Deregulation as a tool to discipline the State

Deregulation is among the most consequential administrative reforms undertaken by the State.

- Amitabh Kant is former G20 Sherpa & CEO NITI Aayog and Aditya Sinha writes on macroeconomic and geopolitical issues.

India’s ongoing efforts to simplify procedures, reduce paperwork, and replace imprisonment ‘with monetary penalties mark a decisive shift in ‘governance, enhancing predictability, lowering transaction costs, and signalling trust in citizens and enterprises. The Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023 and the Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Bill, 2025 embody this transition from a permission-and-penalty regime to a trust-based government. Yet, beyond these efficiency gains lies a larger question: Do they fulfil the true purpose of deregulation? With the Prime Minister calling for deeper reforms and announcing a High-Level Committee on Deregulation, it is evident that India must now move from administrative simplification to a more fundamental rethinking of why and how the State regulates.

‘The Indian State has often treated deregulation as a form of administrative housekeeping. Redundant provisions are deleted, fines rationalised, and digital portals introduced to replace manual processes. While these measures are laudable, they only modify the form of regulation. The deeper question, the substance of regulation, remains largely untouched.

Born of a socialist ethos, India’s regulatory mindset has treated the State as master rather than midwife to enterprise. Control became the default instinct, regulation a tool to discipline rather than to enable. The citizen or firm is treated as a subject whose conduct must be permitted, monitored, or corrected. This logic pervades even modern statutes, producing a culture of compliance without autonomy. The outcome is an administratively lighter but conceptually unchanged State, one that still imagines order as something to be imposed rather than co-created.