It is wrong to suppose that the Village Communities were isolated entities even in ancient and medieval India. We learn from the Manusmriti, the Mahabharata, Kautilya’s Atthashastra and other Sanskrit books that there were officers at the head of one village, ten villages, twenty villages, one hundred villages, one thousand villages, each officer supervising those below him. It is true that each village enjoyed a very large measure of local self-government consistent with national safety and efficiency. But the rural republics gradually passed into larger political organisations on a federal basis rising layer upon layer from the lower rural stratifications on the broad basis of popular self-government. Dr. Radhakumud Mookerji mentions how these different administrative units, one above the other, were known as Sabha, Mahasabha, and Nattar. The best account of this type of hierarchy is obtained from the administrative organisation of the great Chola Empire under Rajaraja as reflected in the numerous Inscriptions associated with that King. The smallest unit, the base of the administrative system, was the village (uru) or town (nagara). The next higher unit was called Nadu or Kurram. The next position in hierarchy belonged to Kottam, or Visaya. Above this came the Mandala or Rashtra, the Province of the Empire. K. P. Jayaswal in “Hindu Polity” also tells us about the constitution of the Janapada or the Realm Assembly representing numerous regional councils of the country. All these facts clearly indicate that the Indian village system was not a relic of tribalism but a co-ordinated administrative organisation on federal principles. In modern times, this co-ordination will naturally have to be much more systematic and organised. But the fundamental idea of decentralisation and devolution of power which has stood the test of centuries ought to be the corner-stone of our future Constitution. Such an organisation instead of being medieval, would be the model for an ideal state. “Going back to villages,” observes Dr. Radhakrishnan “is not to become primitive.” “It is the only way to keep up a mode of existence that is instinctive to India, that supplied her once with a purpose,a faith and a meaning. It is the only way to keep our species civilised. India of the peasant and rustic life, of village communities, of forest hermitage and spiritual retreats has taught the world many great lessons but has wronged no man, has injured no land and sought no domination over others.”[84]
