- Feb 11

Indian Polity (The Union and its Territories)

India is a union of states and union territories, which are governed by the Constitution of India. The Constitution defines the relationship between the union and the states, as well as the powers and functions of each level of government. The Constitution also lays down the procedure for the creation and reorganisation of states and union territories, as well as the conditions for ceding territory to a foreign country. Here, we will discuss the various aspects of the union and its territories, and how they have evolved over time.

Articles Related to States and Union Territories

The Constitution of India contains several articles that deal with the states and union territories. Some of the important ones are:

Article 1: It declares India as a union of states and specifies the names of the states and union territories.
Article 2: It empowers the Parliament to admit new states into the union or establish new states on the existing states’ territory.
Article 3: It empowers the Parliament to form new states or alter the boundaries, names, or areas of the existing states, with the prior recommendation of the President.
Article 4: It states that any law made by the Parliament under Article 2 or 3 shall not be deemed as an amendment of the Constitution and shall not require ratification by the states.
Article 239: It provides for the administration of union territories by the President through an administrator appointed by him/her.
Article 239A: It empowers the Parliament to create a legislature and a council of ministers for certain union territories, such as Puducherry and Delhi.
Article 239AA: It confers special status to the National Capital Territory of Delhi and provides for a legislative assembly and a council of ministers with limited powers.
Article 240: It empowers the President to make regulations for the administration of certain union territories, such as Andaman and Nicobar Islands and Lakshadweep.
Article 241: It provides for the establishment of a high court for a union territory or a group of union territories by a law of the Parliament.
Article 242: It empowers the Parliament to create a body for the administration of the tribal areas in Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura, and Mizoram.

Constitutional Provisions Related to the Creation of New States

The Constitution of India envisages two ways of creating new states: by admission and by reorganisation.

Admission:

Admission is the process of admitting a new state into the union, which may or may not be a part of the existing territory of India. For example, Sikkim was admitted as a state in 1975, after it ceased to be a protectorate of India. The Parliament can admit a new state by passing a law under Article 2, with a simple majority.

Reorganisation:

Reorganisation is the process of forming new states or altering the boundaries, names, or areas of the existing states, within the territory of India. For example, Telangana was formed as a new state in 2014, by bifurcating Andhra Pradesh. The Parliament can reorganize the states by passing a law under Article 3, with a simple majority. However, the law must have the prior recommendation of the President, who shall refer the bill to the state legislature concerned for its opinion. The state legislature’s opinion is not binding on the Parliament, but it must be given within a specified time limit.

Creation of a New State: Parliament’s Role, Presidential Recommendation, State Legislature Opinion

As mentioned above, the Parliament can create a new state by passing a law under Article 3, with a simple majority. However, the law must have the prior recommendation of the President, who shall refer the bill to the state legislature concerned for its opinion. The state legislature’s opinion is not binding on the Parliament, but it must be given within a specified time limit.

The role of the Parliament is to consider the bill and pass it with or without amendments, after taking into account the state legislature’s opinion, the views of the public, and the recommendations of the commissions or committees appointed for the purpose. The Parliament can also override the state legislature’s opinion, if it deems it necessary, in the national interest.

The role of the President is to act as a constitutional link between the union and the states, and to ensure that the bill is in accordance with the constitutional provisions and the principles of federalism. The President can also seek the advice of the Supreme Court on any question of law arising out of the bill, before giving his/her recommendation.

The role of the state legislature is to express its opinion on the bill, within the time limit specified by the President. The state legislature can either accept or reject the bill, or suggest amendments or modifications. The state legislature’s opinion is not binding on the Parliament, but it is a constitutional obligation for the Parliament to consider it.

Ceding Territory to a Foreign Country

The Constitution of India does not explicitly provide for the procedure of ceding territory to a foreign country. However, it can be inferred from the following provisions that such a process would require a constitutional amendment:

Article 1: It states that the territory of India shall comprise the states, the union territories, and such other territories as may be acquired.
Article 3: It states that the Parliament can alter the boundaries of the states, but not diminish their area.
Article 368: It states that the Parliament can amend the Constitution by passing a bill with a special majority of two-thirds of the members present and voting, and a majority of the total membership of each house. The bill must also be ratified by at least half of the state legislatures, if it affects the federal structure of the Constitution.

Therefore, ceding territory to a foreign country would amount to altering the territory of India and diminishing the area of the states, which would affect the federal structure of the Constitution. Hence, such a process would require a constitutional amendment under Article 368, with the consent of the state legislatures concerned.

