Politics of Planned Development Class 12 Political Science Chapter 3 CBSE Notes 2025-26

Independent India faced several fundamental challenges, among which planned economic development was key to ensuring well-being for all. This chapter explores the critical decisions and debates around how India aimed to achieve economic growth and social justice, the rationale behind specific strategies, and the reasons for eventual changes in direction.

The Dilemma of Development Issues of development in India were not just about economic goals but also involved conflicts between diverse interest groups. For instance, while the government pursued industrialization in places like Orissa for economic gains and employment, local tribes feared displacement and loss of livelihood. Environmental concerns were also significant. This made the planning and implementation of development a complex political and ethical challenge.

Political Decision-Making Major decisions about the economy and development model could not be left to experts alone. Instead, they required political consensus and public approval. The idea was to have economic growth along with social and economic justice, ensuring that the government played an active role. However, disagreements remained about the degree of state control, the importance of central planning, and how to balance justice with growth.

Meaning and Models of Development 'Development' meant different things to different people—while industrialists sought industrial growth, local communities valued their land and environment, and policymakers aimed for overall progress. Post-independence debates were influenced by Western definitions of modernity, which equated development with industrialization and urbanization. 

Two major global models existed: the capitalist system in the West and the socialist approach seen in the USSR. In India, most leaders favored a government-led strategy that incorporated elements of socialism, especially inspired by the Soviet model.

There was broad agreement that India needed a model focused on poverty alleviation and resource redistribution, with the government responsible for driving both growth and fairness. Some leaders prioritized rapid industrialization, while others advocated for rural development and agricultural reform.

Planning as a Nation-Building Strategy Almost all political streams—from left to right—agreed that the government should not leave development solely to private players. This led to the creation of structured economic plans. 

The experience of the Great Depression, World War II reconstruction, and Soviet successes further cemented the popularity of state-led planning. Surprisingly, even industrialists contributed to this thinking through the Bombay Plan of 1944, which sought major state initiatives in industry. Planning in India became a consensus approach, with the Planning Commission (established in 1950) as the central institution for formulating growth strategies.

Planning Commission and Its Role The Planning Commission was not a constitutional body but was set up via government resolution. Its core aims were based on the Directive Principles of State Policy—securing justice and equitable livelihood, distributing resources to serve the common good, and preventing concentration of wealth. 

Although the Commission had only advisory power, it shaped national priorities through its recommendations, which needed Cabinet approval. The Commission's work was strongly influenced by shifts in political thinking and public debates.

With time, the idea of planning evolved. In 2015, the Planning Commission was replaced by NITI Aayog, designed to foster cooperative federalism and adapt to new economic realities.

Five Year Plans and Their Rationale India adopted the Five Year Plan (FYP) model, inspired by the USSR, to better allocate government finances for longer-term priorities. The budget was divided into 'plan' (for targeted interventions) and 'non-plan' (for recurring expenses). This allowed for a focus on key sectors and long-term transformation.

The launch of the First Five Year Plan in 1951 generated excitement across society. Debates and discussions on the plan's content were widespread—signaling high engagement and expectations. Initial plans aimed to address immediate needs and build a base for future growth.

First Five Year Plan: Focus on Agriculture and Infrastructure The First Five Year Plan (1951–1956), drafted by economists including K.N. Raj, was cautious. It stressed that the country should "hasten slowly" to avoid harming democracy. Its thrust was on agriculture, irrigation, and allied sectors, especially because Partition had damaged food production. Large projects like the Bhakhra Nangal Dam were undertaken. 

Land reforms were also identified as crucial for increasing agricultural output. At the same time, planners aimed to increase national income by boosting savings, but this was difficult since average incomes and savings were low. While some gains were visible, savings ultimately did not rise as much as hoped.

Second and Third Five Year Plans: Shift to Rapid Industrialisation The Second FYP (1956-1961), led by P.C. Mahalanobis, marked a decisive move toward building heavy industries and transforming the economy quickly. The Congress party officially committed to a "socialist pattern of society", which influenced the plan focus. 

Public and private sector industries were developed under protectionist policies with high import tariffs. Investment increased in sectors like steel, railways, and machinery, most of which were in the public sector. This period is seen as a major turning point in India’s industrial landscape.

However, several challenges emerged. India had to import foreign technology, which depleted foreign exchange. Industrial bias meant less focus and investment on agriculture, raising concerns of food shortages. Critics highlighted an "urban bias" and suggested agriculture needed equal emphasis. Others favored development of agriculture-related industries.

Following the Second and Third Plans, India faced an economic crisis, leading to a 'plan holiday' before the Fourth Plan started. By then, planning as a tool had lost some of its novelty, but the foundation for India's subsequent economic structure had been laid.

Key Terms and People

• Bombay Plan: A 1944 proposal by leading industrialists advocating state-driven industrial development.
• P.C. Mahalanobis: Chief architect of the Second Five Year Plan, known for supporting rapid industrialisation and strong public sector involvement.
• Planning Commission: Government body set up in 1950 to frame and oversee India’s economic policies and plans.
• NITI Aayog: Established in 2015 as the successor to the Planning Commission for strategic policy-making.

Typical Questions for Practice

• Why was development planning seen as necessary after Independence?
• Explain the main differences between the First and Second Five Year Plans.
• Discuss the role and limitations of the Planning Commission in India’s development process.

Together, these points offer a clear understanding of how India's approach to economic development was shaped by both global influences and domestic needs, how consensus and debates influenced policies, and what challenges arose with rapid industrialization versus agricultural focus.

Class 12 Political Science Chapter 3 Notes – Politics of Planned Development: Structured NCERT Key Points

These Class 12 Political Science Chapter 3 notes cover all major decisions and debates on planned development in India. Students will benefit from clear explanations of the First and Second Five Year Plans, Planning Commission roles, and important committee contributions highlighted in the NCERT curriculum.

Quick revision with these notes helps clarify differences between development models, the rationale behind state intervention, and the evolving concept of planning in India. Ideal for last-minute prep, each section is structured for fast learning and exam confidence.