Federalism & Centre-State Relations
Federalism

Federalism is an institutional system that incorporates two types of political systems, the provincial and the central level. There is an autonomous government at each level. In some federal countries, there is a system of dual citizenship, but in India there is a single citizenship. Thus people have dual identities and loyalties. They belong to their region as well as to the nation. Each level of political system has certain specific powers and responsibilities and there is also a separate government.

Generally, a written constitution contains a detailed outline of dual government. This constitution is supreme and also the source of the powers of both the governments. The federal or central government is responsible for matters of national importance such as defense and currency. Provincial state governments are accountable for matters of regional or local importance. To prevent any conflict between the Center and the states, there is a system of independent judiciary which resolves the conflicts. The judiciary is empowered to resolve legal disputes arising in relation to the sharing of power between the central government and the states.

The actual functioning of federalism is determined by the realities of politics, culture, ideology and history. Federalism works smoothly through a culture of mutual trust, cooperation, respect and restraint. The behavior of political parties also decides which way the constitution will run. If a single unit, province, linguistic community or ideology dominates the entire federation, conflict develops among units or peoples who do not have the dominating force.  In such a situation, the angry units may raise their demand for separation. The situation could even lead to civil war. Many countries have had to go through this experience.

Federalism in the Indian Constitution

The Indian landmass, like a continent, is vast and full of many variations. There are 20 major and hundreds of other minor languages ​​here. People of many religions reside here. Crores of tribes reside in different parts of the country. Despite these diversities, we live on a common land and have a common history. Especially in those days when we were fighting the freedom struggle. We have many other similarities. That is why our national leaders have defined India as 'Unity in Diversity'. It is sometimes referred to as 'unity with diversity'.

Even before independence, many leaders of the national movement agreed on the subject that in order to rule a vast country like India, it would be necessary to divide the powers between the provincial and central governments. He was also aware that there were regional and linguistic diversities in Indian society. These variations needed to be recognized. People from different regions and languages ​​had to participate in power and the people of these regions should have got the opportunity of self-government. In the context of the Muslim League's movement to give more representation to Muslims, a compromise formula was discussed before partition, according to which a proposal to give more powers to the regional governments came. But after the partition of India, the Constituent Assembly decided to form a government based on the principles of mutual cooperation and unity between the Center and the states and separate rights for the states.

The most important principle of the federal system adopted by the Indian Constitution is that the relationship between the Center and the states will be based on cooperation. Thus, apart from recognizing diversity, the constitution emphasizes on unity. In the Constitution of India, word 'Union' has been used instead of 'Federation'. Constitution describes India in these words - Article 1 (1) India shall be a Union of States. (2) The States and their territories shall be such as are specified in the First Schedule.

Division of Power

Two types of governments have been accepted in the Constitution of India. One for the entire nation is called the federal government or central government and another for each provincial unit or state is called the state government. Both are constitutional governments and have clear areas of action. In case of dispute, it will be settled by the judiciary in accordance with the constitutional provisions. The constitution makes a clear arrangement that which powers will be available only to the central government and which to the states only. An important aspect of the division of power is that the constitution has delegated economic and financial powers to the central government. The responsibilities of the states are very high but the sources of income are less.

Strong Central Government and Federalism

A strong central government appears to have been established by the Indian Constitution. India, like a continent, is vast and full of many diversities and social problems. The framers of the constitution believed that we needed a federal constitution which could accommodate these diversities. But they also wanted to establish a powerful central government which could check the disruptive tendencies and bring about socio-political change. Such powers were necessary for the center at the time of independence because at that time there were not only some provinces formed by the British government but also more than 500 princely states which were to be either merged with old provinces or formed as new provinces.

Along with maintaining the unity of the country, the framers of the constitution also wanted a powerful central government to solve the socio-economic problems and in doing so it should also get the cooperation of the states. Poverty, illiteracy and economic inequality were some of the problems for which planning and coordination was very necessary to solve them. Thus the concerns of national integration and development inspired the framers of the Constitution to form a strong central government.