Constitutional Amendments, Repealing Amendments, Associate Statehood

Constitutional Amendments

A constitutional amendment is a change or addition to the Constitution of India, which is the supreme law of the land. The Constitution of India can be amended by the Parliament, under Article 368, in the following manner:

The amendment bill can be introduced in either house of the Parliament, by a minister or a private member, with the prior permission of the President.
The bill must be passed by both houses of the Parliament, with a special majority of two-thirds of the members present and voting, and a majority of the total membership of each house.
The bill must also be ratified by at least half of the state legislatures, if it affects the federal structure of the Constitution, such as the distribution of powers between the union and the states, the representation of the states in the Parliament, the provisions related to the Supreme Court and the high courts, etc.
The bill becomes an act after it receives the assent of the President, and the amendment comes into force on the date specified in the act or on the date of the President’s assent, if no date is specified.

Repealing Amendments

A repealing amendment is a constitutional amendment that repeals or nullifies an existing amendment or a part of it. For example, the 42nd Amendment of 1976, which made several changes to the Constitution, was partly repealed by the 44th Amendment of 1978, which restored some of the original provisions. The procedure for repealing an amendment is the same as that for making an amendment, as described above.

Associate Statehood

Associate statehood is a concept that refers to a status of partial autonomy and integration for a state or a territory, within a larger federation or union. For example, Puerto Rico is an associate state of the United States of America, which means that it has its own constitution, government, and laws, but is subject to the federal laws and jurisdiction of the USA. The Constitution of India does not provide for the concept of associate statehood, but it can be introduced by a constitutional amendment, if the Parliament and the state or territory concerned agree to it. Such an amendment would require the consent of the state legislature, as well as the ratification of the other state legislatures, as it would affect the federal structure of the Constitution.

Reorganisation of States

The reorganisation of states is the process of forming new states or altering the boundaries, names, or areas of the existing states, within the territory of India. The reorganisation of states has been done several times since independence, to meet the demands of the people based on various factors such as language, culture, ethnicity, geography, administration, etc. The reorganisation of states is governed by the constitutional provisions under Article 3, as well as the recommendations of the committees and commissions appointed for the purpose.

Post-Independence State Classification

At the time of independence in 1947, India had 15 provinces and 562 princely states. The provinces were directly administered by the British government, while the princely states were ruled by local rulers who had varying degrees of autonomy and allegiance to the British crown. After independence, the princely states were integrated into the Indian union through the instrument of accession, merger, or takeover. The provinces were reorganised on the basis of language, culture, and administration.

In 1950, the Constitution of India classified the states into four categories: Part A, Part B, Part C, and Part D. The Part A states were the former provinces, which had a governor, a legislature, and a council of ministers. The Part B states were the former princely states, which had a rajpramukh, a legislature, and a council of ministers. The Part C states were the smaller states and territories, which were administered by a chief commissioner appointed by the President. The Part D states were the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, which were administered by a lieutenant governor appointed by the President.

In 1956, the States Reorganisation Act was passed, which abolished the four-fold classification of states and created 14 states and 6 union territories, based on the recommendations of the States Reorganisation Commission. The states were formed on the basis of linguistic and cultural affinity, while the union territories were the areas that were not viable as states or had special status or strategic importance.

In 1960, the state of Bombay was bifurcated into Gujarat and Maharashtra, based on the demand of the Gujarati and Marathi speaking people. In 1962, the state of Nagaland was created out of the Naga Hills district of Assam, to pacify the Naga insurgency. In 1963, the state of Punjab was reorganised into Punjab, Haryana, and Himachal Pradesh, based on the demand of the Sikh, Hindu, and hill people respectively. In 1966, the union territory of Delhi was given a legislative assembly and a council of ministers, with limited powers. In 1971, the state of Himachal Pradesh was upgraded from a union territory to a state. In 1972, the states of Manipur, Tripura, and Meghalaya were created out of the union territories of Manipur, Tripura, and the autonomous districts of Assam respectively. In 1975, the state of Sikkim was admitted into the Indian union, after it ceased to be a protectorate of India. In 1987, the states of Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram, and Goa were created out of the union territories of Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram, and Goa, Daman and Diu respectively. In 2000, the states of Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, and Uttarakhand were created out of the states of Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, and Uttar Pradesh respectively, based on the demand of the tribal, regional, and hill people respectively. In 2014, the state of Telangana was created out of the state of Andhra Pradesh, based on the demand of the Telangana people. In 2019, the state of Jammu and Kashmir was reorganised into two union territories of Jammu and Kashmir, and Ladakh, following the abrogation of Article 370 and Article 35A of the Constitution.

