Q.26 Though the federal principle is dominant in our Constitution and that principle is one of its basic features, but it is equally true that federalism under the Indian Constitution leans in favour of a strong Centre, a feature that militates against the concept of strong federalism. GS-II: POLITY (UPSC CSE 2014)

Answer:

THE INTRODUCTION:

The Indian Constitution unequivocally embodies a federal structure while leaning significantly towards a robust central government. This dual characteristic has rightfully earned India the description of a “quasi-federal” state. Despite federalism being a fundamental feature of the Constitution, the centralization of power frequently undermines the autonomy of states.

THE BODY:

The Indian Constitution incorporates several federal features:

• • Dual Polity: The Constitution establishes a dual polity consisting of the Union and the States, each endowed with sovereign powers in their respective fields as defined by the Constitution (Article 1, Part V, and Part VI).
  • Division of Powers: The Seventh Schedule of the Constitution divides powers between the Union and State governments into three lists: the Union List, the State List, and the Concurrent List (Article 246). The Union List contains subjects of national importance, the State List includes subjects of regional significance, and the Concurrent List comprises subjects of common interest to the Union and the States.
  • Written Constitution: The Indian Constitution is a written document that delineates the structure, powers, and functions of both the central and state governments, thus avoiding misunderstandings and conflicts.
  • Supremacy of the Constitution: The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any law inconsistent with it can be declared invalid by the This ensures that both the Union and State governments operate within the jurisdiction prescribed by the Constitution.
  • Independent Judiciary: The Constitution provides for an independent judiciary, with the Supreme Court at the apex, to protect the Constitution’s supremacy and settle disputes between the Centre and the States.
  • Bicameral Legislature: The Parliament consists of two houses—the Rajya Sabha (Council of States) representing the states and the Lok Sabha (House of the People) representing the people of India. This bicameral structure ensures that both the states and the people are represented in the legislative process.

Despite its federal structure, several provisions tilt the balance of power towards the Centre:

• • Unequal Distribution of Power: The 7th Schedule contains three lists: the central list, the State list, and the Concurrent list. The central list includes 100 subjects, whereas the State list contains 61 subjects, and the concurrent list contains 52 subjects. The more important subjects have been included in the Union List. The Centre has overriding authority over the Concurrent List, and the residuary powers are entrusted to the Centre.
  • Territorial Integrity and States are not Indestructible: The territorial integrity of the country lies with the centre, while the boundaries of states are destructible. By unilateral action, the Parliament can change any state’s area, boundaries, or name. It requires only a simple majority and not a special majority.
  • Flexibility of the Constitution: The constitutional amendment process is less rigid, and the bulk of the Constitution can be amended only by unilateral action by the Parliament. Further, the power to initiate an amendment to the Constitution lies only with the Centre.
  • Single Constitution and Citizenship: India has a single Constitution for the Union and the States and a single citizenship for all citizens, irrespective of the state of residence.
  • Residuary Powers: The Union Government holds residuary powers, meaning any subject not mentioned in the State or Concurrent List falls under the Union List.
  • Emergency Provisions: During a national emergency (Article 352), President’s Rule (Article 356), or financial emergency (Article 360), the Centre can assume significant control over the states. These provisions enable the Centre to maintain national integrity and respond effectively to crises.
  • Role of Governors: Governors, appointed by the President, act as representatives of the Centre in states and have the power to reserve specific bills for the President’s consideration. They also played a crucial role in the president’s rule.
  • All-India Services: The Indian Administrative Service (IAS) and Indian Police Service (IPS) are common to the Union and the States, ensuring the Centre’s influence over state administration.
  • Integrated Constitutional Office: Constitutional bodies like CAG under Article 148 and Election Commission under Article 324 are integrated Constitutional bodies, and the states have no control over them.

Several landmark judgments have shaped the understanding of federalism in India:

• • R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994): The Supreme Court held that federalism is a basic feature of the Constitution, and any arbitrary use of Article 356 (President’s Rule) would be subject to judicial review. This case emphasized the need to balance central authority and state autonomy.
  • Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973): The Court recognized federalism as part of the basic structure of the Constitution, which cannot be altered by any amendment. This judgment underscored the inviolability of federal principles within the constitutional framework.
  • State of Rajasthan v. Union of India (1977): The Court upheld the Centre’s power to dismiss state governments under Article 356, emphasizing the need for a strong Centre to maintain national integrity. This case highlighted the centralizing tendencies within the federal structure.

RECOMMENDATIONS OF VARIOUS COMMISSIONS

SARKARIA COMMISSION (1983-1988)

• • Inter-State Council: Establishment of an Inter-State Council under Article 263 to facilitate coordination between the Centre and States. This council was eventually set up in 1990.
  • Use of Article 356: It is recommended that Article 356 should be used sparingly and as a last resort, with detailed justification for its invocation. The Commission emphasized the need for a “speaking document” from the Governor when recommending the President’s Rule.
  • Role of Governors: Suggested that Governors should be eminent persons, not involved in local politics, and their appointment should include consultation with the state’s Chief minister. This aimed to ensure impartiality and reduce central influence over state administration.

PUNCHHI COMMISSION (2007-2010)

• • Amendment of Articles 355 and 356: To prevent misuse, these articles should be amended to ensure that President’s Rule is imposed only under extreme circumstances.
  • Concurrent List: States should be consulted through the Inter-State Council before introducing bills on matters in the Concurrent List. This recommendation aimed to enhance cooperative federalism.
  • Appointment of Governors: To ensure a more transparent and consultative process, a committee involving the Prime Minister, Home Minister, Lok Sabha Speaker, and the concerned Chief Minister was recommended.

THE CONCLUSION:

The Indian Constitution, while federal in structure, incorporates several unitary features that ensure a strong Centre. This quasi-federal nature is designed to maintain national unity and integrity, especially given India’s diverse socio-cultural landscape. The Supreme Court, through landmark judgments, and various commissions, through their recommendations, has continuously shaped and balanced the Centre-State relations to uphold the federal spirit within the framework of a strong central authority.