History of Public Administration in Bangladesh

Public Administration, as Woodrow Wilson said – “Public administration is a detailed & systematic
application of law.” Public administration hereby is the mechanism through which governments
provide numerous services to the public. Irrespective of their system of government, public
administration is a common feature of all nations. It has its own ancient origins. In ancient Greece
and Egypt public affairs were organized by public offices, and the chief officeholders were
predominantly responsible for the administration of justice, maintenance of law and order, and
provisions of plenty of other services to the citizen. The Romans developed a more sophisticated
administrative system. They created distinct administrative hierarchies for ensuring justice,
military affairs, finance, taxation, foreign affairs, and many other internal affairs, each with its own
principal officers of the state (Nasrullah, 2010). Question arises; how Public Administration works
inside Bangladesh? What is the root? Does it have any base? If so, where is it from?

The answer would be clear if it could be traced back to the historical underpinnings. Bangladesh
is a new state but not an old nation. The Indian sub-continent bears a significant mark of British
ruling, partition of the countries of Indian sub-continent, etc. Bangladesh bears a colonial legacy
in its entire public administration system. Present day Bangladesh was part of the British Empire
for almost two hundred years. In 1947 Pakistani rulers replaced the British and dominated the area
then known as East Pakistan until a bitter war in 1971 brought about an independent Bangladesh.
A colonial imprint persists in Bangladesh especially in political and administrative arrangements.
The British tradition helped the bureaucracy to become an essential tool of governance. At the
same time, it is accused of following the “Pakistani tradition of involvement in power politics”
(Haque, 1995).

The evolution of the prevailing structure and culture of public administration in Bangladesh can
be categorized into five historical phases:

1. Ancient period (2000 BC–AD 1200)

2. Medieval period (AD 1200–1765)

3. British period (1765–1947)

4. Pre-independence Pakistan period (1947–1971)

5. Bangladesh period (1971 to date)

 Ancient Period (2000 BC-AD 1200)

The traditions of Bangladesh Public Administration are rooted in Bengal’s ancient samaj (society)
and Mughal historical past that greatly predates the colonial rule. But it was in the nineteenth
century with the imposition of the British colonial administration that current Bangladesh Public
Administration had much of its features formed (Nasruddin, 2010)

The ancient period can be divided into four subphases: the early Vedic, the later Vedic, the
Mauryan, and the post Mauryan.

• Geographically, Vedic and later Vedic periods were concerned with the Indian subcontinent
excluding Bengal.
• But from the Mauryan period onward, greater Bengal, including Orissa, Bihar, and
Assam, became a part of the Mauryan Empire.

Early Vedic Period

➢ There was no bureaucratic administration in its true sense during the early Vedic phase
(2000–1500 BC).
➢ States were tribal in origin; kings had no permanent administration due to limited
sovereignty and very narrow sources of revenue.

Vedic Period

➢ The size of the states in the later Vedic period (1500–1000 BC) increased considerably.
➢ The concept of “the divine king” that considerably increased the power and sovereignty of
the king was entrenched during this period.
➢ Owing to his divine status, the king was considered the owner of land within the territory
and was entitled to collect a regular land tax called Bhaga.
➢ All these conditions facilitated the emergence of a centralized and hierarchical system of
administration. At the top of this administration was the Council of Ratnins (the cabinet).

The Cabinet

The Kings Relations – King’schamberlain

Courtiers – The
The Departmental Heads
Royal Chamberlain
The Crown Prince.
 Public Administration under Mauriyan Dynasty (322-298 BCE)

➢ During the Mauryan dynasty (320–185 BC), ancient India developed an efficient
administrative system resembling many principles of modern bureaucracy.
➢ Mauriyan Empire laid down the foundation of our administration based on the principle of
consultation and clear division of duties and responsibilities.
➢ During the period of King Chandragupta Maurya, when Kautilya was the prime minister,
the kingdom was divided into provinces, and further into districts (Dwivedi et al., 2010).
➢ The organization of the Empire was administered in line with the extensive bureaucracy as
described by Kautilya, in his book Arthashastra.
➢ The king was the head of the legislative, treasury, judicial, and military functions.
Ministers, departmental heads, and other members of amatya (the cabinet) were selected
by the emperor himself and held office at his pleasure.
➢ Deconcentrated administration was present in all administrative units, especially for
collecting revenue, dispensing justice, and maintaining law and order.

