Introduction
Part I of the Indian Constitution (Articles 1-4) deals with the Union and its territory. It lays down the foundational principles defining India as a 'Union of States', providing for the name, territory, and the mechanisms for the admission or establishment of new states, and the alteration of existing ones. This section covers the constitutional provisions governing India's territorial integrity and political boundaries, tracing the crucial historical evolution of states and Union Territories, from the integration of princely states to the ongoing demands for new state formations.
Core Constitutional Articles
Article 1: Name and territory of the Union
"India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States."
Name: India, that is Bharat
The Preamble uses "India" (English) and "Bharat" (Hindi), indicating both the traditional and modern names for the country. Adopted as a compromise, it symbolizes the nation's dual identity – ancient roots and modern international recognition, highlighting diverse cultural heritage.
"Union of States"
Unlike a 'Federation of States' (e.g., USA), India is not a result of an agreement among states. States have no right to secede. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar explained: India is an "indestructible Union of destructible states," emphasizing indivisibility and a strong unitary bias.
Territory of India (Article 1(3))
Comprises:
1. Territories of the States (28 currently)
2. Union Territories (8 currently)
3. Territories that may be acquired (e.g., Goa, Puducherry before state/UT status).
Note: 'Union of India' refers only to states.
Article 2: Admission/Establishment of New States
Empowers Parliament to admit into the Union of India new states (e.g., Sikkim) or establish new states (e.g., if India acquires a foreign territory). This article deals with states *not already part* of the Union of India.
Article 3: Formation & Alteration of Existing States
Article 3 empowers Parliament to create new states or alter existing ones within the Union of India. It includes the power to:
- Form a new state by separation of territory or by uniting states/parts.
- Increase the area of any state.
- Diminish the area of any state.
- Alter the boundaries of any state.
- Alter the name of any state.
Process of Alteration:
- President's Recommendation: A bill can be introduced in either House of Parliament only on the recommendation of the President.
- State Legislature's Views: Before recommending, the President refers the bill to the concerned state legislature for expressing its views within a specified period.
- Parliament Not Bound: The President is NOT bound by the views of the state legislature. Parliament can pass the bill even if the state legislature rejects it or fails to express its views.
- Simple Majority: The bill can be passed by a simple majority of Parliament (not under Article 368).
- UTs Exemption: In case of a Union Territory, the Parliament is not required to refer the bill to the concerned legislature.
Article 4: Simple Majority, Not Article 368
Laws made under Article 2 (admission/establishment of new states) or Article 3 (formation/alteration of existing states) shall NOT be considered an amendment of the Constitution for the purposes of Article 368.
This makes it easier for Parliament to reorganize states as such laws can be passed by a simple majority.
Cession of Indian Territory
The power of Parliament to diminish the area of a state (under Article 3) does not include the power to cede Indian territory to a foreign country. This specific question was addressed by the Supreme Court.
Berubari Union Case (1960)
Context: A political agitation arose over the transfer of the Berubari Union (a territory in West Bengal) to Pakistan, as per the Nehru-Noon agreement (1958).
SC Ruling: The Supreme Court advised that the power of Parliament to diminish the area of a state (under Article 3) does not cover the cession of Indian territory to a foreign country. Indian territory can be ceded to a foreign state only by amending the Constitution under Article 368.
Parliament's Action: The 9th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1960, was enacted to transfer the Berubari Union to Pakistan.
100th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2015
Context: Long-standing issue of India-Bangladesh land boundary and exchange of enclaves. The Land Boundary Agreement (LBA) was signed in 1974 but not fully ratified. A revised LBA was signed in 2011.
Parliament's Action: To implement the 2015 LBA, the 100th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2015, was passed. This Act facilitated the exchange of certain enclave territories with Bangladesh and readjustment of boundaries, reconfirming the principle established in the Berubari case that cession of Indian territory requires a constitutional amendment under Article 368.
Evolution of States & Union Territories
India's political map has undergone significant transformation since independence, primarily driven by the demand for linguistic states.
