Political Science Notes Part 8: Centre-State Relations, Inter-State Relations, and Emergency Provisions for UPSC, PSC, SSC CGL

Detailed Notes

Chapter 14: Centre-State Relations

Introduction

Centre-State relations are central to India’s quasi-federal framework, defining the division of powers and responsibilities between the Union and States. While the Constitution ensures a clear framework, India’s unitary bias gives the Centre dominance, particularly during crises. Recent trends, such as the GST Council and NITI Aayog, reflect a shift toward cooperative federalism, balancing central authority with state autonomy.

Constitutional Provisions

• Part XI (Articles 245–263): Governs legislative and administrative relations.
• Part XII (Articles 268–293): Covers financial relations.
• Part XIII (Articles 301–307): Regulates trade, commerce, and intercourse.
• Part XVIII (Articles 352–360): Emergency provisions that alter federal dynamics.

Three Types of Centre-State Relations

1. Legislative Relations (Articles 245–255)
   • Distribution of Powers (Seventh Schedule):
     • Union List (100 subjects, e.g., defense, foreign affairs): Exclusive to Parliament.
     • State List (61 subjects, e.g., agriculture, police): Exclusive to State Legislatures.
     • Concurrent List (52 subjects, e.g., education, marriage): Both can legislate; Union law prevails in conflicts (Article 254, Doctrine of Repugnancy).
   • Parliament’s Powers Over State Subjects:
     • Rajya Sabha Resolution (Article 249): 2/3rd majority allows Parliament to legislate on State List subjects in the national interest.
     • National Emergency (Article 353): Grants Parliament authority over State List subjects.
     • State Consent (Article 252): Two or more states can request Parliament to legislate on a State subject.
     • International Treaties (Article 253): Parliament can legislate on State subjects to fulfill global obligations.
   • Significance: Ensures flexibility while maintaining central oversight.
2. Administrative Relations (Articles 256–263)
   • State Obligations: States must comply with Union laws and accept Centre’s directives for governance (Article 256).
   • Centre’s Control:
     • Article 256: Centre can issue directions for implementing Union laws.
     • Article 257: Directions to protect national interests (e.g., infrastructure coordination).
     • Article 355: Centre’s duty to protect states from external aggression or internal disturbance.
   • All-India Services (Article 312): IAS, IPS, IFS ensure uniformity and coordination, serving both Centre and States.
   • Grants-in-Aid (Article 275): Centre provides financial support to states for development.
   • Inter-State Council (Article 263):
     • Established in 1990 (Sarkaria Commission).
     • Chaired by the Prime Minister, includes Chief Ministers and Union Ministers.
     • Promotes coordination and resolves disputes.
   • Example: Centre’s advisory teams during disaster management (e.g., floods in Assam).
3. Financial Relations (Articles 268–293)
   • Division of Taxation Powers:
     • Union Taxes (e.g., income tax, customs): Collected by Centre, some shared with states via Finance Commission recommendations.
     • State Taxes (e.g., land revenue, state excise): Collected and retained by states.
   • Finance Commission (Article 280):
     • Appointed every 5 years.
     • Recommends tax devolution and grants-in-aid principles.
   • Types of Financial Transfers:
     • Tax Devolution: States’ share in central taxes (e.g., 41% as per 15th Finance Commission).
     • Grants-in-Aid: Funds for financially weaker states.
     • Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS): Conditional funds for programs like MGNREGA.
   • GST and Federalism:
     • Goods and Services Tax (introduced 2017, 101st Amendment).
     • GST Council (Article 279A): Centre and States jointly decide rates and policies, exemplifying cooperative federalism.

Special Provisions for Certain States

• Jammu and Kashmir (pre-2019): Had special status under Article 370 (abrogated in 2019).
• North-Eastern States: Special protections under Articles 371A–371J (e.g., Nagaland’s autonomy in customary laws).

Important Judicial Interpretations

• S.R. Bommai Case (1994): Restricted misuse of President’s Rule (Article 356), ensuring judicial review and strengthening federalism.
• West Bengal vs. Union of India (1963): Upheld Parliament’s exclusive power to acquire private property, no state agreement needed.
• Delhi Govt. vs. Lt. Governor Case (2018): Affirmed the elected government’s authority in Union Territories, enhancing state-like autonomy.

Recent Developments and Trends

• Cooperative Federalism: Strengthened by GST Council, NITI Aayog, and joint crisis management (e.g., COVID-19 response).
• Competitive Federalism: States compete in governance metrics (e.g., Ease of Doing Business rankings).
• State Assertions: Demands for greater financial and legislative autonomy (e.g., Tamil Nadu, Punjab).
• Judicial Activism: Courts protect state autonomy, reinforcing federal principles.

