The Sixth Schedule of the Constitution provides for the administration of tribal areas in Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram to safeguard the rights of the tribal population in these states.
Constitutional Provisions: Established under Article 244(2) and Article 275(1).
Formation: Based on recommendations from the Bordoloi Committee.
Benefits of inclusion:
- Empowerment: Creation of Autonomous Regional Councils (ARCs) and Autonomous District Councils (ADCs) – elected bodies with the power to administrate tribal areas.
- Legislative Power: Authority to legislate on forest management, agriculture, village and town administration, inheritance, marriage, divorce, and social customs.
- Judicial Powers: Ability to establish village councils or courts to resolve disputes among Scheduled Tribes, and appoint officers for law enforcement.
- Financial Powers: Permission to collect land revenue, levy taxes, regulate money lending and trading, collect royalties from mineral extraction, and establish public amenities.
- Legislative Exemptions: Acts of Parliament or state legislatures may not apply or apply with specified modifications and exceptions to autonomous districts and regions.
- Article 355 refers to the provision in the Constitution that states that “It shall be the duty of the Union to protect every State against external aggression and internal disturbance and to ensure that the government of every State is carried on in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution”.
- Part of emergency provisions contained in Part XVIII of the Constitution of India, from Article 352 to 360.
- Based on the principle of “duty to protect”.
EXTRA – Imposed in Manipur, in an effort to control the unrest in the state.
The 7th Schedule of the Indian Constitution defines the distribution of legislative powers between the Union and the States, essential to India’s quasi-federal structure.
Key Significance:
- Three Lists– Union, State, and Concurrent Lists define subject-wise law-making powers.
- Legislative Clarity– Prevents overlap and jurisdictional conflicts between the Centre and States.
- Federal Balance– Maintains autonomy of States while ensuring national unity.
- 42nd Amendment Impact– Shifted key subjects (e.g., education, forests) to the Concurrent List, increasing central control.
- Facilitates Cooperative Federalism– Promotes coordination in policy areas under the Concurrent List.
- Bihar and Andhra Pradesh have been actively demanding Special Category Status (SCS) from the Central Government.
- Special Category States are those Indian states given preferential treatment in financial assistance and central schemes due to their unique socio-economic and geographical challenges. It was a classification introduced by the Planning Commission in 1969.
- Criteria for Designation:
- Hilly and difficult terrain
- Low population density or sizable tribal population
- Strategic location along international borders
- Economic and infrastructural backwardness
- Non-viable state finances
- Note: The 14th Finance Commission discontinued the SCS status in 2015, but some benefits continue through other mechanisms
The Constitution of India establishes a federal system of government.However, the Indian Constitution also contains many unitary or non-federal features.
Federal features : Two governments (central and state), Division of powers, Written Constitution, Supremacy of the Constitution, Rigidity of the Constitution, Independent judiciary and Bicameralism
Unitary features :a strong Centre, a single Constitution, single citizenship, flexibility of the Constitution, states not being indestructible, no equality of state representation, All India Services, integrated audit and election machinery (CAG and EC), veto over state bills (Article 201), integrated judiciary, appointment of state governors by the Centre, emergency provisions, and so on.
Hence, the Indian Constitution has been described as ‘quasi-federal’ by K.C. Wheare, ‘federation with a centralizing tendency’ by Ivor Jennings, and so on.
SC observation : In the Bommai case(1994), the Supreme Court observed that the Constitution is federal and characterized federalism as its ‘basic feature.’ The states have an independent constitutional existence and are not satellites or agents of the Centre.
The Punchhi Commission, chaired by former Chief Justice of India Madan Mohan Punchhi, was constituted by the Union Government in April 2007 to review and examine the functioning of existing arrangements between the Union and States.
Major recommendation to strengthen Cooperative federalism
- Regarding Office of Governor :
- Appointment : adopt the following strict guidelines (i) He/she should be eminent in some walk of life (ii) a person from outside the state (iii)a detached figure etc
- A committee for appointment of governors → it may comprise thePrime Minister, the Home Minister, the Lok Sabha’s speaker and the concerned Chief Minister of the State.
- fixed tenure of 5 years , Removal → impeachment procedure like President
- Discretionary powers should be used sparingly, and must be a choice dictated by reason activated by good faith and tempered by caution.