Integration of Princely States (Post-1947)
At independence, there were 565 princely states, mostly enjoying varying degrees of autonomy. Sardar Patel (Home Minister) and V.P. Menon (Secretary of the Ministry of States) played a pivotal role in their integration, primarily through the Instrument of Accession.
Junagadh
Integrated through a referendum (plebiscite) in 1948.
Hyderabad
Integrated through police action (Operation Polo) in 1948.
Jammu & Kashmir
Integrated through the Instrument of Accession signed by Maharaja Hari Singh after Pakistani tribal invasion in 1947.
Original Constitutional Classification (1950)
Post-integration and before 1956, the states of India were reorganized into four categories:
Part A States
Nine former British Indian provinces (e.g., Assam, Bihar). Governed by an elected governor and state legislature.
Part B States
Nine former princely states with legislatures (e.g., Hyderabad, Mysore). Governed by a Rajpramukh and elected legislature.
Part C States
Ten former Chief Commissioner's provinces and some princely states (e.g., Delhi, Himachal Pradesh). Administered by a Chief Commissioner.
Part D State
Only one, Andaman and Nicobar Islands. Administered by a Chief Commissioner appointed by the President.
Demand for Linguistic Reorganization
Dhar Commission (1948)
Headed by S.K. Dhar. Recommended reorganization of states on the basis of administrative convenience rather than linguistic factors.
JVP Committee (1949)
Constituted by Congress, comprising Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, and Pattabhi Sitaramayya. It also formally rejected reorganization on a linguistic basis for the time being.
Potti Sriramulu & Formation of Andhra (1953)
Despite official rejection, the demand intensified. The Telugu-speaking areas of Madras Presidency strongly demanded a separate state of Andhra. Potti Sriramulu, a Congress leader, undertook a fast unto death for a separate Andhra state. He died after 56 days of fasting in December 1952.
Impact: His death led to widespread protests and violence, forcing the Government of India to concede the demand. On October 1, 1953, Andhra was created as the first linguistic state in India.
Fazl Ali Commission (1953) & States Reorganisation Act, 1956
Fazl Ali Commission (1953)
Formed in December 1953, with Fazl Ali as chairman, and K.M. Panikkar and H.N. Kunzru as members. Its recommendations:
- Accepted linguistic basis for reorganization, but rejected the 'one language-one state' theory.
- Recommended 4 major factors for reorganization: unity & security, linguistic & cultural homogeneity, financial/economic/administrative considerations, and welfare promotion.
- Recommended the abolition of the four-fold classification of states.
- Suggested creation of 16 states and 3 centrally administered territories.
States Reorganisation Act, 1956
The government largely accepted the Fazl Ali Commission's recommendations, with some modifications. The Act was passed in November 1956.
Result: It created 14 states and 6 Union Territories. The 7th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1956, also abolished the distinction between Part A and Part B states, and Part C states were either merged or converted into UTs.
Subsequent Reorganizations (1960-Present)
Maharashtra & Gujarat
Bombay state bifurcated into Maharashtra (Marathi-speaking) and Gujarat (Gujarati-speaking).
Nagaland
Formed out of Assam, primarily for the Naga people.
Haryana & Punjab, Himachal Pradesh
Punjab state bifurcated into Haryana (Hindi-speaking) and Punjab (Punjabi-speaking). Himachal Pradesh was converted into a Union Territory.
Himachal Pradesh
Himachal Pradesh was elevated to full statehood.
Manipur, Tripura, Meghalaya
Manipur, Tripura, and Meghalaya (from Assam) became full-fledged states. Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh became UTs.
Sikkim
Became a full state of India (after the 36th Amendment Act).
Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh, Goa
Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh, and Goa (from UTs) became full states.
Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, Jharkhand
Chhattisgarh (from MP), Uttarakhand (from UP), and Jharkhand (from Bihar) were created on grounds of administrative viability and regional aspirations.
Telangana
Formed from Andhra Pradesh, becoming the 29th state of India.
Recent Reorganizations
J&K Reorganisation Act, 2019
Context: Long-standing special status of Jammu & Kashmir under Article 370. In August 2019, Parliament passed the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019.
