Haryana: Civilizational Cradle or Laboratory of Political Experiments?

   -Ramphal Kataria

The Long History of Power in Haryana: From Harappans to Panchayat Exclusion

Abstract

Haryana occupies a paradoxical position in India’s history. It is among the earliest known centers of human civilization in South Asia and simultaneously a region repeatedly subjected to political violence, administrative experimentation, and democratic disruption. From Harappan settlements and epic geographies to medieval conquest, colonial militarization, and post-colonial state restructuring, Haryana has borne the imprint of power struggles across millennia. This essay situates the contemporary crisis surrounding Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) in Haryana—particularly the postponement of elections and the imposition of exclusionary eligibility criteria in 2015—within this longer historical continuum. It argues that the denial of grassroots democracy reflects not administrative incapacity but a deliberate political project that treats democratic institutions as instruments of control rather than representation.

Civilizational Foundations and Historical Memory

The archaeological site of Rakhigarhi in Hisar district has fundamentally altered our understanding of the Indus–Saraswati civilization. Excavations have revealed urban planning, craft specialization, and material culture that rival—and in some respects predate—other major Harappan centres¹. Together with sites such as Mitathal and Agroha, these findings establish Haryana as a foundational zone of early urban civilization rather than a peripheral extension of the Indus Valley.

This deep civilizational pedigree coexists with a powerful mythological geography. Kurukshetra and the surrounding 48 kos region are widely believed to be the battlefield of the Mahabharata, where the Pandavas and Kauravas fought a war framed as a struggle between dharma and adharma. Whether read as myth, allegory, or cultural memory, the Mahabharata’s spatial anchoring in Haryana has profoundly shaped popular perceptions of the region as a land where moral conflict and political power intersect.

Historians have long noted that mythological landscapes often overlap with zones of intense historical contestation. Haryana exemplifies this pattern. The persistence of epic memory alongside archaeological remains suggests not discontinuity but layered histories, in which successive regimes appropriated and reinterpreted space to legitimise authority.

Strategic Location and the Burden of Conquest

Haryana’s proximity to Delhi has been both an asset and a curse. As a gateway to the Gangetic plains, the region repeatedly became the theatre of invasions and imperial consolidation. In the early medieval period, Thanesar emerged as a center of political power under Emperor Harshavardhana, whose reign marked a brief moment of relative stability in North India.

Subsequent centuries, however, saw relentless militarization. Turkic and Afghan invasions transformed Haryana into a corridor of conquest. Religious and architectural remnants, such as the Char Qutub Masjid, reflect the region’s early integration into Islamic political networks. The burial of Razia Sultana at Kaithal—after her violent death in 1240—stands as a stark reminder of the volatile intersection of gender, power, and regional politics².

The founding of Hisar by Sultan Firoz Shah Tughlaq in the fourteenth century further institutionalized the region’s military importance. Later, the decisive Battles of Panipat—fought in 1526, 1556, and 1761—cemented Haryana’s role as the crucible in which the fate of empires was repeatedly decided³.

Colonial Rule and the Militarisation of Society

British colonialism did not demilitarise Haryana; rather, it recognized violence through institutional means. The region was incorporated into the colonial “martial races” framework, supplying soldiers to the British Indian Army. Hansi, near Hisar, became a centre of military training under James Skinner, whose regiment symbolized the fusion of colonial discipline with local martial traditions.

This militarization had lasting social consequences. It reinforced hierarchical masculinities, valorised coercive authority, and normalized obedience to command—traits that later shaped both rural power structures and electoral politics.

Rural Society, Khaps, and Informal Sovereignty

Against this backdrop of recurrent warfare and political instability, rural Haryana developed powerful informal institutions of governance. Khaps, or clan-based councils, emerged as mechanisms for regulating social relations, resolving disputes, and enforcing norms. While often romanticized as indigenous democratic bodies, khaps historically functioned as sites of social hegemony, privileging dominant castes and patriarchal authority.

Contemporary khap interventions—particularly in matters of marriage, gender, and sexuality—cannot be understood in isolation. They are the residual expressions of a long history in which formal state authority was intermittent or externally imposed, leaving local elites to exercise de facto sovereignty.

State Formation and Developmental Aspirations

The creation of Haryana in 1966 marked a critical rupture. Carved out of Punjab, the new state inherited regions widely regarded as economically backward. Agriculture was predominantly rain-fed; irrigation infrastructure was minimal; institutional credit scarce; and industrial development negligible.