- Make decision on a Bill within 6 months
- provided clear guidelines on the order of precedence for the appointment of chief ministers, thereby limiting the governor’s discretionary powers in this regard.
- Cooperation
- Amend article 263 : make the Inter-State Council a credible, powerful and fair mechanism for management of inter-state and Centre-state differences.
- Zonal Councils → Meet at least twice a year
- New All India Service → Health, Education, Judiciary
- The Seventh Schedule should be amended to include ‘Environment, Ecology and Climate Change’ under the Union list.
- Political Federalism
- Concurrent list : Some broad agreement should be reached before introducing Bills on Concurrent Subjects by institutionalizing a mechanism under the ISC.
- Emergency : Article 356 should be amended to incorporate guidelines set forth by the SC in S.R. Bommai case (1994) ; Provide a framework for ‘localized emergency’ (Art. 352, 356 → last resort)
- Rajyasabha : Factors inhibiting the functioning of the Rajya Sabha as a representative forum of States should be removed; States should be given equal representation; requirement of domicile status for election to Rajya Sabha should be restored
- Economic Federalism
- All future Central legislation involving States’ involvement should provide for cost sharing.
- Consultation with states in finalizing the Terms of Reference of the Finance Commission.
- Review of all transfers to States to minimize discretionary transfers (like CSSs)
The MHA’s recent initiative to seek states’ comments on the Punchhi Commission reflects a commitment to Cooperative Federalism, fostering collaboration to propel India forward in the era of Amrit Kaal.
Established in 2015, NITI Aayog replaced the Planning Commission to better reflect the needs of a market-driven, cooperative federal economy, shifting from centralized planning to a dynamic policy think tank model.
Key Contributions & Transformations:
- Bottom-Up & Cooperative Federalism- Involves States in policy formulation via the Governing Council, promoting state-specific development strategies. Encourages state-specific planning based on local needs.
- Policy Think Tank- Provides expert inputs, real-time data, and policy research across sectors (e.g., health, education, AI, climate change). Example: Reports on gig economy, digital health, SDGs, etc.
- Flexible Planning Model- Replaced rigid 5-year plans with 3-Year Action Agenda, 7-Year Strategy, and 15-Year Vision, ensuring adaptability.
- Competitive Federalism- Encourages States/UTs to improve governance through performance-based rankings like the SDG Index and Health Index. e.g., Aspirational Districts Programme, SDG India Index
- Outcome-Oriented Governance- Focuses on impact assessment and measurable outcomes over fund allocation.
- Support to Aspirational Districts- Targets backward regions with real-time monitoring, data-driven planning, and sectoral convergence for inclusive development.
- Driving Innovation & Start-ups- Initiatives like Atal Innovation Mission (AIM) promote entrepreneurship, start-ups, and school-level innovation.
- Global Collaboration & SDG Localization- Aligns national policies with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and facilitates international cooperation in policy best practices.
K.C. Wheare called India a “quasi-federal” state due to the centralizing tendencies despite a federal framework. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar described it as a “federal Constitution with a strong unitary bias.”
Quasi-Federal Features of Indian Polity:
- Dual Polity- There is a clear division of powers between the Union and the States via the Union, State, and Concurrent Lists under the Seventh Schedule.
- Written and Rigid Constitution- The Constitution is written and partially rigid, with some provisions requiring joint consent of the Centre and States for amendment.
- Independent Judiciary- The Supreme Court acts as the guardian of the Constitution and resolves Centre-State disputes.
- Bicameralism- The Rajya Sabha represents states in the Parliament, allowing them a voice in national legislation.
Unitary Spirit in Practice:
- Strong Centre- Union List has more subjects and dominates over the State List. States have limited autonomy in law-making.
- Emergency Provisions- During emergencies (Articles 352, 356, 360), powers get centralized, and the federal structure turns unitary.
- Single Constitution & Citizenship- India has one Constitution and single citizenship for all, unlike classical federations like the USA.
- Appointment of Governors- The Centre appoints governors and can act as agents of the Union, influencing state administration.
- All-India Services- Officers like IAS, IPS serve both the Centre and the States but are controlled by the Union, reducing state autonomy in administration.
India’s federalism is a federation in form but unitary in substance, designed to preserve national unity while accommodating regional diversity, making it a ‘cooperative federalism with centralising tendencies’.