Provisions: Abolished Article 370 and Article 35A of the Constitution (though SC has subsequently upheld the abrogation in Dec 2023). Reorganized the State of Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories:
- Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir: With a legislature (like Puducherry).
- Union Territory of Ladakh: Without a legislature (like Chandigarh).
Implications: Reduced the number of states from 29 to 28. Increased the number of UTs from 7 to 9 (before DNH/D&D merger). Significant shift in India's federal structure concerning J&K.
D&NH & D&D Merger, 2020
In January 2020, the Union Territories of Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Daman & Diu were merged into a single Union Territory through The Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu (Merger of Union Territories) Act, 2019.
Implication: Reduced the number of UTs from 9 to 8.
Current Count: 28 States & 8 Union Territories
Summary Table: Evolution of Indian States
| Period/Act | Key Change/Development | Result (States/UTs) |
|---|---|---|
| Pre-1950 | Integration of 565 Princely States (Patel, Menon) | Accession of Junagadh, Hyderabad, J&K. |
| 1950 (Original Const.) | Classification into Part A, B, C, D States. | ~29 States categorized |
| 1953 (Andhra) | Formation of first linguistic state (Potti Sriramulu's fast) | Andhra separated from Madras. |
| 1956 (States Reorganisation Act & 7th Amend.) | Abolished A,B,C,D; implemented Fazl Ali recommendations. | 14 States & 6 UTs |
| 1960-2014 (Key Additions) | Continuous reorganization based on various factors. | Maharashtra, Gujarat, Nagaland, Haryana, HP, NE States, Sikkim, Goa, C'garh, U'khand, J'khand, Telangana. |
| 2019 (J&K Reorganisation Act) | Abolished Art 370/35A; J&K State to UTs. | 28 States & 9 UTs (J&K, Ladakh as new UTs) |
| 2020 (D&NH & D&D Merger) | Merged two UTs into one. | 28 States & 8 UTs (Current status) |
Demands for New States
The process of state reorganization is ongoing, with demands for new states from various regions. Examples of ongoing demands include Vidarbha (Maharashtra), Gorkhaland (West Bengal), Bodoland (Assam), Maru Pradesh (Rajasthan), Bundelkhand (UP/MP), Poorvanchal (UP).
Issues and Considerations
Administrative Viability
Arguments for smaller states often cite better administration, closer governance to people, and improved law and order.
Economic Development
Proponents argue that smaller states can focus better on local economic development, allocate resources more efficiently, and address regional disparities. Critics fear that small states may lack resources and become economically unviable.
Cultural Identity
Demands are often based on linguistic, tribal, or distinct cultural identities, seeking to preserve heritage and promote self-governance for specific communities.
Resource Allocation
Debates arise over equitable distribution of existing resources (water, minerals, infrastructure) and financial viability for new states.
Law and Order
New states may initially face challenges in establishing new administrative machinery and maintaining law and order.
Political Fragmentation
Creation of too many small states might lead to political instability or exacerbate regional rivalries.
Conclusion & Significance
Part I of the Indian Constitution, governing the Union and its territory, serves as a dynamic framework for the nation's geographical and administrative integrity. The deliberate choice of "Union of States" over "Federation" underscores India's strong central authority and the indissoluble nature of the Union, while Parliament's power to create and alter states reflects its adaptable nature. The historical evolution of states, especially through linguistic reorganization, highlights the democratic responsiveness to regional aspirations balanced against concerns for national unity and administrative viability. This continuous process of territorial redefinition is a testament to India's evolving federal structure and its commitment to both unity and diversity.
Prelims-ready Notes
Article 1: "India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States."
- "Union of States": Not an agreement, states no right to secede (Ambedkar: "indestructible Union of destructible states").
- Territory of India: States (28), UTs (8), Acquired Territories. ('Union of India' = States only).
Article 2 & 3: Admission/Formation of States
- Article 2: Admission/establishment of new states (not already part of Union). (e.g., Sikkim).