Yet, within a decade, Haryana became a symbol of agrarian transformation. Public investment in canals, tubewells, rural electrification, roads, and extension services enabled farmers to capitalize on the Green Revolution. By the late 1970s, the state ranked among India’s leaders in wheat and rice productivity.

This transformation fuelled a national discourse suggesting that smaller states could deliver faster, more responsive development. Haryana’s experience appeared to vindicate this claim—at least in material terms.

Democratic Decentralization: Promise and Contradiction

Political decentralization was expected to complement economic growth. The 73rd Constitutional Amendment (1992) accorded constitutional status to Panchayati Raj Institutions, mandating regular elections, reservation for women and marginalized groups, and devolution of powers. The 74th Amendment extended similar principles to urban local bodies.

Haryana conducted its first PRI elections under this framework in 1994. However, the promise of decentralization was quickly compromised. Section 175 of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act introduced disqualifications that went beyond constitutional requirements, most notably the two-child norm. This provision disproportionately affected women, Dalits, and the poor, undermining the inclusive intent of the constitutional amendments⁴.

Though the Supreme Court later struck down this clause, its impact persisted for multiple electoral cycles, forcing elected representatives to adopt evasive or illegal strategies to retain office.

The 2015 Crisis: Democracy Deferred

By July 2015, the tenure of PRIs in Haryana had expired. Constitutionally, elections were required within six months. Instead, the state government postponed polls, citing incomplete ward delimitation and voter lists—justifications widely dismissed as administratively flimsy.

In August 2015, the government promulgated an Ordinance introducing new eligibility criteria for PRI candidates, including educational qualifications and economic conditions such as toilet ownership. These measures were framed as reforms aimed at improving governance quality. In reality, they represented a radical contraction of the democratic base.

When challenged, the Punjab and Haryana High Court stayed the Ordinance. Rather than comply, the government rushed amendments through the legislature, securing gubernatorial assent overnight and issuing notifications with extraordinary haste. This maneuver raised serious questions about the autonomy and constitutional role of the Governor and the State Election Commission.

Exclusion by Design

Petitions filed before the Supreme Court, including those by Jagmati Sangwan and other aspirants, exposed the scale of exclusion produced by the amendments. Estimates suggested that:

82% of Scheduled Caste women,

72% of women from the general category, and

54% of men
would be rendered ineligible to contest PRI elections⁵.

The Supreme Court stayed the operation of the amendments while allowing the electoral process to continue. However, the state government’s insistence on early hearings and its refusal to recalibrate policy resulted in the entire electoral process grinding to a halt.

Political Economy of Electoral Delay

The postponement of PRI elections had tangible socio-economic consequences. Panchayat elections in Haryana are high-stakes contests, often involving significant personal expenditure. Aspiring candidates invest savings, mortgage land, or incur high-interest loans in anticipation of elections.

The prolonged uncertainty of 2015 trapped many aspirants in a Catch-22: unable to withdraw without financial loss, yet unable to sustain mounting debts indefinitely. The delay intensified factional rivalries, deepened social cleavages, and risked long-term economic distress for ordinary villagers.

The state’s rhetoric—claiming ignorance of the scale of exclusion and invoking slogans such as “Number One Haryana”—betrayed either profound administrative incompetence or calculated indifference to democratic costs.

Conclusion: History Repeating Itself

For over four millennia, Haryana has been shaped by the ambitions of those who sought to rule India—from Harappan elites and epic heroes to sultans, emperors, colonizers, and modern political executives. Each epoch left its imprint on the region’s social structure, often at the expense of ordinary people.

The PRI crisis of 2015 is not an isolated episode. It is the latest manifestation of a historical pattern in which power is centralized, participation is restricted, and democratic institutions are subordinated to elite control.

The enduring question, therefore, is not merely administrative or legal. It is civilizational and ethical:
Is Haryana a land that nurtured one of humanity’s earliest urban cultures—or has it become a laboratory where democracy itself is repeatedly experimented upon, with its people reduced to expendable subjects?