Asymmetric Federalism: It is based on unequal powers and relationships in political, administrative, and fiscal arrangement spheres among the constituent units (States). In India, asymmetry exists both vertically (between Centre and States) and horizontally (among the States).
Existing intrinsic asymmetry :
Vertical Asymmetry (Centre and States) | Horizontal Asymmetry (Between States/UT’s) | Fiscal Asymmetry |
|
|
|
Role of Asymmetry in Cooperative Federalism:
- Based on weighted and differentiated equality : Equal treatment of all States while recognizing varying capacities.
- Balancing national unity with regional autonomy : States like Nagaland and Mizoram enjoy negotiated autonomy as a political compromise. Parliament is prohibited from interfering with religious, social practices, land, and natural resources in these states.
- Allows Self-Rule within Shared Rule: Creation of Autonomous District Councils acknowledges historical rights and facilitates self-rule within the shared rule framework.
- Protecting Diversity: Addresses India’s linguistic, cultural and religious diversity by allowing differentiated treatment for states.
- Grants concessions to certain conflict- ridden regions to prevent secessionism and address autonomy demands.
- Special provisions facilitate inclusive decision-making and resource distribution.
However, Concerns have also been raised against asymmetric federalism citing potential for regionalism and separatism.
The recent abrogation of Article 370 also highlights the importance of ensuring that the principles of asymmetric federalism are not misused, emphasizing the ongoing need to balance regional autonomy with national unity.
Despite challenges, asymmetrical federalism remains relevant for accommodating diverse groups and promoting cooperative federalism.It is crucial for sharing governance responsibilities and ensuring inclusive governance in a multicultural society like India.
Extra
- Article 370 Abrogation Case: Petitioners argued for internal sovereignty under Article 370. The Supreme Court ruled it as a feature of asymmetric federalism, not internal sovereignty.
- Article 371A-I:
- Provides special provisions for at least nine states.
- Categorized under “Temporary, Transitional and Special Provisions” section.
- Operable until crisis ceases, but lacks explicit expiry dates
- India adopted the salad bowl approach over the melting pot, recognizing the existing pluricultural society.)
Article 153 provides for the office of a Governor for every state. Appointed by the President of India as per Article 155, Governors serve as representatives of the central government in the states, bridging the gap between the Union and regional administrations. While the Governor is constitutionally supposed to act as a neutral arbiter and protector of the Constitution, the actual practice has often been different.
Issues related to office of the Governor :
- ‘Partisan’ Behavior:Governors have been accused of acting as agents of the Centre and not as an independent Constitutional Office.
- Constitutional misadventure: The Tamil Nadu Governor has acted without forethought in sacking a Minister without the Chief Minister’s advice going beyond what constitution mandates.
- Dereliction of duties:
- Recently in Punjab and earlier in Rajasthan, the Governor refused to convene the Assembly session on the recommendation of the State Cabinet. (Art 163 and art 174)SC observed that the Governor can’t employ his discretion against the advice of the Cabinet to convene the Assembly.
- Political uncertainty in state: The Governor of Jharkhand didn’t act on the advice of the Election Commission of India to disqualify the Chief Minister of Jharkhand for violation of electoral norms.
- Increasing Tussle with Elected Governments
- Tamil Nadu: In January 2023, the Governor refused to read some parts of the Governor’s address at the beginning of the State Legislative Assembly session.
- West Bengal:Public spat between the Governor and the Chief Minister, with differences on administration and appointments in state-run universities.
- In Delhi : The tussle between the L-G and the CM.
- Misuse of article 200:
- No timeline to give the assent: Several Bills passed by the Tamilnadu state Assembly have been pending as the Governor has not made any decision.
- Indefinite withholding of assent to Bills: leading to a deadlock between the executive and legislative branches.
- Reservation of Bills for Presidential Assent: which can delay the enactment of legislation.
- Misuse of other discretionary Powers :
- President Rule : Article 356 has been used more than 125 times.In almost all cases it was used for political considerations rather than any genuine breakdown of constitutional machinery in the States.
- Appointment of CM { article 164 (1) }: Determining the time needed for a party to prove its majority, or which party must be called first to do so, generally after a hung verdict in an election.
- Vesting them with other roles like university chancellorship exposes the office to potential conflicts of interest and controversies as seen in Kerala
- There are little checks on their conduct and ways to hold Governors accountable
- Lack of transparency in their communication with states and role clarification amplifies governance issues.
