The village administration during the Chola period was very distinctive. The Uttara Merur Inscription of Cholaparantaka gives a clear picture of the village administration of the Cholas. The village administration was looked after by the Gram Sabha, in which the Chola officials acted as advisors and observers.

According to the Uttara Merur Inscription, there were two assemblies in the village administration. They were the ‘Ur’ and the Sabha. The Urs existed in most of the villages. The ‘Sabhas’ were found in the villages which were endowed to the Brahmins. In some villages both the ‘Ur’ and the ‘Sabha’ were found.

The Uttara Merur (Changalpet district) inscription is carved on the wall of the Vaikuntha temple. It consists of two inscriptions issued in the 12th and 14th years of the reign of the first Parantaka. The first statute contains the constitutional rules of the Gram Sabhas, the second statute contains a long explanation of the rules and the revised rules. According to the statute issued in the 14th year of the reign of Parantaka I in 921 AD, each of the 30 divisions in the village was to nominate one candidate for final selection. Certain qualifications and disqualifications were prescribed for these nominated members.

A candidate for election had to possess the following minimum qualifications.

1. The candidate should be the owner of at least 1/4 veli (one and a half acres) of tax-paying land.

2. He should reside in a house built on his own homestead.

3. He should be more than 35 years and less than 70 years of age.

4. Should have knowledge of Vedic mantras and Brahmins, otherwise he should have land as big as a fence and he should be well versed in one Veda and one commentary.

5. Among those who had the above qualifications, those who were well versed in business and virtuous, honest and pure in mind were selected.

Despite having the above qualifications, those who had the following qualifications were not allowed.

1. A person would be ineligible for re-election if he had been in any committee continuously for the past years.

2. A candidate who had not submitted proper accounts and other information while in the committee and his close relatives would be ineligible to contest the election.

3. A person against whom there was a charge of the first four of the five great sins, namely, killing a Brahmin, drinking alcohol, theft and adultery, would be ineligible for election and his relatives would be ineligible.

4. Ignorant, embezzlers, those who ate forbidden food. Those who had relations with lower castes and did not perform penance rites were disqualified.;

The members of the Gram Sabha were selected on the basis of the above qualifications and disqualifications.

Each village had wards or divisions. One candidate was selected from each ward for the Gram Sabha through election. The names of the persons contesting the election were written on palm leaves and placed in a wide-mouthed vessel. Then, in the general assembly, the name of the representative selected was announced by a child lifting a ticket from the vessel (lottery system – Kuduvolai). The term of the selected member was one year.

Out of the 30 selected members, important committees were formed

1. Annual Committee (Samvatsara Variyam) This committee had 12 members.

2. Thottivariam (Garden Committee) The committee had 12 members.

3. Vidhivariam (Garden Committee) This committee had 6 members.

Apart from the above major committees,

1. Panchwara Samiti: 6 members,

2. Ponsariam (Gold Committee): 6 members.

Their term of office was 360 days. The number of committees and the number of members varied from village to village, the members of the committees were called ‘Variyaperumakkal’. The Gram Sabha was held in the village temples. In some villages, there were committees called Mahasabha and Perungiri, the members of which were called Perumakkal.

The Gram Sabha had the power to manage all the affairs of the village.

1) The Gram Sabha had jurisdiction over private land, and the General Assembly handled the transfer of private property. Permission from the Central Government was required for the transfer of property.

2) Land revenue was assessed and collected based on the conversion of forest and barren land into agricultural land, and the production of cultivated land. Landowners could pay a large sum of money at once instead of paying land revenue every year.

3) When land revenue was not paid properly, the land could be auctioned and the money collected was collected.

4) The central government was responsible for measuring the land. However, the permission of the Mahasabha had to be obtained.

5) The Gram Sabha had the power to collect a special tax for rural development, and the amount collected from land revenue, excluding the special tax, had to be deposited in the central government treasury.

6) Many committees were appointed to look after the administration of a large village, and there were many officers to assist them. A committee called Nayattar (Justice Committee) was a part of the Mahasabha, and the function of this committee was to detect crimes, resolve conflicts, and disputes.

7) The Gram Sabha had fixed that certain items should be sold in a specific area of ​​the village. Taxes were levied and collected on the traded items. Plantation Management Committee

The Chola dynasty stands as a remarkable example of advanced local self-governance in Ancient India. Their village-level administration, characterized by assemblies like ur, sabha, and nagaram, showcased democratic principles and participatory governance. These assemblies, supported by committees (variyams), handled responsibilities such as tax collection, irrigation, temple maintenance, and judicial functions with autonomy and accountability.

The Uttaramerur inscriptions of the 10th century provide a detailed account of their electoral process, qualifications and disqualifications for candidates, and the roles of various committees. These inscriptions reveal a sophisticated system that emphasized transparency, fairness, and record-keeping, reflecting a deep understanding of governance.

The Cholas’ emphasis on participatory administration, coupled with their ability to address local needs efficiently, remains a testament to India’s rich democratic heritage, leaving an enduring legacy of effective grassroots governance.