Footnotes

1. Possehl, G. (2002): The Indus Civilization: A Contemporary Perspective.

2. Lal, K. S. (1994): History of the Khaljis.

3. Richards, J. F. (1993): The Mughal Empire.

4. Supreme Court of India judgments on PRI disqualifications (pre-2015).

5. Petitions challenging Haryana Panchayati Raj Amendments, Supreme Court of India, 2015.

 

Politics of crop failure in Haryana

Haryana is predominantly an agriculture  state. It's vicinity to national capital provide special significance to it. After its creation on Nov.1,1966, agriculture in state shown an unpredictably upsurge both in production and productivity of cereals particularly wheat and rice and contribute significantly in national pool. Green revolution of sixties played a vital role in unprecedented growth in agriculture. Creation of new state and advent of Green Revolution provided tremendous opportunities to farmers and farm labors to attain newer heights in production of cereals. Farm university and many agricultural institutions were established in Hisar and Karnal. Regional

agricultural institutions were also came into the existence in different parts of Haryana to cater need and demands of farm sector and this new development created availability of technology and knowledge at the door step of farmers. Farmers of Haryana grabbed this new opportunity with both hands and by investment of their hard work and labor took the state on higher pedestal of agriculture growth. But this growth also brought new challenges before the farm sector. New varieties and technology was high input intensive package. Now  Agriculture production was not possible without  fertilizer, pesticides and irrigation. These inputs demanded for higher dose of furnace in agriculture production. And we see the simultaneous growth in the fields of new farm implements, tractors, more pesticides and seed agencies and more tube wells and submersibles. These inputs burdened the agriculture enormously. Farmers were made to raise crop loans from commission agents initially and later on from organised banking sectors against pledging of their lands. Since Haryana is in the bracket of high growth of population and its population increased exponentially over the past 48 years. This led to shrinkage of farm holdings and over burdened by crop loans. Requirement of irrigation led to more installation of tube wells and so power bills surprised the farmers of this new state. In nutshell, higher production created higher indebtedness of farmers. Agriculture remains a profitable vocation anymore. Most of the farmers are debt ridden and find it difficult to pursue agriculture as an vocation. But there is no other option and hence pursuing this. The landless agricultural laborers who reaped dividends of boom in agriculture production are now find it difficult to be engaged in agriculture because farmers family could meet the requirements of labor. At the peak of season such as seeding of crop or harvesting provide work to agriculture laborers. Both farmers and farm labors are in dire straits.

The plight of farmers breed opportunity for politics. Political parties are engaged in create a demand of compensation for crop loss to weather's vagaries or for any other flimsy ground instead of making a comprehensive agriculture policy to save the agriculture. They created it a tool to garner sympathy and votes. In last decade this demand of compensation is at fore now and then. Farmers are made to demand compensations rather than remedy for challenges before agriculture. Compensation on crop loss is the duty and responsibility of government of the day but assessment and distribution of such competition must be objective and the benefit must reach to the actual looser. Unfortunately this is not happening. Political clout of a ruling party leader rules the assessment and its distribution. Recently, rabi crops were affected by unseasonable rains and hailstorms in some parts of Haryana and it was the duty of the government to compensate the farmers whose crop lost beyond the prescribed limit of the damage parameters. But department and government failed to make an objective assessment of crop loss and hasten got the report of special harvest inspection and sanctiond an amount of ₹1072 crore for compensation. This was the big amount to be distributed for crop loss within a month or two after crop loss. What is glaring is that actual area of damage and farmers were not identified properly rather pressure groups and heavy weights in government successfully got the bigger share for their areas. It was the politics of compensation and that rubbed the salts on the wounds of lakhs of affected farmers who were robbed of the chances of fair compensation. It is also glaring that the total production of rabi crops surpassed the arrivals in markets. There is no logic how to justify this crop loss and drama of compensation. It's also fact that certain areas really affected by the unseasonable rains and weather's vagaries. But the areas where such loss was marginal were benefited the most. Episode of Assandh is more shocking where farmers were able to press the government to a mince the compensation after the harvest of rabi crops and without any subjective or objective crop loss assessment. It is imperative that now on farmers have been made to demand compensation and they forget the comprehensive agriculture policy or implementation of Swaminathan Commission Report for saving the farm sector and bestowing honor and respect to the producers of grain whose tireless efforts and bone breaking labor fills the bellies of the millions of Indians. At the same time the important parcel and agent of agriculture Production network is ignored and that is landless agriculture laborers. None spoke for them from where they'll earn their yearly pool of grains when crops were lost in their villages? Without their contribution agriculture is not possible and they should be made a part of fair compensation program. Is politics of compensation is doing good for farmers or ruining their zest to fight the odds and turning them into potential beggars? Is politics of compensation is deliberately destroying their demand and fight for comprehensive crop policy? Is this the way to treat 'anndata'? 