Committees and Commissions for State Reorganisation

The committees and commissions for state reorganisation are the bodies appointed by the government of India to study and recommend the formation or alteration of states and union territories, based on various criteria such as language, culture, ethnicity, geography, administration, etc. Some of the important committees and commissions for state reorganisation are:

Dhar Commission (1948): It was appointed by the Constituent Assembly to examine the feasibility of reorganising the states on linguistic basis. It rejected the idea of linguistic states and suggested that the existing administrative units should be retained.
JVP Committee (1949): It was appointed by the Congress Working Committee to reconsider the issue of linguistic states, after the demand for a separate Andhra state intensified. It consisted of Jawaharlal Nehru, Vallabhbhai Patel, and Pattabhi Sitaramayya. It also rejected the idea of linguistic states and upheld the Dhar Commission’s report.
Fazal Ali Commission (1953): It was appointed by the government of India to examine the issue of reorganisation of states, after the death of Potti Sriramulu, who fasted for the creation of Andhra state. It consisted of Fazal Ali, K.M. Panikkar, and H.N. Kunzru. It recommended the formation of 16 states and 3 union territories, based on linguistic and cultural factors, as well as administrative efficiency and national integration.
Shah Commission (1966): It was appointed by the government of India to examine the issue of reorganisation of Punjab, after the demand for a separate Sikh state intensified. It consisted of J.C. Shah, B.P. Sinha, and S.C. Vaish. It recommended the division of Punjab into Punjab and Haryana, based on language, and the transfer of some hill areas to Himachal Pradesh. It also recommended the creation of a union territory of Chandigarh, to serve as the common capital of Punjab and Haryana.
Sarkaria Commission (1983): It was appointed by the government of India to examine the issue of centre-state relations, and to suggest measures to improve them. It consisted of R.S. Sarkaria, B. Sivaraman, and Dr. S.R. Sen. It recommended that the formation or alteration of states should be done only after taking into account the views of the state legislature concerned, the wishes of the people, and the national interest. It also recommended that the consent of the state legislature should be obtained before ceding any territory to a foreign country.
Punchhi Commission (2007): It was appointed by the government of India to review the Sarkaria Commission’s report and to suggest changes in the light of the changing socio-economic and political scenario. It consisted of M.M. Punchhi, Dhirendra Singh, and V.K. Shunglu. It recommended that the formation or alteration of states should be done only after a broad consensus among the stakeholders, and that the views of the state legislature should be given due weightage. It also recommended that the President should consult the Inter-State Council before giving his/her recommendation under Article 3.

Linguistic Movements

The linguistic movements are the social and political movements that demand the recognition and promotion of a particular language or the creation of a state based on linguistic identity. The linguistic movements have played a significant role in the reorganisation of states in India, as well as the development of regional cultures and literatures. Some of the important linguistic movements in India are:

Andhra Movement (1946-1953): It was the movement for the creation of a separate state for the Telugu speaking people, out of the Madras Presidency. It was led by Potti Sriramulu, who fasted unto death for the cause. His death sparked widespread protests and violence, which forced the government to concede the demand and create the state of Andhra in 1953.
Tamil Movement (1956-1967): It was the movement for the protection and promotion of the Tamil language and culture, against the imposition of Hindi as the official language of India. It was led by C.N. Annadurai, E.V. Ramasamy, and M. Karunanidhi, who formed the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) party. The movement opposed the Official Languages Act of 1963, which made Hindi and English the official languages of the union, and demanded that Tamil should be given equal status. The movement also advocated for a separate Dravidian nation, comprising the four southern states. The movement gained popular support and the DMK came to power in Tamil Nadu in 1967.
Kannada Movement (1956-1973): It was the movement for the unification of all Kannada speaking areas under one state, and the recognition of Kannada as the official language of the state. It was led by Kuvempu, Aluru Venkata Rao, and Gopal Gowda, who formed the Kannada Sahitya Parishat and the Ekikarana Samiti. The movement succeeded in merging the Kannada speaking regions of Bombay, Hyderabad, and Madras into the state of Mysore in 1956. The movement also demanded that the state should be renamed as Karnataka, and that Kannada should be the medium of instruction in schools and colleges. The movement achieved its goals in 1973, when the state was renamed as Karnataka, and Kannada was declared as the first language of the state.
Marathi Movement (1956-1960): It was the movement for the creation of a separate state for the Marathi speaking people, out of the Bombay Presidency. It was led by Keshavrao Jedhe, S.M. Joshi, and Prabodhankar Thackeray, who formed the Samyukta Maharashtra Samiti. The movement opposed the bilingual state of Bombay, which included both Marathi and Gujarati speaking regions, and demanded that the state should be divided on linguistic lines. The movement faced stiff opposition from the Congress party, which wanted to retain Bombay as a cosmopolitan city and a financial hub. The movement gained momentum after the police firing on the protesters in 1956, which killed 105 people. The movement finally succeeded in 1960, when the state of Bombay was bifurcated into Maharashtra and Gujarat, and Bombay was made the capital of Maharashtra.
Punjabi Movement (1966-1973): It was the movement for the creation of a separate state for the Punjabi speaking people, out of the state of Punjab. It was led by Master Tara Singh, Sant Fateh Singh, and Prakash Singh Badal, who formed the Akali Dal party. The movement demanded that the state should be reorganised on linguistic and religious grounds, and that Punjabi should be recognised as the official language of the state. The movement faced opposition from the Hindi speaking people, who wanted to retain their linguistic and cultural identity. The movement also faced resistance from the central government, which feared the rise of Sikh separatism and extremism. The movement achieved its objective in 1966, when the state of Punjab was reorganised into Punjab, Haryana, and Himachal Pradesh, and Punjabi was declared as the official language of Punjab. The movement also demanded that the union territory of Chandigarh, which was the common capital of Punjab and Haryana, should be transferred to Punjab. The movement continued its agitation until 1973, when the central government agreed to give Chandigarh to Punjab, but the decision was never implemented.