Constitutional provisions that establish a strong central government-

• Parliament has control over the existence of a state and the stability of its geographical boundaries. According to Article 3, Parliament may 'form a new State by the separation of its territory from any State or by joining two or more States'. It can change the boundaries or name of any state. But to prevent misuse of this power, the constitution first gives an opportunity to the legislature of the affected state to express its views.
• There are some emergency provisions in the constitution making the center very powerful, which when implemented turns our federal system into a highly centralized one. During an emergency the powers become legally centralized. Parliament also gets the power to make laws on those subjects which come under the jurisdiction of the states.
• The central government has very effective financial powers and responsibilities even under normal circumstances. The central government has control over the major sources of income. Thus the Center has many sources of income and is dependent on the Center for state grants and financial assistance. Also, after independence, India used planning as a means for rapid economic progress and development. Due to planning, the power to take economic decisions was limited in the hands of the central government. The Planning Commission appointed by the Central Government oversees the resource management of the states. In addition, the central government, exercising its prerogative, gives grants and loans to the states. This distribution of economic resources is considered unbalanced and the government is often accused of being discriminatory towards states ruled by rival parties.
• The Governor of the state has the power to send the recommendation of the removal of the state government and the dissolution of the Legislative Assembly to the President. Apart from this, even under normal circumstances, the Governor has the power to secure any bill passed by the Legislature for the assent of the President. This gives an opportunity to the central government to delay the law making of a state and if it wants to examine such bills and reject them completely by exercising veto on them.
• Circumstances may arise when it becomes necessary for the Central Government to make laws on the subjects of the State List. But for doing so it is necessary to first get the permission of Rajya Sabha. The constitution clearly states that the power of the central executive will be more than the power of the state executive. Article 257 (1) 1- " The executive power of every State shall be so exercised as not to impede or prejudice the exercise of the executive power of the Union, and the executive power of the Union shall extend to the giving of such directions to a State as may appear to the Government of India to be necessary for that purpose."
• In addition, the central government can give directions to the state governments. The following provision of the constitution makes it clear-
• Our administrative system is single. All India Services are fr the whole country and the elected officials work in the administration of the states. Therefore, the officers of the Indian Administrative Service serving as the District Collector or the officers of the Indian Police Service working as the Commissioner of Police are under the control of the Central Government. The state can neither take any disciplinary action against him nor remove him from service.
• Two other Articles 33 and 34 of the Constitution greatly increase the power of the Union Government in the event that 'martial law' is imposed in any area of ​​the country. These provisions give the right to the Parliament that in such a situation, it can legally justify any act done by any officer of the Center or the State for the maintenance or restoration of peace. Under this, the 'Armed Forces Specific Powers Act' was created. This has sometimes led to mutual tension between the people and the armed forces.

Tension in Indian federal system

The Constitution has given a lot of powers to the Centre. Although the Constitution recognizes the different identities of different regions, it still gives more power to the Centre. Once the principle of 'identity of the state' is recognized, it is natural that the demands for more power and role by the states in the governance of the whole country and in their official sphere should be raised. That is why the states demand more power. From time to time, the states have raised the demand for giving more power and autonomy. This gives rise to conflicts and disputes between the Center and the states. The judiciary resolves the legal disputes between the center and the state or between different states. But the demand for autonomy is a political question which can be resolved only through mutual dialogue.

Center-State relations

The constitution is just a framework. Its form is shaped by the realities of politics. Therefore, the changing nature of the political process had a great impact on Indian federalism. Jawaharlal Nehru laid the foundation of the Indian federal system in the 1950s and early 1960s. During this time, the Congress dominated the center and the states. Apart from demanding the formation of new states, the relations between the Center and the states remained peaceful and normal. The states hoped that they would be able to develop from the financial grants received from the Centre. Apart from this, due to the policies made by the Center for socio-economic development, there was a lot of hope for the states.