When Economics Erases Women: A Stark Reality from Western Haryana

-Ramphal Kataria

Divorced to Save Land: How Law Is Used to Erase Women

“The most common way people give up their power is by thinking they don’t have any.” — Alice Walker

Haryana is a small state in northern India, administratively divided into 21 districts and 80 subdivisions. Sirsa, situated in the north-western part of the state and bordering Punjab to the north and Rajasthan to the west, presents a social reality that is both distinctive and disturbing. While rural Haryana broadly shares common socio-economic features, this region stands apart due to the overwhelming dominance of large landowners—an imbalance far sharper here than in most other parts of the state.

Land reforms implemented in Haryana during the 1970s sought to place ceilings on agricultural holdings. Landowners were permitted to retain less than 18 acres of irrigated double-crop land, up to 25 acres of single-crop land, and up to 50 acres of inferior or non-irrigated land. However, in Sirsa district—particularly in Ellenabad—the intent of these reforms was quietly subverted. At the time of implementation, much of the land was barren and unirrigated, enabling landlords to legally retain vast tracts. With the later expansion of irrigation and agricultural development, these lands turned fertile and highly profitable, generating enormous wealth for a few.

“Where there is inequality, law does not operate equally—it adapts itself to power.”

This transformation widened the economic gulf between marginal farmers and large landowners. Small farmers and landless families struggled to meet both productive and non-productive expenses—seeds, fertilizers, implements, medical treatment, and deeply entrenched social obligations such as the marriage of daughters and bhat-chhuchhak (customary gifts and monetary assistance given to daughters on ceremonial occasions). Lacking access to institutional credit, they borrowed from landlords at exorbitant interest rates. Over time, repayment became impossible. Small parcels of land were sold under coercive conditions, gradually consolidating landholdings in the hands of a few powerful families, far exceeding legally permissible limits.

The inevitable question arose: how was this surplus land to be protected from state acquisition?

The answer lay in the most vulnerable members of the family—the women.

In a society that is deeply feudal and patriarchal, women possess little voice and even less awareness of legal or economic dealings. As Simone de Beauvoir observed, “One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman.” In western Haryana, this “becoming” often means learning to disappear silently.

Large landowners devised a calculated and socially sanctioned strategy: using the legal identity of married women to shield surplus land. Mutually agreed divorce petitions were filed in courts, where husbands formally consented to transfer land to their wives as a means of livelihood and maintenance. In reality, this land belonged to the surplus pool and would otherwise have been liable for acquisition.

A unit of surplus land was thus “saved” by legally dissolving a marriage.

“Patriarchy has no gender—it survives on silence.”

The cruelty of this arrangement is difficult to overstate. The woman—often a mother of young children—continued to live within the same household, raising the children of her “divorced” husband, under the same roof, but without legal status, social dignity, or security. Marriage, sanctified through sacred rituals and lifelong vows to protect a woman’s honour and safety, was reduced to a disposable legal instrument for protecting property.

This is male hegemony at its most grotesque. Women are used to fulfill sexual roles, to bear and raise children, and ultimately to sacrifice their legal existence for male economic gain. Their silence is manufactured, not chosen. As Bell Hooks wrote, “Patriarchy has no gender. Women can perpetuate it just as easily as men, when survival demands submission.”

The exploitation does not end with divorce.

In June 2014, the government notified exemption of stamp duty on the transfer of acquired property within the family. The same woman—now legally divorced—is compelled to transfer the land she received through the court decree back to the man or his family, citing herself as a divorced wife. This transaction is fundamentally untenable: once a marriage is annulled, the familial relationship ceases to exist. Yet, the process continues unchecked, robbing the state of revenue and normalizing fraud under the cover of legality.

“A woman without legal identity is the easiest subject of exploitation.”

What unfolds here is not merely economic manipulation but the systematic annihilation of women’s personhood. Economics becomes the deciding force that dictates whether a woman will retain dignity, legal identity, or even recognition as a human being within her own household.

In the so-called affluent families of this feudal order, women are expected to erase themselves to safeguard male wealth. Monetary corruption may be investigated and punished, but who will confront this deeper moral decay? Who will fight a corruption that destroys human values, abuses judicial processes, and turns women into expendable instruments of accumulation?

“The true measure of a society is not how it treats its wealthy men, but how easily it sacrifices its women.”

In this part of Haryana, patriarchy does not merely subordinate women—it consumes them. Their suffering is normalized, their sacrifice glorified, their erasure justified in the name of family honour and economic security. When a society compels its women to surrender marriage, legality, and dignity to protect land and wealth, one must ask: is this still a society of humans? Or an immoral order sustained by a uniquely brutal form of corruption—where the ultimate cost is a woman’s erased existence?

