the district level would want the administration to be ‘more sensitive’ to those who were ‘without a livelihood.’

Historically, because Collectors are unelected and accountable over a lifetime, they have remained institutionally insulated from the politics of the day. Riots, famines, elections, natural disasters, mission-mode programmes, and the computerisation of records have all been managed by Collectors, who serve as the fulcrum of district-level administration. The Collector safeguards national unity and integrity year-round, 24 hours a day, and can be relied upon in moments of crisis to coordinate across sectors and resolve issues. The COVID-19 pandemic reaffirmed the Collector’s vital role in disaster management and governance, prompting the highest levels of government to acknowledge the importance of the executive magistrate in maintaining public order.

Finally, the most crucial role of the Collector is as the government’s aide of last resort—its eyes and ears—someone who can be trusted to uphold the government’s interests, maintain its authority, and report on any matter in a dispassionate manner. Programmes such as the Aspirational Districts Programme and the Civil Services Awards scheme have bolstered the morale of Collectors.

What is truly needed is to empower Collectors by training them to adopt a more analytical approach in preparing for future governance challenges. While directly recruited IAS officers receive extensive training, those promoted to the position of Collector from provincial services require rigorous instruction—not in routine public administration, but in modern methodologies, analytical tools, and cutting-edge knowledge in corporate law, urban planning, business, and finance.

Until India’s urban population reaches at least 75 per cent and the numerous affirmative action programmes for rural development and social justice are phased out, the institution of the Collector will remain indispensable and continue to form the backbone of governance. Any knee-jerk tinkering with this institution would be regressive and risk damaging the essential fabric of unity and democracy in India.

The writer is a former Secretary, Government of India, and a Professor of Practice in Public Policy at IIM Calcutta. Views expressed are personal