Challenges to and Restoration of the Congress System

Written and reviewed by Subhra Gupta, Humanities faculty at UniDrill (M.A. Sociology, University of Delhi · 7 years teaching Humanities). Based on NCERT Political Science Class XII (Politics in India since Independence), Chapter 5.

Who rules after Nehru?

On 27 May 1964, India lost the only prime minister it had known. For seventeen years Jawaharlal Nehru had been the face of the country, the leader of Congress and the centre of every important decision. Observers abroad wondered aloud whether a poor, diverse, newly independent democracy could pass power to someone else peacefully, or whether the army or chaos would step in.

Two questions hung in the air: "After Nehru, who?" and "After Nehru, what?" The 1960s were even called the dangerous decade, because poverty, inequality, and communal and regional divisions seemed capable of breaking the democratic experiment or the country itself. This chapter shows how India handled that decade: two smooth successions, a shock at the polls in 1967, a split in the ruling party, and a landslide in 1971 that changed what Congress was.

The big picture: a timeline, 1963 to 1972

Two successions: how Congress passed the test

When Nehru died, the Congress President K. Kamaraj consulted party leaders and MPs. A consensus formed around Lal Bahadur Shastri, who was chosen unanimously as leader of the Congress Parliamentary Party and became Prime Minister. His time in office (1964 to 1966) was short and hard: the 1965 war with Pakistan and a serious food shortage. He answered both with one slogan, "Jai Jawan Jai Kisan", honouring the soldier and the farmer together. He died suddenly at Tashkent on 11 January 1966, a day after signing an agreement with Pakistan's President Ayub Khan to end the war.

Now there was a contest. Morarji Desai and Indira Gandhi both wanted to lead. Senior leaders favoured Indira Gandhi, but Morarji Desai would not step aside, so the matter went to a secret ballot of Congress MPs. Indira Gandhi won with the support of more than two-thirds of them. Two successions in under two years, both without violence, showed that the party and the system could handle change of leader.

Pause and predict: Shastri was chosen by consultation and Indira Gandhi by a secret ballot. What changed between 1964 and 1966 that made a vote necessary?

Check your answer: In 1964 there was one clear consensus candidate. In 1966 there were two serious claimants, and neither would withdraw. A consensus cannot be built when two leaders both refuse to step back, so the party counted votes instead.

Why 1967 was a shock

Elections in February 1967 took place in the middle of an economic crisis. The cause-effect chain below shows why voters were angry.

Non-Congressism. The socialist leader Ram Manohar Lohia noticed something simple: Congress kept winning because the opposition vote was split among many parties. His answer was the strategy of non-Congressism: parties with very different ideologies should adjust seats and form anti-Congress fronts, just to defeat Congress. He argued that Congress rule was undemocratic and against the interests of ordinary and poor people. The idea gave opposition parties a reason to cooperate despite deep ideological gaps.

The verdict. Observers called the result a political earthquake. Congress still won a majority in the Lok Sabha, but with its lowest number of seats and its lowest vote share since 1952. Half of the ministers in Indira Gandhi's cabinet lost. Powerful state leaders were defeated: Kamaraj in Tamil Nadu, S.K. Patil in Maharashtra, Atulya Ghosh in West Bengal and K.B. Sahay in Bihar.

In the states the shock was bigger. Congress lost its majority in seven states and, because of defections, could not form a government in two more. The nine states are in the table.

Madras was special. The DMK came to power after leading a large anti-Hindi agitation against the Centre. It was the first time any non-Congress party won a majority of its own in a state. In the other eight states, coalitions took over.

Two views. For the exam: 1967 was a "political earthquake" that broke Congress dominance in nine states. Another reading: some observers point out that Congress kept its majority at the Centre, so the shock was felt most in the states. On this reading 1967 marks the start of competitive politics in the states, not the end of Congress at the Centre.

Coalitions and defection: two new words in the political dictionary

After 1967, many non-Congress governments in states were formed by Samyukt Vidhayak Dal (SVD), joint legislature parties of non-Congress members. These brought together parties that disagreed on almost everything. In Bihar, for example, the SSP, PSP, CPI (a Left party) and the Jana Sangh (a Right party) sat in the same government. In Punjab the Popular United Front included both Akali groups, the CPI, the CPI(M), the SSP, the Republican Party and the Jana Sangh. These governments showed that coalitions were possible, and also how fragile they could be.

Defection means an elected representative leaves the party on whose symbol he or she was elected and joins another. The phrase "Aya Ram, Gaya Ram" comes from Gaya Lal, a Haryana MLA, who changed parties three times in a fortnight in 1967. The line "Gaya Ram was now Aya Ram" is credited to Rao Birendra Singh. The phrase stuck because defection had become so common that governments rose and fell on it.