In the mid-1960s, there was some decline in the supremacy of the Congress and opposition parties came to power in many states. This strengthened the demand for giving more power and autonomy to the states. The main reason behind this demand was that different parties were in power at the Center and in the states. Therefore, the state governments started protesting against the undesirable interventions made by the Congress government at the center.  Even for the Congress, the matter of harmonizing relations with the states ruled by the opposing parties has not been as easy as before. In this strange political context, a debate broke out over the concept of autonomy within the federal system.

After all, since the 1990s, the Congress dominance has come to an end and we have entered the era of coalition-politics at the Centre. Various national and regional parties have come to power in the states as well. This increased the political stature of the states, respected diversity and ushered in a seasoned federalism. In this way, the issue of autonomy has become politically active in the second phase.

Controversial points/areas of tension in Centre-State relations:-

• Demand for autonomy
• Role of Governor and President's Rule
• Demand for new states
• Interstate disputes
• Specific Provisions
• Financial and Planning Provisions

• Demand for autonomy

From time to time many states and political parties have raised the demand for giving more autonomy to the states as compared to the Centre. But autonomy can mean different things to different states and parties. Sometimes behind these demands there is a desire that the division of power should be changed in favor of the states and more and more important powers should be given to the states. From time to time many states (Tamil Nadu, Punjab, West Bengal) and parties (DMK, Akali Dal, CPI(M)) demanded autonomy. There is also a demand that the states should have independent sources of income and they should have more control over the resources. It is also called financial autonomy.

In 1977 the Left Government of West Bengal published a document to redefine Centre-State relations. In the demands for autonomy of Tamil Nadu and Punjab, the intention to acquire more financial rights is also hidden. The third aspect of the demand for autonomy relates to administrative powers. Various states are unhappy with the central control over the administrative machinery.

In addition, the demand for autonomy may also be linked to cultural and linguistic issues. The opposition to the domination of Hindi in Tamil Nadu and the demand for promotion of Punjabi language and culture in Punjab are some examples. Some states have been feeling that the Hindi speaking regions are dominated by other regions. In fact, in the 1960s, there were agitations against the implementation of Hindi in some states.

• Role of Governor and President's Rule

The role of the governor has always been a matter of dispute between the Center and the states. The governor is not an elected official. Most of the governors have been retired military officers, civil servants or politicians. Also, the appointment of the Governor is done by the Central Government. Therefore, the decisions of the governor are often seen as interference of the central government in the affairs of the state government. The role of the governor becomes more controversial when separate parties are ruling the center and the state. A commission was set up by the Central Government in 1983 to examine the issues related to Centre-State relations. This commission is known as 'Sarkaria Commission'. This commission, in its report in 1998, recommended that the appointment of governors should be made compulsory and impartial.

For another reason the power and role of governors are always controversial. One of the most controversial provisions of the Constitution is Article 356. By this President's rule is imposed in the states. Apply this provision to a State when "a situation has arisen that the Government of that State cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution." As a result, the federal government takes over the state government. The proclamation issued by the President on this subject has to get the approval of the Parliament. President's rule can be extended for a maximum period of three years. The Governor has the power to recommend the dismissal of the State Government and the suspension or dissolution of the State Legislative Assembly. This created many controversies. In some cases, state governments were dismissed even after having a majority in the legislature. Governments were dismissed in 1959 in Kerala and after that in many states without a majority test. Some cases even went to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court decided that the constitutionality of the decision to impose President's rule could be scrutinized by the court.

Article 356 was used very limitedly till 1967. After 1967, non-Congress governments were formed in many states, while the power at the center remained with the Congress. The Center has used it on several occasions to dismiss state governments or it has prevented a majority party or coalition from ruling through the governor. For example, in the 1980s, the central government dismissed the elected governments of Andhra Pradesh and Jammu and Kashmir.