Post Mauriyan Period: Public Administration under Gupta Dynasty (319-467 CE)

➢ During Gupta dynasty the kingdom (Rajya) was divided into a number of provinces
and they were known as ‘Bhukti’
➢ The provinces were sub-divided into several divisions known as ‘Vishaya’
➢ Divisions were also divided into districts, which were called as ‘Adhis,’.
➢ The group of villages was known as ‘Vithis’ which were the lowest administrative units.
➢ There were several central, provincial, and local officials to carry out the functions of
public administration. The administration under Gupta Empire was largely dependent
upon the old bureaucratic form of administration.
➢ Each city administration had a council. The village administration was under the
control of rural bodies consisting of a headman and the village elders.

Public Administration under Pala Dynasty (750-1161 CE)

➢ Pala dynasty created its administration based on the practice of administrative system
of Gupta dynasty
➢ All the powers were concentrated in the hands of the king. Parameshwar,
Paramvattaraka, or Maharajadhiraja were offered to the Pala rulers.
➢ The King used to rule some provinces in the Pala empire, while others were under the
control of Vassal chiefs. The Vassal chiefs were granted autonomy to govern their
provinces.
 ➢ The Pala empire's lands that were managed directly were divided into many provinces
known as Bhuktis and governed by officials known as Uparika who collected the levy
and preserved the province's law and order. These Bhuktis (Provinces) were further
segmented into Vishaya (Divisions) and Mandala (Districts). Further, they were divided
into smaller units such as Khandala, Bhaga, Avritti, Chaturaka, and Pattaka (Bhuiya,
2011).

Public Administration under the Sena Dynasty (1097-1225 CE)

➢ The Pala administrative system was maintained by the Senas. Even under the Senas,
Bhuktis (Province), Vishayas (Division), and Mandals (District) remained administrative
divisions.
➢ Patakas and Chaturakas are the names of the smallest administrative divisions. This raises
the possibility that small administrative divisions such as Patakas and Chaturakasa gained
importance under the Senas (Stein, 2010).

Public Administration under Mughal Dynasty (1526-1761 CE)

➢ The Mughal administration perhaps was the most centralized administration in the history
of India.
➢ The Mughals came from the Central Asian region and brought with them their past
administrative experience and utilized that to good effect to build and efficiently run the
vast Indian empire.
➢ The Mughals supplanted the sultanate rule because of two reasons –
• First, most of the later sultans were weak and incompetent and unable to protect
their domain.
• Second, the Mughals were warriors and they attempted to enter and conquer India
several times, finally succeeding under the leadership of Babar, the founder of the
dynasty.
➢ During Mughal period, the character of administration was in the form of ‘a centralized
autarchy’, and administrative philosophy was guided by the loyalty to the throne.
➢ The emperor seldom used to delegate authority and kept a careful watch upon the activities
of his subordinates. Revenue administration, especially the land revenue was one of the
most important functions of the Mughal administration.
➢ The system of administration was so centralized that every minute detail of the
administration had to be endorsed by the monarch.
➢ The Mughal emperors were not bound to consult important policy issues with higher
officials.
➢ However, the consultation with department heads and some other higher officials on
important matters was customary.
➢ The wakil was the head of the whole administration.
➢ It seems that the post of wakil was a Mughal innovation and was created through dividing
the responsibilities of the wazir of the sultanate.

