The failures and difficulties of the Third Plan seem nowhere to have been taken into account in determining the outlines of the Fourth Plan.
The tendency is to attribute the failures of the Third Plan to exogenous factors — the Chinese and Pakistani aggressions, the bad harvest of 1965-66 — and to imply that but for these developments all would have been well.
As a consequence in determining the size of the plan, assessing the resources available, setting the priorities and detailing the means of achieving targets, the Fourth Plan closely follows the Third.
All this points to the lack of sufficient detailed work at the ground level which, in turn, reflects the administrative bias of the organisation and staffing of the Planning Commission,