Formation of Union Territories

The union territories are the administrative units of India, which are directly governed by the central government through an administrator appointed by the President. The union territories are created for various reasons, such as historical, geographical, strategic, or political. The union territories have been formed by the following methods:

By separating a territory from a state or a union territory, such as Delhi, Chandigarh, Dadra and Nagar Haveli, Daman and Diu, Lakshadweep, and Ladakh.
By acquiring a territory from a foreign country, such as Pondicherry, Karaikal, Mahe, and Yanam from France, and Goa, Daman and Diu from Portugal.
By integrating a territory with another union territory, such as Dadra and Nagar Haveli with Daman and Diu, and Pondicherry, Karaikal, Mahe, and Yanam with Puducherry.
By upgrading a territory from a union territory to a state, such as Himachal Pradesh, Manipur, Tripura, Meghalaya, Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram, Goa, and Jammu and Kashmir.

Formation of New States in India

The formation of new states in India is the process of creating new states out of the existing states, within the territory of India. The formation of new states is done to meet the demands of the people based on various factors such as language, culture, ethnicity, geography, administration, etc. The formation of new states is governed by the constitutional provisions under Article 3, as well as the recommendations of the committees and commissions appointed for the purpose. The new states that have been formed in India since independence are:

Andhra (1953): It was formed out of the Telugu speaking regions of the Madras Presidency, after the Andhra movement.
Gujarat and Maharashtra (1960): They were formed out of the state of Bombay, after the Marathi and Gujarati movements.
Nagaland (1963): It was formed out of the Naga Hills district of Assam, after the Naga insurgency.
Punjab, Haryana, and Himachal Pradesh (1966): They were formed out of the state of Punjab, after the Punjabi movement and the Shah Commission’s report.
Manipur, Tripura, and Meghalaya (1972): They were formed out of the union territories of Manipur, Tripura, and the autonomous districts of Assam respectively, after the tribal movements.
Sikkim (1975): It was admitted into the Indian union, after it ceased to be a protectorate of India.
Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram, and Goa (1987): They were formed out of the union territories of Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram, and Goa, Daman and Diu respectively, after the regional movements.
Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, and Uttarakhand (2000): They were formed out of the states of Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, and Uttar Pradesh respectively, after the regional and tribal movements.
Telangana (2014): It was formed out of the state of Andhra Pradesh, after the Telangana movement.
Jammu and Kashmir, and Ladakh (2019): They were formed out of the state of Jammu and Kashmir, after the abrogation of Article 370 and Article 35A of the Constitution.

Andhra Pradesh State Reorganisation Act, 2014

The Andhra Pradesh State Reorganisation Act, 2014 is the act of the Parliament of India, which bifurcated the state of Andhra Pradesh into two states of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, with effect from 2 June 2014. The act was passed after a prolonged agitation by the people of Telangana, who demanded a separate state for their region, which they felt was neglected and exploited by the Andhra region. The act also provided for the division of assets and liabilities, the allocation of employees, the distribution of revenues, the apportionment of public debt, the adjustment of boundaries, the establishment of common institutions, the special development package for backward areas, the status of Hyderabad as the common capital for 10 years, and the amendment of the First and Fourth Schedules of the Constitution.