• Demand for new states

There has also been tension in our federal system regarding the demand for the formation of new states. The national movement not only brought about all-India national unity but It also gave birth to unity based on common language, region and culture. Our national movement was also a movement for democracy. Therefore, during the national movement it was also decided that the states would be formed on the basis of common culture and language as far as possible.

This led to the demand for the formation of states on linguistic basis after independence. The States Reorganization Commission was established in 1954, which recommended the formation of states on the basis of language for the major linguistic communities. Some states were reorganized in 1956. This marked the beginning of the formation of states on linguistic basis and this process is still going on. Gujarat and Maharashtra were formed in 1960; Punjab and Haryana were separated in 1966. Later the northeastern states were reorganized and many new states like Meghalaya, Manipur and Arunachal Pradesh were born.

Some large states were bifurcated in the 1990s to meet the demand for new states and for greater administrative convenience. Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh were bifurcated to form three new states namely Jharkhand, Uttaranchal and Chhattisgarh respectively. Following an agitation for partition, Telangana was granted separate statehood from Andhra Pradesh on 2 June 2014. Some regions and linguistic groups are still fighting for a separate state, like Vidarbha in Maharashtra is being prominent.

• Interstate disputes

While on the one hand the states remain in a state of dispute with the Center on the question of greater autonomy and their share on the sources of income, on the other hand there are many examples of mutual disputes between two or more states in the federal system. It is true that the judiciary plays the role of arbitrator in legal disputes, but these disputes are not merely legal in nature. These disputes also have political aspects, so their best solution can be found only on the basis of deliberation and mutual trust. Generally, two types of serious disputes arise- 1. Boundary disputes and 2. Disputes over sharing of river waters.

• • Boundary disputes- States often present their claim on the territory of neighboring states. Although the boundaries of the states have been determined on linguistic basis, people speaking more than one language live in the border areas. Therefore, this dispute cannot be settled on linguistic basis alone. One such old dispute is about 'Belgaum' between Maharashtra and Karnataka. The border dispute between Manipur and Nagaland is also old. On the separation of Haryana from Punjab, not only about the border areas between them. Rather, there is a dispute about the capital Chandigarh as well. Chandigarh is the capital of both these states. In 1985, the then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi had some agreement on this subject with the leaders of Punjab. Accordingly, Chandigarh was to be transferred to Punjab. But so far it could not happen. Boundary disputes are emotional in nature.
  • Disputes over sharing of river water- The dispute over sharing of river water is serious in nature as it relates to the problem of drinking water and agriculture in the respective states. The Cauvery water dispute is an example of this. This is a major dispute between Tamil Nadu and Karnataka. The farmers of both the states are dependent on Cauvery water. Although there is a 'Water Disputes Tribunal' to resolve it, both these states have gone to the Supreme Court to resolve it. One such dispute is between Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra over the sharing of Narmada river waters. Rivers are our main resource that is why the patience and cooperation spirit of the states gets tested in the inter-state water dispute.
• Special Provisions - The most unique feature of Indian federalism is that it treats many states in a slightly different way. Due to the different size and population of each state, they have been given unequal representation in the Rajya Sabha. While even the smallest states have been given minimum representation, this system has also ensured that large states get more representation. Under the scheme of sharing of power, the powers given to the constitution are equally available to all the states. But for some states, the constitution provides for some special rights according to their specific social and historical circumstances. Most of such provisions are for the northeastern states (Assam, Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram etc.) where tribal majority population with distinct history and culture resides. These residents here want to preserve their culture and history (Article 371). However, these provisions have not been successful in preventing separatism and armed insurgency in some parts of the region. Some such specific provisions are also for the hill state of Himachal Pradesh and other states like Andhra Pradesh, Goa, Gujarat, Maharashtra and Sikkim.
• Financial and planning related provisions- The central government has control over the major sources of income. States are dependent on the Center for grants and financial assistance. The Finance Commission plays a major role in the reduction of these disputes. The Finance Commission is a constitutional body. According to Article 280, the President constitutes it.