- Article 3: Formation/alteration of existing states (within Union).
- Parliament's power: Increase/diminish area, alter boundaries/names.
- Process: President's recommendation; President refers to state legislature (views not binding); Simple Majority in Parliament.
Article 4: Laws under Arts 2 & 3 are NOT Art 368 amendments
Simple majority sufficient, making state reorganization easier.
Cession of Indian Territory
- Berubari Union Case (1960): SC ruled cession requires Art 368 amendment.
- 9th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1960: To transfer Berubari to Pakistan.
- 100th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2015: For India-Bangladesh Enclave Exchange (LBA).
Evolution of States: Key Milestones
- Integration of Princely States: Sardar Patel & V.P. Menon. Junagadh (referendum), Hyderabad (police action), J&K (Instrument of Accession).
- Original Constitution Classification (1950): Part A, B, C, D States.
- Linguistic Reorganization Demand: Dhar (rejected), JVP (rejected), Potti Sriramulu (fast), Andhra State (1953, first linguistic).
- Fazl Ali Commission (1953): Recommended linguistic basis (but not 'one language-one state').
- States Reorganisation Act, 1956 (7th Amend. 1956): Created 14 States and 6 UTs. Abolished Part A, B, C, D.
- Subsequent Reorganizations: Maharashtra & Gujarat (1960), Nagaland (1963), Haryana & Punjab (1966), NE states (1970s), Sikkim (1975), Goa (1987), Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, Jharkhand (2000), Telangana (2014).
- J&K Reorganisation Act, 2019: Abolished Art 370/35A. J&K became UT with legislature, Ladakh UT without. (States: 28, UTs: 9).
- D&NH & D&D Merger, 2020: Merged into one UT. (States: 28, UTs: 8).
Demands for New States
Ongoing demands (e.g., Vidarbha, Gorkhaland) based on administrative, economic, cultural identity considerations.
Mains-ready Analytical Notes
Nature of Indian Federalism
The phrasing "Union of States" and the power of Parliament under Article 3 to alter state boundaries by simple majority reinforce India's 'federal system with a unitary bias' or 'quasi-federal' nature. It highlights that the Union is indestructible, while states are not, a stark contrast to American federalism. This design was crucial for maintaining unity in a diverse post-partition nation.
Linguistic Reorganization - A Pragmatic Compromise
The initial rejection by Dhar Commission and JVP Committee, followed by the dramatic events leading to Andhra's creation and the Fazl Ali Commission's acceptance of linguistic basis (with caveats), shows the government's pragmatic approach. It was a democratic response to popular aspirations, crucial for political stability and development, but also led to subsequent demands and debates.
Balancing Unity and Diversity
The entire evolution of states reflects a continuous attempt to balance linguistic/cultural identity and regional aspirations with the overarching goal of national unity and administrative viability. This has been a successful strategy in managing centrifugal forces in a diverse country.
Role of Judiciary in Territorial Integrity
The Berubari Union case is a landmark judgment establishing that cession of Indian territory requires a constitutional amendment, thereby placing a check on parliamentary power under Article 3 and safeguarding territorial integrity. The 100th Amendment further reinforces this principle.
Impact of J&K Reorganization (2019)
This represents a significant shift in India's federal structure, reducing a state with special status into UTs. Debates surrounding this move involved questions of federalism, parliamentary power, fundamental rights, and the 'basic structure' doctrine. While the SC has upheld the abrogation (Dec 2023), its implications for federal relations and democratic representation remain subjects of ongoing academic and political discourse.
Contemporary Demands for New States
The ongoing demands for new states (e.g., Vidarbha, Gorkhaland) bring to the fore complex issues: Administrative Efficiency, Developmental Disparities, Identity Politics, Economic Viability, Impact on Federalism.
Relevance to Governance
The power under Articles 2 and 3 allows for dynamic administrative adjustments. This flexibility has been instrumental in responding to changing demographic, economic, and political needs across India.