Such actions undermine the federal structure of the constitution and create an environment of mistrust between the center and states.
Way forward
- Establish a ‘Code of Conduct’ endorsed by all levels of government to guide governors.
- Codify discretionary powers, set boundaries, and mandate adherence to Cabinet advice.
- Amend Article 155: Reform governor appointments and removals based on Punchhi and Sarkaria Commission reports.
- Follow Judicial Guidance
- Recently, the Supreme Court (SC) has observed that bills sent to the governor for assent must be returned “as soon as possible”. He has the option to send it back to the Assembly for reconsideration.
- SC in Shamsher Singh case (1974) said, “The Constitution does not aim at providing a parallel administration within the State by allowing the Governor to go against the advice of the Council of Ministers.”
- S.R. Bommai Judgment (1994) : President’s rule– The Supreme Court classified the instances of failure of constitutional machinery into four heads- Political crises, Internal subversion, Physical breakdown, Non- compliance with constitutional directions of the Union Executive
- In Rameshwar Prasad v. Union of India (2006):: motivated and whimsical conduct of the Governor is amenable to judicial review.
- Nabam Rebia Judgement (2016): SC ruled that the exercise of the Governor’s discretion Article 163 is limited and not arbitrary.
Conclusion
- The Governors should also act according to their Constitutional mandate, rather than acting as political agents. An active but unbiased Office of Governor can strengthen the Union-State relationship and the federal structure
- Urgent comprehensive reforms are required to protect the sanctity and independence of the Governor’s office, in line with the Constitutional principles of federalism and democratic functioning
While the Governor is generally bound by the advice of the Council of Ministers under Article 163, the Constitution allows the Governor to act independently in certain situations. However, these powers have often led to tensions in Centre–State relations, raising concerns over federal balance.
Constitutional Discretion:
- Article 200 – Reserving bills for the President’s assent.
- Article 356 – Recommending President’s Rule.
- Acting as administrator of a Union Territory (additional charge).
- Deciding royalty payments to tribal councils.
- Article 167 – Seeking info from the Chief Minister on state affairs.
Situational Discretion:
- Appointing CM in case of hung assembly or sudden vacancy (Art. 164).
- Dismissing CoM if it loses Assembly’s confidence.
- Dissolving Assembly when the government loses majority (Art. 174).
Impact on Centre–State Relations
Positive Impact
- Crisis Management: Helps maintain constitutional order during emergencies (e.g., Punjab insurgency).
- Stability in Hung Assemblies: Facilitates government formation (e.g., Maharashtra 2019).
- Upholds National Coherence: Ensures state laws align with Union laws when necessary.
- Bridge Between Centre and State: Helps communicate regional issues to the Centre.
Negative Impact
- Central Overreach: Governors act as Union’s agents, undermining state autonomy.
- Example: Tamil Nadu Governor withheld assent to 10 bills (2023–24); SC had to intervene.
- Partisan Government Formation: Seen in Karnataka (2018), Maharashtra (2019).
- Misuse of Article 356: Used to dismiss opposition-ruled states (e.g., Arunachal Pradesh 2016).
- Legislative Interference: Delays in bill assent disrupt state functioning (e.g., Kerala, West Bengal).
- Erosion of Federal Trust: Opposition-ruled states face more friction, deepening asymmetry.
- Undermining Elected Governments: Frequent clashes in states like West Bengal and Kerala.
Role of Supreme Court Judgments
The Supreme Court has clarified and restricted Governors’ discretionary powers to protect federalism:
- Samsher Singh v. State of Punjab (1974): Governors must follow the Council’s advice except in explicit discretionary areas, curbing arbitrary actions.
- S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994): President’s Rule recommendations are subject to judicial review, requiring objective evidence of constitutional failure, reducing political misuse.
- Nabam Rebia v. Deputy Speaker (2016): Governors cannot interfere in State legislatures (e.g., advancing sessions), reinforcing legislative autonomy.
- Recent Rulings (2020–2024):
- State of Tamil Nadu v. Governor of Tamil Nadu (2023): Directed Governors to act on bills within reasonable time, criticizing delays.
- Punjab and Kerala (2023–24): Courts rebuked Governors for delaying bill assent, emphasizing federal principles.
- Telangana (2024): High Court intervened in Governor’s delay in approving legislative nominations, protecting State rights.