• Finance Commission

Article 280(1) of the Constitution provides that within two years from the commencement of the Constitution and thereafter at the end of every five years or earlier at such time as the President considers necessary, a Finance Commission shall be constituted. In view of this the tradition is that within five years from the date of constitution of the previous Finance Commission, the next Finance Commission, which is a quasi-judicial and advisory body, is constituted. Continuing this tradition, under the constitutional provisions, the Central Government had approved the formation of the 15th Finance Commission on November 22, 2017. The tenure of the 15th Finance Commission will be till 2020-25.

Functional Responsibilities of Finance Commission

• To recommend to the President of India how to distribute the net proceeds of taxes between the Union and the States and the allocation of such proceeds between the States.
• Grants/assistance should be given to the states out of the Consolidated Fund under Article 275.
• On the basis of the recommendations made by the State Finance Commission, to recommend necessary steps for augmenting the Consolidated Fund of the State for the supply of resources to the Panchayats and Municipalities.
• Any other specific direction given by the President, which is in the interest of sound finance of the country.
• The commission submits its report to the President, which is laid by the President in both the Houses of Parliament.
• The recommendations made by the Finance Commission are of advisory nature, whether to accept it or not depends on the government.

Disputes regarding terms and conditions of 15th Finance Commission-

Since the formation of the 15th Finance Commission, serious objections are being raised in this matter by some states taking it as an attack on the concept of 'cooperative federalism', considering it as a deliberate discrimination between the northern and southern states. All the states of South India are opposing these terms and conditions and Punjab has also joined them. These states say that the new terms and conditions of the Finance Commission are harmful for those states, which have done a good job on population control. The share of southern states in the country's population was more than 24% in 1971, which decreased to 20 in 2011. %. On the other hand, the population of Bihar increased by about 25% between 1991 and 2011. These states also say that the basic structure of the Constitution should not be violated by the terms and conditions of the Finance Commission. These states are in favor of a national discussion on this issue. Southern states believe that if the terms and conditions of the 15th Finance Commission are implemented as they are, then progressive states will be badly affected.

These states say that the Center should respect the federal structure of cooperatives. They consider these terms and conditions of the State Finance Commission to be harmful to the basic financial structure of the states. These states argue that the allocation of funds based on the 2011 Census will benefit those states, which have failed to check their growing population. These states also say that the 15th Finance Commission has also included those subjects in its terms, which were not yet covered under its purview.

The Finance Commission is constituted every five years by the Central Government to decide the mode of distribution of revenue between the Center and the States and from one State to another. Revenue in the country is collected collectively and then a formula for its distribution is decided. While deciding the manner and conditions of distribution of revenue, the Finance Commission takes into account many other parameters besides the revenue performance of any state and after that the revenue is divided. For this, the Finance Commission often takes into account the gap between the population of the state and its income. Due to this the scale of revenue sharing comes to a standstill at high poverty.

The allocation of resources among the states has been recommended by the 15th Finance Commission keeping in mind the 2011 census. If seen, it seems appropriate to use the latest census data, but from this one of the most serious issues of dispute between the northern and southern states is emerging. The socio-political sector may face several challenges due to the change in the census base. This is more likely to harm the southern states, which have been doing better in controlling their populations for decades. Their low population growth is inherently linked to 'low fertility rates', a result of better education, health services and development. In such a situation, they may have to suffer in fund allocation due to their success in development related works, which is being treated as a penalty. This is the reason that mainly the southern states are raising serious objections to the terms and conditions of the 15th Finance Commission. 