Beyond the textbook. For the exam: defection was a feature of 1967 politics. In reality: the problem was addressed by law in 1985, when the 52nd Amendment added the Tenth Schedule to the Constitution (the anti-defection law). The exam still treats "Aya Ram, Gaya Ram" as a 1967 phrase from Haryana.

The Syndicate and the new Prime Minister

The Syndicate was an informal group of powerful Congress leaders who controlled the party organisation. Its members were Kamaraj (its leader), S.K. Patil (Bombay), S. Nijalingappa (Mysore), N. Sanjeeva Reddy (Andhra Pradesh) and Atulya Ghosh (West Bengal). Both Shastri and Indira Gandhi became Prime Minister with its support. The Kamaraj Plan (1963), under which senior Congressmen resigned from office to work for the party, had, in effect, raised the importance of organisational leaders like these.

Indira Gandhi faced two tasks: to become independent of the Syndicate and to regain the ground lost in 1967. She turned a power struggle into an ideological one. In May 1967 the Congress Working Committee adopted a Ten Point Programme: social control of banks, nationalisation of general insurance, a ceiling on urban property and incomes, public distribution of food grains, land reforms and house sites for the rural poor. The Syndicate accepted the programme on paper but had reservations about carrying it out.

The 1969 split: a chain of events

The break came through a presidential election. After President Zakir Husain died in May 1969, the Syndicate chose N. Sanjeeva Reddy as the official Congress candidate. Indira Gandhi encouraged Vice-President V.V. Giri to stand as an independent and appealed to Congress legislators to vote according to their conscience. She also announced the nationalisation of 14 leading private banks and the abolition of privy purses (the hereditary payments promised to the former princely rulers), moves that strengthened her pro-poor image. Giri won narrowly, and Congress split in November 1969.

The chain in one line: Zakir Husain dies → Syndicate nominates Sanjeeva Reddy → Indira Gandhi backs Giri and calls for a conscience vote → bank nationalisation and the privy purse move → Giri wins → Congress splits into Congress (O) and Congress (R)

Indira Gandhi presented the split as a clash between socialists and conservatives, and between the pro-poor and the pro-rich.

Two views. For the exam: the split is explained as an ideological contest between socialists and conservatives. Another reading: her opponents in Congress (O) described the same events as a breach of party discipline, and many analysts see a struggle for control of the party and the government running alongside the ideological one.

Why the privy purse matters. After integration of the princely states, rulers were promised a hereditary payment. A 1970 constitutional amendment to end it failed in the Rajya Sabha. An ordinance was then struck down by the Supreme Court. Only after the 1971 victory was the Constitution amended to abolish privy purses.

1971: Garibi Hatao

After the split, Congress (R) had lost its majority in the Lok Sabha. Indira Gandhi dissolved the Lok Sabha in December 1970 and went to the voters. The opposition parties of the non-Communist, non-Congress kind formed the Grand Alliance, among them the SSP, the PSP, the Jana Sangh and the Swatantra Party. Congress (R) allied with the CPI. The two sides offered voters very different messages.

Garibi Hatao helped her build a new base among landless labourers, Dalits, Adivasis, minorities, women and unemployed youth. The result was decisive.

Later in 1971 came the Bangladesh crisis and the war with Pakistan that led to the creation of Bangladesh. This added to her popularity, and Congress (R) swept the State Assembly elections in 1972.

Pause and predict: The Grand Alliance included parties as far apart as the Jana Sangh and the SSP. Why did a strategy that worked in some states in 1967 not work in 1971?

Check your answer: In 1967 the target was a weakened Congress that had no clear message. In 1971 Congress (R) had a positive slogan and a new social base, while the Grand Alliance had only a negative one. A coalition formed only to oppose someone has no answer to a rival who offers a programme.

Restored, but different

By 1972 Congress was dominant again. The key point is that this was a re-invention rather than a return. The new Congress relied heavily on the popularity of its supreme leader. Its organisation was weaker than before. It depended less on the older federal mix of state leaders and factions, and more on direct appeal to the poor, women, Dalits, Adivasis and minorities. The Congress system of the Nehru years was restored in outcome, but its nature had changed.

Two views. For the exam: restoration under Indira Gandhi meant a changed Congress, resting on one leader's popularity and a new social base. Another reading: scholars who describe the earlier Congress system as a loose federation of factions argue that 1971 ended that system: dominance returned, but the old way of settling differences inside the party did not.

Key people and terms

Exam traps

60-second revision

Where this chapter connects

• Previous: Era of One-Party Dominance describes the Congress system that the 1967 elections shook.
• Next: The Crisis of Democratic Order follows the same leader and party into the Emergency of 1975.
• Related: Politics of Planned Development explains the economic policy debates behind bank nationalisation and the Ten Point Programme.