Current Affairs & Recent Developments
Supreme Court Judgment on Article 370 (Dec 2023)
The Supreme Court upheld the President's power to abrogate Article 370 and the subsequent reorganization of the State of Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories. This reinforces the Parliament's vast powers under Articles 3 and 4, and the 'Indestructible Union of destructible states' principle. The Court also directed the Election Commission to take necessary steps to hold elections in J&K.
Delimitation Exercises
The ongoing discussions and potential future delimitation exercises for constituencies in J&K or other regions (post-2026 freeze expiry) are directly linked to the 'formation of new states and alteration of areas' and their impact on political representation within the Union.
Border Disputes and Enclaves
While the major India-Bangladesh Land Boundary Agreement (2015) is completed, smaller-scale border disputes with neighbouring countries or internal boundary issues sometimes arise, indirectly referencing the constitutional mechanisms for territorial adjustments.
Demands for New States (Ongoing)
Though no new states have been formed recently, demands like those for Vidarbha, Gorkhaland, or separate administrative units within existing states periodically resurface in political discourse, highlighting the enduring relevance of Article 3 and the complex issues surrounding such reorganizations.
UPSC Previous Year Questions (PYQs)
Prelims MCQs
UPSC CSE 2022: With reference to the 'Union of India', consider the following statements:
1. The Union of India includes the States, but not the Union Territories.
2. The territory of India includes the States, Union Territories and acquired territories.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
UPSC CSE 2013: What is the constitutional status of Dadra and Nagar Haveli?
UPSC CSE 2012: Which one of the following is not a feature of the Government of India Act of 1935?
Mains Questions
UPSC CSE 2020 (15 marks): "Indian Constitution exhibits a unique blend of federalism and unitarism. Elaborate."
Direction:
- Directly links to Article 1's "Union of States" vs. "Federation of States" and the 'indestructible Union of destructible states' concept.
- Discuss how powers under Article 3 reinforce the unitary bias, while other features like division of powers (lists) and dual polity support federalism.
UPSC CSE 2013 (10 marks): "Given the present-day challenges and issues of federalism in India, discuss the suitability of its structure for achieving national integration."
Direction:
- Allows for a direct discussion on how the features related to 'Union and its Territory' (e.g., strong Centre, Parliament's power under Art 3, single citizenship) aid national integration.
- Acknowledge challenges posed by linguistic/regional demands and Centre-state tensions.
- Reference the historical context of state reorganization.
UPSC CSE 2018 (15 marks): "The Indian Constitution has provisions for financial emergencies, but the Indian economy has never faced one. Discuss the implications of these provisions on the Centre-State financial relations."
Direction:
- While focusing on financial emergency, this question also touches upon the unitary bias in India's federal system.
- Explain how the Centre gains significant control during emergencies, including over state finances.
- Reinforces the idea of an "indestructible Union of destructible states" from an economic control perspective.
Trend Analysis
Prelims Trends:
- Specific Articles (1-4): Questions frequently test the precise wording or implication of these articles, especially the distinction between 'Union of India' and 'Territory of India', and the powers under Article 3.
- Historical Evolution: The reorganization of states, key commissions (Dhar, JVP, Fazl Ali), and specific events (Andhra, J&K reorganization) are recurring themes. Knowing the chronology and the outcomes of these events is crucial.
- Landmark Cases: The Berubari Union case and its implications for cession of territory are important.
- Current Number of States/UTs: Factual updates regarding the latest changes are important.
Mains Trends:
- Conceptual Understanding of Federalism: Questions almost always revolve around the unique nature of Indian federalism, using terms like 'quasi-federal' or 'unitary bias', and asking for their implications.
- Impact of Reorganization: Mains questions analyze the reasons behind state reorganization, its impact on unity, diversity, and governance, and the challenges associated with demands for new states.
- Role of Centre and States: Questions often explore the dynamics of power between the Centre and states concerning territorial integrity and administrative control, sometimes referencing specific events like the J&K reorganization.
- Inter-disciplinary: Links to Modern History (integration of princely states, linguistic reorganization movement) are common.
