In recent years, Punjab has witnessed a steady erosion in the effectiveness of its governance. While debates often focus on economic issues, drug abuse, or youth unemployment, a deeper and more systemic crisis is quietly crippling the state’s ability to function: the lack of coordination between the elected legislature and the permanent bureaucracy. This misalignment is not merely a matter of political inefficiency—it has real consequences for the lives of ordinary citizens. From pending works in villages to delays in essential services, the state’s machinery appears jammed. Worse, in the vacuum of governance, policing has begun to replace administration, pushing the state further toward a “police state” model that sidelines democratic norms.
The first and most visible problem is the lack of coordination between Members of the Legislative Assembly (MLAs) and bureaucrats, especially at the district and block levels. Elected representatives often find themselves powerless to ensure that the work they promise to their constituents gets done. For example, an MLA may recommend a pension file or a grant for road repair. Still, unless the Deputy Commissioner (DC), Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM), or other officers take action, the file can sit idle for months.
Bureaucrats, on the other hand, frequently complain that MLAs interfere too much in day-to-day work and expect favors or shortcuts. This leads to a situation where both sides are suspicious of each other, causing paralysis in decision-making. Instead of working as complementary arms of governance, they function more like rival power centers. When institutional harmony breaks down, the state machinery fails to deliver, even for the smallest of tasks.
This breakdown trickles down to the common citizen. In Punjab, it is not unusual to hear complaints like “kam nahi ho reha” (the work isn’t getting done) or “sarkar sirf jumle deti hai” (the government only gives empty slogans). People are made to run in circles—from the MLA’s office to the tehsildar, from the DC to the patwari—without any result. Land mutations, caste certificates, old-age pensions, tubewell connections, and compensation claims for crop damage are stuck in files with no clarity on when, or if, they will be resolved.
The real tragedy is that many of these problems are not due to lack of funds or policy. They are due to administrative neglect and institutional ego battles. The people, especially in rural areas, feel ignored and helpless. Their anger is rising not just because of what is not being done, but because they don’t even know who is answerable. There is no accountability. The MLAs blame the officers, and the officers blame the system—or political pressure. Meanwhile, nothing moves.
In the absence of responsive governance, the state increasingly leans on the police to manage dissent and unrest. Protests by farmers, unemployed youth, contractual workers, or Dalit groups are often met not with dialogue or resolution, but with lathi charges, arrests, and heavy-handed policing. Police stations, not public offices, are becoming the new centers of authority.
This shift is deeply concerning. When a state starts to rely more on controlling people rather than serving them, it signals a dangerous transformation. Law and order is important, but it cannot be a substitute for justice and governance. In Punjab, the police are being used not only to handle crime but also to suppress agitation that results from administrative failure. This is creating a climate of fear and frustration where dissent is criminalized instead of heard.
There are several factors fueling this crisis. First is the over-centralization of power in the Chief Minister’s Office (CMO). In recent years, regardless of which party is in power, decision-making has become concentrated in the hands of a few individuals. MLAs—even ministers—feel sidelined, as files often need the CM’s direct approval or the nod of a few bureaucrats close to the power center.
Secondly, the bureaucracy itself has become rigid, outdated, and risk-averse. Officers are often transferred based on political convenience rather than merit or performance. This discourages them from taking bold decisions or initiating new projects. Add to that a lack of digitization, corruption at lower levels, and weak grievance redressal systems, and you have a recipe for widespread administrative failure.Finally, there is a cultural shift where politics is seen as a game of optics, slogans, and social media rather than governance. Leaders focus on media appearances, rallies, and blame games, while actual service delivery takes a backseat. The bureaucracy, meanwhile, uses procedural complexity as a shield to delay or deny action, often without fear of consequences.
As a result of all this, people are beginning to lose faith—not just in politicians or parties, but in the very idea of government. When even basic issues remain unresolved after months or years, the belief in democratic governance starts to erode. This leads to rising voter apathy, cynicism, and in some cases, radicalization.
In rural and urban areas alike, citizens feel that only protests, media pressure, or political connections can get their work done. This is neither fair nor sustainable. A functioning democracy cannot run on exceptions; it must run on systems. The perception that the state only responds when there is a threat or public outcry is a dangerous one—it encourages lawlessness and discredits the role of peaceful civic engagement.
Punjab urgently needs a governance reset. Coordination between the legislature and bureaucracy must be institutionalized, not left to personal rapport or political patronage. MLAs should have defined roles in monitoring developmental work and ensuring service delivery in their constituencies, without interfering in routine administration. Similarly, bureaucrats must be held accountable for timely execution and transparency, with performance audits and public feedback mechanisms.
Decentralization of power to local bodies—panchayats, municipalities, and ward committees—can also help in bringing governance closer to the people. Investing in digital governance, citizen grievance redressal systems, and community monitoring platforms can further reduce corruption and delay.
Most importantly, the government—regardless of party—must send a clear message: Punjab will not be run through fear, files, or force, but through responsibility, responsiveness, and respect for democratic principles.