Jammu and Kashmir State Reorganisation Act, 2019

The Jammu and Kashmir State Reorganisation Act, 2019 is the act of the Parliament of India, which reconstituted the state of Jammu and Kashmir into two union territories of Jammu and Kashmir, and Ladakh, with effect from 31 October 2019. The act was passed after the abrogation of Article 370 and Article 35A of the Constitution, which granted special status and autonomy to Jammu and Kashmir. The act also provided for the division of assets and liabilities, the allocation of employees, the distribution of revenues, the apportionment of public debt, the adjustment of boundaries, the establishment of common institutions, the delimitation of constituencies, the application of central laws, the extension of the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and the Election Commission, and the amendment of the First and Fourth Schedules of the Constitution.

Previous Year Civil Service Questions with Answers

Q. Which one of the following is not a feature of the Andhra Pradesh State Reorganisation Act, 2014? (UPSC Prelims 2015)

(a) The High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad shall be the common High Court for both the successor States.

(b) The Governor of Telangana shall have special responsibility for security of life, liberty and property of all those who reside in the common capital area.

(c) The Polavaram Irrigation Project shall be declared as a national project and shall be executed by the Union Government.

(d) The Union Government shall constitute an expert committee to recommend measures for the progress and development of the backward regions of the successor States.

Answer: (d) The Union Government shall constitute an expert committee to recommend measures for the progress and development of the backward regions of the successor States.

Explanation:

The Andhra Pradesh State Reorganisation Act, 2014 does not provide for the constitution of an expert committee to recommend measures for the progress and development of the backward regions of the successor States. Instead, it provides for the constitution of a board, called the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation and Development Board, to monitor the implementation of the development package for the backward areas of the successor States.

Q. Which one of the following statements is not correct about the Jammu and Kashmir State Reorganisation Act, 2019? (UPSC Prelims 2020)

(a) It reconstituted the state of Jammu and Kashmir into two union territories of Jammu and Kashmir, and Ladakh.

(b) It abolished the Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Council and transferred its powers and functions to the Legislative Assembly.

(c) It provided for the delimitation of the constituencies of the Legislative Assembly of the union territory of Jammu and Kashmir on the basis of the 2021 Census.

(d) It extended the jurisdiction of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India and the Chief Election Commissioner of India to the union territories of Jammu and Kashmir, and Ladakh.

Answer: (c) It provided for the delimitation of the constituencies of the Legislative Assembly of the union territory of Jammu and Kashmir on the basis of the 2021 Census.

Explanation:

The Jammu and Kashmir State Reorganisation Act, 2019 did not provide for the delimitation of the constituencies of the Legislative Assembly of the union territory of Jammu and Kashmir on the basis of the 2021 Census. Instead, it provided for the delimitation of the constituencies of the Legislative Assembly of the union territory of Jammu and Kashmir on the basis of the 2011 Census.

UPSC NCERT Practice Questions on Indian Polity

Q. What are the main features of the federal system of India? How does it differ from the unitary system?

Answer:

The main features of the federal system of India are:

The division of powers between the Union and the States, as specified in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution.
The supremacy of the Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land and binds both the Union and the States.
The existence of a written and rigid Constitution, which can be amended only by a special procedure involving both the Union and the States.
The independence of the judiciary, which acts as the guardian and interpreter of the Constitution and settles disputes between the Union and the States.
The bicameralism of the Parliament, which consists of the Rajya Sabha (the Council of States) and the Lok Sabha (the House of the People).
The representation of the States in the Rajya Sabha, which gives them a voice in the Union legislature.
The existence of a common citizenship, a common electoral system, a common all-India services, and a common national emblem for the whole country.

The federal system of India differs from the unitary system in the following ways:

In a unitary system, there is only one level of government, which exercises all the powers of the state. In a federal system, there are two or more levels of government, which share the powers of the state according to the Constitution.
In a unitary system, the central government can change or abolish the sub-national units at its will. In a federal system, the sub-national units have a constitutional status and cannot be altered or abolished by the central government unilaterally.
In a unitary system, the sub-national units are subordinate and dependent on the central government. In a federal system, the sub-national units are coordinate and independent of the central government in their respective spheres of authority.
In a unitary system, the central government can legislate on any subject matter. In a federal system, the central and the sub-national governments can legislate only on the subjects assigned to them by the Constitution.
In a unitary system, the central government can override or nullify the laws made by the sub-national units. In a federal system, the laws made by the central and the sub-national governments are equally valid and binding within their respective jurisdictions.

Crack the UPSC with Superb IAS

Tips, tricks, and strategies from experts