 

From Clan to Cage: How Caste Still Chains Northern India

-Ramphal Kataria

From Herds to Honor Killings: How Gotra and Caste Still Rule Northern India

Outwardly, northern India looks modern. Cities gleam, economies boom, women work alongside men, and social media buzzes with talk of equality. Look closer, though, and you see a society shackled by ancient codes—caste, gotra, and village-level hierarchies dictate who you can marry, whom you can love, and sometimes, how you live or die.

From ‘Jan’ to Gotra: A Tool for Survival

Historian Rahul Sankrityayan’s Manav Samaj reminds us that Indian society didn’t start with rigid caste lines. Early humans lived in kinship-based clans called ‘Jan.’ Survival depended on cooperation; economic cohesion was everything.

Gotra, originally a lineage identifier, ensured exogamy—marrying outside one’s clan to prevent genetic defects. It was rational, scientific, and essential for the community’s survival. A tool of social cohesion, not oppression.

When Survival Became Strata: Gotra Hardens into Caste

Agriculture changed everything. Land and surplus created hierarchy. Occupational divisions became hereditary. Gotra, once a simple social device, became embedded in the rigid caste system:

Caste Endogamy: Marry within your caste.

Gotra Exogamy: Marry outside your gotra.

Thousands of tiny social compartments emerged, locking people into identities they did not choose. Mobility shrank, opportunity narrowed, love became regulated.

Invaders, Mughals, and the British: Cementing Rigidity

Aryans, Greeks, Mughals, and the British all left their mark. Mughals centralized administration; British censuses and laws froze identities. Instead of evolving fluidly, caste hardened. Each invader, knowingly or not, left society more introverted, hierarchical, and fragile.

Haryana: Where Modernity Collides with Tradition

Haryana is the perfect case study. The Green Revolution brought prosperity. Urbanization and education bring exposure. Yet, caste often trumps religion, and village-level bhaichara extends incest taboos across entire villages.

Young men and women fall in love across castes—or even within the same gotra—and the reaction is brutal. Khap Panchayats enforce these “honor codes,” sometimes with murder. The tools of kinship have become weapons of control.

Why Change Is Inevitable—and Necessary

The original purpose of Gotra—to prevent inbreeding in small clans—is irrelevant today. Young people are working, studying, and socializing in diverse spaces. Technology, media, and economic independence are forcing new bonds across caste lines.

Society must respond:

Enforce laws protecting individual choice.

Educate communities on the scientific and social irrelevance of rigid Gotra taboos.

Promote inter-caste interactions and economic equality.

The New Social Order Is Coming

Denial only delays the inevitable. The young are forming relationships based on love, compatibility, and shared values, not outdated caste hierarchies. Tradition will clash with modernity, and some will resist violently—but history favors evolution.

Haryana—and northern India at large—stands at a crossroads. The old codes of honor and gotra cannot govern 1.4 billion people anymore. Society will adapt, and the new, humane, inclusive social order is already struggling to be born.

References

1. Dube, S. C. (1990). Indian Society. New Delhi: National Book Trust.

2. Gupta, A. (2020). Caste and cross-region marriages in Haryana: Experience of Dalit cross-region brides in Jat households. Modern Asian Studies. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0026749X200000X

3. Sahapedia. (2024). Mahapandit Rahul Sankrityayan: The atheist monk. https://www.sahapedia.org/mahapandit-rahul-sankrityayan-atheist-monk

4. Sankrityayan, R. (1948). Manav Samaj [Human Society]. Varanasi: Bihar Hindi Granth Academy.

5. Singh, Y. (1973). Modernization of Indian Tradition. New Delhi: Thomson Press.

6. Times of India. (2023, March 15). Understanding gotras: The ancient lineage system in Hindu culture. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/astrology/others/understanding-gotras-the-ancient-lineage-system-in-hindu-culture/articleshow/110557098.cms

7. Times of India. (2025, June 22). Amend Hindu Marriage Act to curb live-in ties, same-gotra marriages: Haryana sarpanches. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chandigarh/amend-hindu-marriage-act-to-curb-live-in-ties-same-gotra-marriages-haryana-sarpanches-mahapanchayat-on-june-22/articleshow/121323794.cms

8. AbhyasOnline.in. (n.d.). Caste system in Haryana [Infographic]. https://abhyasonline.in/contents/Haryana%20GK/Haryana%20GK/People%20Of%20Haryana/Caste%20System%20In%20Haryana/