Way Forward:
- The discretionary role of the Governor must be exercised with restraint, transparency, and constitutional morality.
- Supreme Court judgments have acted as a check on overreach and guided federal balance.
- Recommendations for reform include:
- Codifying the scope of discretion (as per Sarkaria Commission),
- Mandating timelines for assent to bills,
- Revising the Governor appointment process for neutrality.
The transition from the Planning Commission to NITI Aayog in 2015 marked a move from centralized economic control to a more collaborative, federal, and dynamic policy-making institution. It aligns India’s development planning with 21st-century challenges and aspirations.
Limitations of the Planning Commission:
- Top-Down Approach- Centralised policies often ignored state-level diversity and ground realities.
- Outdated Structure- Five-Year Plans became rigid and disconnected from evolving global and domestic economic dynamics.
- Weak Federal Participation- States had limited input, leading to dissatisfaction and a lack of ownership in national priorities.
- Slow Policy Response- Bureaucratic delays in plan formulation and implementation made it unfit for real-time governance.
- Resource Allocation Over Policy Innovation- Focused more on financial distribution than on outcome-based, evidence-backed reforms.
Establishment & Structure of NITI Aayog:
- Formed in 2015 to replace the Planning Commission with a modern policy think tank.
- Chaired by the PM, with CMs, LGs, and experts forming the Governing Council.
- Structure encourages cooperative and competitive federalism, innovation, and real-time policy feedback.
Key Functional Differences:
| Parameter | Planning Commission | NITI Aayog |
| Approach | Centralised top-down | Bottom-up, cooperative federalism |
| Role | Resource allocator | Policy advisor and knowledge partner |
| Planning Tool | Five-Year Plans | Strategy @75, Vision Documents |
| State Participation | Limited | Active, through Governing Council |
| Fiscal Powers | Had budgetary control | No financial control |
Impact on India’s Development Policy:
- Greater State Empowerment-
- Active state role in vision-building through SDG localization and the Aspirational Districts Programme.
- Performance-based ranking promotes competitive federalism.
- Evidence-Based and Tech-Driven Policymaking-
- Use of real-time dashboards (e.g., NITI Health Index, Education Index).
- Promotes data-driven decision-making and localized interventions.
- Innovation & Future-Readiness-
- Leads in frontier policy areas like AI, EVs, and the digital economy.
- Launched Atal Innovation Mission and India@100 roadmap.
- Enhanced Centre-State Synergy-
- Governing Council Meetings are used for aligning national goals.
- Supports state capacity building through technical and policy handholding.
- New Models of Development-
- Introduced ‘Sunrise Sectors’ focus, like circular economy, gig economy, and blockchain.
- Launched State Institution for Transformation (SITs) to replicate NITI’s model at the state level.
- Private Sector & Civil Society Engagement-
- Collaborative models such as public-private partnerships in education, health, and infrastructure.
- Involves NGOs and think tanks for inclusive governance.
- Better Monitoring & Evaluation-
- Shift from input-based to outcome-based monitoring through regular reports and rankings.
- Created the Development Monitoring & Evaluation Office (DMEO) for impact audits.
- Focus on Self-Reliance (Atmanirbhar Bharat)-
- Supports indigenous innovation and Make in India through tailored policy guidance.
- Provided critical inputs during the COVID-19 economic recovery plans.
Challenges and Criticisms:
- Lacks fiscal powers; cannot enforce implementation.
- Overlap with existing ministries sometimes causes friction.
- Still evolving institutional identity and authority.
The shift from the Planning Commission to NITI Aayog reflects India’s maturing democratic and economic structure. While it has transformed developmental planning through decentralisation, innovation, and real-time data usage, empowering it with functional autonomy and execution authority can significantly amplify its impact.
The Indian Constitution establishes a federal system with some unitary features. It is sometimes called a quasi-federal system, as it contains elements of both federation and union.
Trends Indicating Weakening of Indian Federalism | Trends Indicating Counterbalancing of Indian Federalism |
|
|
The evolving political landscape, marked by the resurgence of coalition politics and the increasing influence of regional parties, offers a unique opportunity to redefine and strengthen the federal structure. Achieving a balanced federal structure requires concerted efforts towards collaboration, empowerment of states, clarity in roles and responsibilities, and trust-building between the central government and states.