Public Administration during British Colonial Rule (1757-1947)

➢ The British colonial administration founded the modern bureaucracy based on legal-
rational principles in the country. It successfully separated civil administration from
military administration and established the supremacy of the former.
➢ The term “civil servant” was also used for the first time.
➢ The Regulating Act of 1773 was the first landmark in the transformation of the East
India Company’s commercial administration into a political government in the Indian
subcontinent. It laid the foundation of central administration. It made the governor-
general in council as the supreme government having control over all presidencies.
➢ The act also distinguished between the civil and the commercial functions of the
company by classifying the company servants into two separate areas. The collectors
and subordinate officers were engaged in revenue and judicial administration, whereas
the merchants performed trading. Later, the Pitt’s India Act of 1784 established a board
of control to control all legal, civil, and political affairs of the company. In 1813, the
trading monopoly of the company was abolished, and all sorts of commercial activities
of the company were withdrawn in 1833.
➢ The elitism was expressed through recruiting only from the noble Englishmen and
conferring to them much greater power, status, training, and pay.
➢ Gradual Indianization of the Covenanted Service allowed only the upper strata of the
Indian society to make inroads into it, and thus the infiltration of native elites in the
service was ensured.
➢ Recruitment and training were designed to create a superior class of generalists who
would lead the civil administration.
➢ The parliamentary oversight of the recruitment process was introduced through the
1833 act.
➢ Performance-based promotion based on annual confidential reporting was introduced
in 1834.
➢ The nature of changes in public administration during the British rule has three discrete
phases. The first phase (1793-1833) largely coincided with the degree of control
exercised by the British Government over the East India Company. The second phase
(1834-1855) reflected the control exercised over the administration of India through
legislation governing the recruitment policy, pay and discipline of the services.
However, the most interesting third phase (1855-1892) was marked by controversies
surrounding the recruitment policy, Indianization of public service and creation of
provincial services.
 Public Administration during Pakistan Rule (1947-1971)

➢ Based on Jinnah’s two nation theory the country India was divided into two separate states
in 1947: India and Pakistan. Bangladesh was a part of Pakistan and later in 1971, separated
from Pakistan.
➢ Civil service during this period was mostly continuation of the British tradition. The Civil
Service of Pakistan (CSP), which was the elite superior service of the country, outshone its
counterpart ICS in terms of career mobility and administrative power.
➢ Few changes were made to the structure. Services were divided into All-Pakistan Services,
Central Superior Services, and Provincial Services. Position classification was introduced
in which cadres were vertically divided into three categories: generalist administrative,
functional services, and specialist services.
➢ Horizontally, services were differentiated into four distinct classes, namely, class I, II, III,
and IV. So many differentiations across the civil service created inter-cadre and class
conflicts that continued degradation of the esprit de corps feeling in the service that was
the greatest asset of the civil service during colonial times.
➢ Personnel management was centralized by setting up the Establishment Division under the
office of the president.
➢ It formulated, executed, and coordinated recruitment, training, disciplinary action, and
other personnel management policies, procedures, and regulations of the All Pakistan and
Central Services.
➢ Political conflicts between the east and west wings of Pakistan also had an impact on civil
service management.
➢ One initiative was to make the civil service representative, and therefore a provincial quota
system in recruitment was introduced in 1956.
➢ The elitism in the civil service made a comeback when the military dictatorship took power
in 1958 amid severe political instability.
➢ Political agitation against military rulers created a long-standing distrust between civil
servants and politicians that had untoward effects on civil service management during the
Bangladesh period.
➢ Following the departure of the British in 1947, the Pakistani rulers continued to pursue
similar policies in administration. The result was a public administration system that was
aloof and removed from the public.
➢ Khan (1997) identified a number of characteristic features of early days’ public
administration in Pakistan, such as, the imperial heritage, negative attitudes towards
politicians, the elite character of the administrators and a paternalistic attitude towards
people.