Challenges in Centre-State Relations

• Financial Inequality: States’ dependence on Centre for funds limits autonomy.
• Political Differences: Friction when Centre and States are ruled by opposing parties.
• Governor’s Role: Alleged misuse by Centre to influence state politics via Governors.
• Autonomy Demands: Regional movements seek greater devolution of powers.

Committees on Centre-State Relations

• Sarkaria Commission (1983): Recommended restricting Article 356 misuse, strengthening state autonomy.
• Punchhi Commission (2007): Suggested enhancing Inter-State Council, clarifying Governors’ roles, and rationalizing financial devolution.

Conclusion

Centre-State relations are the backbone of Indian federalism, balancing a strong Centre with state autonomy. Institutions like the GST Council and Inter-State Council foster cooperation, while judicial interventions ensure fairness. As the quote suggests, “Strong Centre, empowered States — that’s the essence of Indian federalism”, and fostering cooperative and competitive federalism will strengthen India’s unity and governance.

Chapter 15: Inter-State Relations

Introduction

Inter-State relations complement Centre-State relations, ensuring cooperation and resolving conflicts among states to maintain national unity and economic integrity. The Constitution provides mechanisms to promote harmony, regulate trade, and address disputes, reinforcing India’s federal framework.

Constitutional Provisions

• Articles 261–263: Cover public acts, trade and commerce, disputes, and coordination among states.

Key Aspects of Inter-State Relations

1. Full Faith and Credit (Article 261)
   • Provision: Public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of one state are recognized across all states.
   • Example: A Punjab High Court judgment is enforceable in Tamil Nadu without re-litigation.
   • Significance: Ensures legal uniformity and trust among states.
2. Inter-State Trade and Commerce (Articles 301–307)
   • Article 301: Guarantees freedom of trade, commerce, and intercourse across India, creating an economic union.
   • Objective: Prevents internal trade barriers (e.g., no customs duties between states).
   • Restrictions:
     • Article 302: Parliament can impose restrictions in the public interest.
     • Article 303: Prohibits discriminatory trade practices between states.
     • Article 304: States can impose reasonable restrictions with legislative approval and Presidential assent.
   • Example: States cannot tax goods from other states to protect local industries.
   • Significance: Promotes a unified national market.
3. Adjudication of Inter-State Water Disputes (Article 262)
   • Issue: Disputes over rivers (e.g., Cauvery, Krishna) flowing across states.
   • Provisions:
     • Parliament can legislate on inter-state river disputes, excluding court jurisdiction (including Supreme Court).
     • Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956: Establishes tribunals for adjudication.
     • River Boards Act, 1956: Allows creation of boards for river regulation (rarely used).
   • Major Disputes:
     • Cauvery Water Dispute: Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Kerala, Puducherry (Tribunal 1990, final award 2007, Supreme Court ruling 2018).
     • Krishna Water Dispute: Maharashtra, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana.
     • Godavari Water Dispute: Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha.
     • Ravi-Beas Dispute: Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan.
   • Significance: Specialized tribunals reduce judicial delays, though disputes remain contentious.
4. Inter-State Council (Article 263)
   • Purpose: Promotes coordination and resolves disputes among states and between Centre and States.
   • Functions:
     • Investigate inter-state disputes.
     • Discuss common interests.
     • Recommend policy coordination.
   • Constitution:
     • Established in 1990 (Sarkaria Commission recommendation).
     • Chaired by the Prime Minister, includes Chief Ministers and Union Ministers.
     • Standing Committee: Headed by Union Home Minister for follow-up actions.
   • Significance: Strengthens cooperative federalism.

Other Mechanisms for Inter-State Cooperation

• Zonal Councils:
  • Established under States Reorganisation Act, 1956.
  • Five zones: North, South, East, West, Central.
  • Northern Zonal Council: Punjab, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Delhi, Jammu and Kashmir, Ladakh, Chandigarh, Rajasthan.
  • Purpose: Address border disputes, economic planning, and security cooperation.
• Significance: Enhances regional collaboration and reduces conflicts.

Recent Developments

• Strengthened Institutions: Growing role of Inter-State Council and Zonal Councils in coordination.
• River Management: Proposals for permanent River Management Boards to prevent water dispute escalation.
• Cooperative Federalism: Emphasis on collaborative governance among states.