• Also, after independence, India used planning as a means for rapid economic progress and development. Due to planning, the power to take economic decisions was limited in the hands of the central government. NITI Aayog appointed by the central government oversees the resource management of the states.
  • NITI Aayog

 NITI Aayog was constituted on January 1, 2015 in place of Planning Commission on a resolution of the Union Cabinet, envisaging the approach of Maximum Governance, Minimum Government in the spirit of cooperative federalism.

Composition of NITI Aayog- Chairman: Prime Minister, Vice-Chairman: appointed by the Prime Minister. Governing Council: Chief Ministers of all States and Lieutenant Governors of Union Territories, Zonal Council: The Prime Minister or a person nominated by him presides over the meeting of Chief Ministers and Lieutenant Governors to address specific regional issues, Ad-hoc Membership: 2 ex-officio members on rotation from leading research institutes, Ex-officio Membership: not more than four members of the Union Council of Ministers nominated by the Prime Minister, Chief Executive Officer (CEO): Secretary to the Government of India appointed by the Prime Minister for a fixed term. Special Invitees: Experts from various fields nominated by the Prime Minister.

Two major hubs of NITI Aayog- 1. Team India Hub - acts as an interface between the states and the Center and 2. Knowledge and Innovation Hub - acts as a think-tank of NITI Aayog.

Objectives of NITI Aayog

• Recognizing that strong states make a strong nation, providing support to states through a continuously structured support mechanism to enhance the spirit of federal participation.
• Developing mechanisms for making credible plans at the village level and progressively extending it to higher levels of government.
• Economic strategy and policies are incorporated in the interests of national security.
• To pay special attention to those sections of the society who are not adequately benefited from economic progress.
• Encouraging partnerships between key stakeholders, academic and policy research institutions such as national and international think tanks.
• Creating a support system for knowledge, innovation and entrepreneurship in collaboration with national and international experts, practitioners and other partners.
• To provide a platform for resolution of inter-sectoral and inter-departmental issues to expedite the implementation of the development agenda.
• To establish the states as resource centers of the arts, centers of research on governance and adopt best practices in sustainable and equitable development and reach out to various stakeholders.

Major difference between NITI Aayog and Planning Commission

• NITI Aayog functions as an advisory think tank whereas Planning Commission functioned as a constitutional body without constitutional status.
• NITI Aayog works on Bottom-Up Approach whereas Planning Commission used to work on Top-Down Approach.
• NITI Aayog emphasizes on wide expertise of members whereas Planning Commission relied on limited expertise.
• NITI Aayog works on the spirit of cooperative federalism as it ensures equal participation of the states whereas the participation of the states in its annual planning meetings was very less.
• NITI Aayog does not have the power to implement policies and allocate funds whereas Planning Commission used to make policies for the states and allocate funds for approved projects.

NITI Aayog has the potential to be representative of efficient, transparent, innovative and accountable governance system in the country. NITI Aayog can emerge as an agent of change over time and contribute to the agenda of better delivery and improvement of public services. To make NITI Aayog more credible than the Planning Commission, it should have independence in budgetary provisions and it should not be in the form of plan and non-plan but in the form of independence of revenue and capital expenditure. This increase in capital expenditure can help bridge the infrastructure deficit at all levels in the economy.

• In addition, the central government, exercising its prerogative, gives grants and loans to the states. This distribution of economic resources is considered unbalanced and the government is often accused of being discriminatory towards states ruled by rival parties.

प्रांतीय कार्यपालिका

संविधान एक परिचय

चुनाव और लोकतंत्र

Indian Constitution

Elections and Democracy

संघवाद एवं केंद्र-राज्य संबंध

Federalism & Centre-State Relations

Local Self-Government

Fundamental Rights, Duties and Directive Principles

Judiciary, Constitutional Amendment and Related Subjects

मौलिक अधिकार, कर्तव्य एवं राज्य के नीति निदेशक तत्व

स्थानीय स्वशासन

स्थायी कार्यपालिका

राष्ट्रीय कार्यपालिका

न्यायपालिका, संविधान संशोधन एवं सम्बंधित विषय