Original MCQs for Prelims
Consider the following statements regarding the powers of the Parliament of India under Article 3 of the Constitution:
1. Parliament can form a new state by uniting parts of existing states.
2. A bill for altering the name of a state can be introduced in Parliament without the President's recommendation.
3. The views of the state legislature, when referred by the President, are binding on Parliament.
Select the correct answer using the code given below:
Which of the following events related to the reorganization of Indian states occurred after the recommendations of the Fazl Ali Commission?
1. Creation of Andhra Pradesh as the first linguistic state.
2. Bifurcation of Bombay into Maharashtra and Gujarat.
3. Formation of Telangana from Andhra Pradesh.
Select the correct answer using the code given below:
Original Descriptive Questions for Mains
"India is an 'indestructible Union of destructible states'." Examine the implications of this statement for the Indian federal system, with reference to the constitutional provisions and historical events of state reorganization. (15 marks)
Key Points/Structure:
- Introduction: Explain the meaning of the phrase, often attributed to Dr. Ambedkar, contrasting it with US federalism.
- Indestructible Union:
- No right to secede: States cannot leave the Union.
- Strong Centre: Unitary features (integrated judiciary, single citizenship, All-India Services, emergency provisions, appointment of Governor by Centre).
- Supremacy of Union Law: Concurrent list, residuary powers with Centre.
- Destructible States:
- Parliament's power (Art 3): Form new states, alter boundaries/names by simple majority.
- No state consent required: President's referral is not binding on Parliament.
- Historical Examples: Creation of Andhra, bifurcation of Bombay, Punjab, UP, Bihar, MP, and recent J&K reorganization.
- Implications for Indian Federalism:
- Flexibility and adaptability: Allows for adjustments to meet regional aspirations and administrative needs.
- Unity in Diversity: Balances regional identities with national integration.
- Centralized Power: Reinforces the Centre's dominance in territorial matters.
- Democratic Responsiveness: Enables creation of states based on popular demands (e.g., linguistic).
- Challenges/Debates: Ongoing demands for new states, resource distribution issues, potential for political fragmentation.
- Conclusion: Summarize how this unique feature, while providing stability, ensures a dynamic federal structure capable of responding to the country's diverse and evolving needs, prioritizing the integrity of the Union.
Discuss the role of various commissions and movements in the linguistic reorganization of Indian states. How did this process shape India's federal structure? (10 marks)
Key Points/Structure:
- Introduction: Briefly mention the demand for linguistic states post-independence.
- Initial Resistance:
- Dhar Commission (1948): Rejected linguistic basis, favoured administrative convenience.
- JVP Committee (1949): Formally rejected linguistic basis for the time being.
- Catalyst for Change:
- Andhra Movement & Potti Sriramulu: His fast unto death led to the creation of the first linguistic state (Andhra, 1953), proving the popular will.
- Formal Acceptance and Framework:
- Fazl Ali Commission (1953): Appointed in response to the pressure. Accepted linguistic basis with caveats (unity, security, financial viability). Rejected 'one language-one state'. Recommended 16 states, 3 UTs.
- States Reorganisation Act, 1956: Implemented Fazl Ali's recommendations (with modifications), creating 14 states and 6 UTs, abolishing the Part A, B, C, D classification.
- Subsequent Reorganizations: Briefly mention how the process continued post-1956 based on linguistic/administrative/ethnic demands (e.g., Maharashtra/Gujarat, Nagaland, Haryana, NE states, Telangana, J&K).
- Impact on Federal Structure:
- Strengthened Federalism (Paradoxically): While appearing to empower regional identities, it satisfied local aspirations, defused secessionist tendencies, and strengthened the loyalty of people to the Indian Union.
- Decentralization: Led to creation of smaller, more manageable administrative units.
- Diverse Representation: Facilitated better representation of linguistic and cultural groups.
- Unitary Bias: Despite reorganization, the Centre's power to create/alter states (Art 3) retained the unitary bias.
- Conclusion: Conclude that linguistic reorganization, though initially resisted, became a pragmatic necessity that refined India's federal structure, ensuring both the recognition of diversity and the preservation of national unity.