Challenges in Inter-State Relations

• Water Disputes: Prolonged litigation and political tensions (e.g., Cauvery dispute).
• Boundary Disputes: Conflicts like Assam-Mizoram border clashes.
• Regionalism: Competition for resources and jobs fuels state rivalries.
• Fiscal Imbalances: Debates over GST shares and Finance Commission grants (e.g., Southern vs. Northern states).

Way Forward

• Strengthen Inter-State Council for proactive dispute resolution.
• Establish efficient tribunals for water disputes.
• Promote cooperative and competitive federalism for balanced development.
• Ensure transparent resource allocation and grievance redressal.

Conclusion

Inter-State relations are vital for India’s unity and economic integration. Mechanisms like full faith and credit, trade freedom, and Inter-State Council foster harmony, while addressing disputes ensures stability. As the quote states, “Unity in diversity is not possible without harmony among States”, and robust inter-state coordination will strengthen India’s federal fabric.

Chapter 16: Emergency Provisions

Introduction

Emergency provisions (Articles 352–360) empower the Centre to assume greater control during crises, temporarily suspending India’s federal structure and centralizing governance. While essential for national security, these provisions impact Fundamental Rights and Centre-State relations, requiring careful use to preserve democracy. As Thomas Jefferson said, “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty”, underscoring the need for checks on emergency powers.

Types of Emergencies

1. National Emergency (Article 352)
   • Grounds:
     • War, external aggression, or armed rebellion (replaced “internal disturbance” via 44th Amendment, 1978).
     • Examples: Indo-China War (1962), Indo-Pak War (1971), Internal Emergency (1975).
   • Procedure:
     • Declared by President on written Cabinet advice.
     • Requires Parliamentary approval within 1 month (special majority: 50% of total membership + 2/3rd present and voting).
     • Valid for 6 months, extendable indefinitely with further approvals.
   • Effects:
     • Centre can legislate on State List subjects.
     • Centre issues directions to states.
     • Lok Sabha/State Assembly terms can be extended.
     • Article 19 (Fundamental Rights) automatically suspended; other rights (except Articles 20, 21) may be suspended by Presidential order.
2. President’s Rule (Article 356)
   • Also Called: State Emergency or Constitutional Emergency.
   • Grounds: Failure of constitutional machinery in a state, based on Governor’s report or otherwise.
   • Examples: Jammu and Kashmir (2018–2019), Punjab (1980s), Arunachal Pradesh (2016).
   • Procedure:
     • Proclamation requires Parliamentary approval within 2 months.
     • Valid for 6 months, extendable up to 3 years with approvals every 6 months (44th Amendment restrictions).
     • Beyond 1 year, requires National Emergency or Election Commission certification of election infeasibility.
   • Effects:
     • State Assembly suspended or dissolved.
     • Council of Ministers removed.
     • President administers state via Governor.
     • Parliament assumes state legislative functions.
3. Financial Emergency (Article 360)
   • Grounds: Threat to India’s financial stability or credit.
   • Status: Never declared in India’s history.
   • Procedure: Requires Parliamentary approval within 2 months.
   • Effects:
     • Centre controls state financial matters.
     • Salaries of judges (Supreme Court, High Courts) may be reduced.
     • State Money Bills require Presidential approval.

Comparison of Emergencies

Safeguards Against Misuse

• 44th Amendment (1978):
  • Requires written Cabinet advice for National Emergency.
  • Limits President’s Rule extensions beyond 1 year.
• Parliamentary Approval: Mandatory within strict timeframes.
• Judicial Review:
  • S.R. Bommai Case (1994): Ensured Article 356 proclamations are subject to judicial review, preventing mala fide use.
  • Minerva Mills Case (1980): Limited emergency powers, reinforcing constitutional checks.
• Periodic Review: Extensions require regular Parliamentary approval.

Criticism of Emergency Provisions

• Excessive Centralization: Undermines federalism by empowering the Centre.
• Threat to Fundamental Rights: 1975–77 Emergency saw abuses like censorship and mass arrests.
• Political Misuse: President’s Rule historically used to dismiss opposition-ruled state governments.

Recent Reforms and Suggestions

• Use President’s Rule sparingly, only in extreme cases.
• Conduct floor tests to verify majority instead of dissolving assemblies.
• Strengthen judicial review to prevent misuse of emergency powers.

Conclusion

Emergency provisions are critical for addressing crises but must be used judiciously to preserve federalism and democracy. Robust safeguards, including judicial review and Parliamentary oversight, ensure accountability. By balancing crisis management with constitutional values, India upholds its democratic ethos, as reflected in the quote, “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.”