End Of An Era: After Over Two Decades,  Bihar CM Nitish Kumar Steps Down From Legislative Council

On March 30, Chief Minister Nitish Kumar finally resigned from the Bihar Legislative Council. Notably, after being elected to the Rajya Sabha, March 30 (Monday) was the last day for him to step down from the Council; otherwise, his Rajya Sabha membership would have automatically lapsed.

The timing of the resignation is politically significant as well. Nitish Kumar’s move to the Rajya Sabha has largely been read as part of a bigger transition underway in Bihar’s power structure, with the Bharatiya Janata Party steadily strengthening its position within the NDA in the state and preparing to give a Chief Minister. His shift to the Rajya Sabha has created space for discussion about the future of Janata Dal (United), which, despite remaining in government, has seen its organisational influence narrow over time. Within the party, the recent public visibility of his son Nishant Kumar has also triggered conversations about succession. This is an unusual development for a leader who built much of his political image in opposition to dynastic politics. At the same time, JD(U)’s negotiations over key positions within the alliance and the continuing uncertainty over leadership arrangements largely indicate that the transition in Bihar is still unfolding rather than settled.

What makes this moment significant is Nitish Kumar’s long association with the Legislative Council as a way to remain in power. For more than two decades as Chief Minister, he largely remained a member of the state legislature through the Council rather than the Assembly, which is an unusual trajectory in Bihar’s political history. 

Despite having won the Lok Sabha election six times in a row, Nitish Kumar chose not to enter the Bihar Legislative Assembly through direct elections while serving as Chief Minister. Instead, he preferred the Legislative Council route. Though opinions remain divided on why he made that choice.

Nitish Kumar has been a central figure in Bihar politics since the 1990s. After the rebellion within the ruling Janata Dal in 1994, he steadily moved into the core of the state’s political arena. In March 2000, when Lalu Prasad Yadav’s Rashtriya Janata Dal failed to secure a clear majority in the Assembly elections, Nitish Kumar became Chief Minister with the support of the NDA. However, he had to resign within seven days after failing to prove his majority.

That marked his first term as Chief Minister of Bihar. At the time, he was serving as a Union Minister in the Central government led by Atal Bihari Vajpayee.

Nitish Kumar began his political journey with the JP Movement in 1974. He contested his first election in 1977 from the Harnaut Assembly seat in Nalanda district but lost. He contested again from the same seat in 1980 and lost again. In 1984, he entered the Lok Sabha race from Barh for the first time, but the Congress wave that year ensured another defeat. Thus, he lost all three of his early elections.

He staged a strong comeback in 1985 by winning from Harnaut and entering the Bihar Assembly for the first time. This was his first electoral victory. In 1989, he entered the Lok Sabha from Barh and, in 1990, became Minister of State in the central government under V. P. Singh. He then went on to win repeatedly from Barh in 1991, 1996, 1998 and 1999. Later, he shifted constituencies and contested from Nalanda in 2004, winning there as well—his sixth consecutive Lok Sabha victory. Between 1998 and 2004, he also served as Railway Minister in Vajpayee’s government.

After parting ways with Lalu Prasad Yadav, Nitish Kumar formed the Samata Party and contested the 1995 Assembly elections. Although the party was reduced to just seven seats, his victory in Harnaut boosted morale within the organisation. That remains his last Assembly election victory; since then, he has not contested an Assembly election.

Except for his first three contests, Nitish Kumar did not lose another election. Even so, the question remains: why did he avoid Assembly elections during his approximate 22 years as Chief Minister?

Senior journalist Manikant Thakur believes there was always a lingering fear of defeat, which is why Nitish Kumar preferred the Legislative Council route instead of contesting directly as an MLA.

Thakur argues that this hesitation becomes even more pronounced when someone is already a Chief Minister or projected as one. According to him, when a leader of such stature continues for years as a Council member rather than contesting Assembly elections, it reflects a certain political insecurity. In his view, relying on the Council instead of direct elections cannot be described as a political strength; rather, it signals weakness. Drawing on five decades of journalistic experience, he says he sensed this hesitation in Nitish Kumar from early on, especially because the latter had lost several elections in the beginning and appeared visibly unsettled after those defeats.

Recalling one such moment after Nitish Kumar’s loss from Barh, Thakur said he went to visit him at his residence in Patna, where he was then staying with party leader Vinay Kumar Singh. He found no party workers or leaders there. Nitish Kumar was alone in his room. When asked about the defeat, he quietly acknowledged it with a visibly disappointed expression.

However, election analyst and former Tata Institute of Social Sciences professor Pushpendra disagrees with this interpretation. According to him, Nitish Kumar’s decision not to contest the Assembly elections was part of a broader political strategy.

Nitish Kumar returned as Chief Minister again in November 2005 and has remained in that position for across multiple terms, ever since. In total, he has taken oath as Chief Minister ten times: in 2000 (for just seven days), 2005–2010, 2010–2014, 2015, 2015–2017, 2017–2020, 2020–2022, 2022–2024, 2024–2025 and 2025–2026. Between May 20, 2014 and February 22, 2015, Jitan Ram Manjhi served as Chief Minister.

Pushpendra acknowledges that Nitish Kumar lost elections early in his career but points out that since 2005, alliances led by him have consistently secured majorities on the strength of his leadership. In his view, after 2005, Nitish Kumar could have won from almost any constituency he chose. Even today, he believes Nitish would win if he contested.

According to him, not contesting elections was a strategic decision. Nitish Kumar did not want to spend disproportionate time on one constituency during the election campaigns. Instead, he preferred to focus on the entire state. There was also another concern that if a Chief Minister wins from a particular constituency but later cannot devote sufficient time to it due to statewide responsibilities, local voters often feel neglected. Nitish Kumar, he says, consciously avoided such complications, and in his opinion, that was a sensible choice.

Pushpendra also dismisses the argument about fear of defeat, noting that even a towering leader like Atal Bihari Vajpayee lost Lok Sabha elections twice.

Throughout his tenure, Nitish Kumar’s political message has revolved around “good governance” and “inclusive development.” He built a broad social coalition drawing support from non-Yadav backward castes, Extremely Backward Classes (EBCs), and upper castes. These are the groups that had grown dissatisfied with the earlier RJD regime.

He prioritised and strongly emphasised infrastructure development and worked toward improving law and order. After taking oath in November 2005, governance and administrative reform became central priorities, earning him the popular title of Sushasan Babu.

He also introduced initiatives such as the bicycle scheme for schoolgirls and 35% reservation for women in government jobs. At the same time, he maintained a firm stance against corruption and dynasty politics.

However, his political journey has also seen several shifts in alliances. On two occasions, he broke ties with the BJP to join the RJD-led Grand Alliance and later returned.

Supporters and observers alike say Nitish Kumar has remained a defining face of governance in Bihar, both indispensable and unavoidable for any political formation. Whichever alliance he has led has crossed the majority mark largely on the strength of his leadership.