Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
UNION & its TERRITORY PART 1 (ART-1-4) by ATRISHEKHAR - Coggle Diagram
UNION & its TERRITORY PART 1 (ART-1-4) by ATRISHEKHAR
EVOLUTION OF STATES AND UNION TERRITORIES
At the time of independence, India comprised of two
categories of political units such a
The princely states- Under the rule of native
princes but subject to the British Crown
Of the 552 princely states
remaining 3 (Hyderabad, Junagarh and Kashmir)
refused to join India but later Integrated
Kashmir by the Instrument of Accession.
Junagarh by means of referendum
Hyderabad by means of police action
549 joined
India
Indian Independence Act (1947) created two
independent and separate dominions of India and Pakistan.
Whereas the Princely states were given three options such as –
Either Joining India
Or Joining Pakistan
Or Remain Independent
The British provinces - Under the direct rule of
British government
1950-four-fold classification of
the states and territories of the Indian Union
Part B (9 States that were formerly Princely States)
Part C (10 states that were chief commissioner provinces)
The Andaman and Nicobar Islands
were kept as the solitary Part D territories
Part A (9 states that were governor provinces)
STATE REORGANISATION COMMISSIONS
S.N Dhar Commission(1948)
Linguistic Provinces Commission
recommended the reorganisation of states on the basis of
administrative convenience
rather than linguistic factor.
1948, JVP Committee
Jawaharlal Nehru, Vallabhai
Patel and Pattabhi Sitaramaiah
Nehru's Opposition to Linguistic Reorganization:
spur further such demands due to the large number of languages in country
stall the process of building national identity
since language is a very strong bond and hence may lead to fears of secession as seen in Europe
Rejected the demand of linguistic reorganization.
1953, the First State Reorganization Commission was established
Fazl Ali Commission
Fazl Ali as the
Chairperson and KM Pannikar and HN Kunzru as other members.
It accepted the linguistic basis with some caveats
Caveats/ warnings
Not using the linguistic basis that would threaten the unity of the country.
It further rejected the principle of one state-one language as seen in the case of Hindi.
Economic and financial viability should be a viable unit for planned economic development
advantages
If the states were multilingual, it would become difficult to administer them.
Education in mother tongue helps in personal development; it further helps in development of regional culture and language.
Masses can participate in democratic culture.
Secular basis of reorganization that transcends identities like caste and religion.
It recommended 16 States and 3 Union Territories. The Union finally modified that into 14 state and 6 Union Territories and it gave away with the earlier fourfold classification as seen in the British Era
In 1940s Telugu speaking areas in Madras State by stalwarts like Swami Sitaram and Potti Sreeramulu who went on a hunger strike and finally sacrificed himself.
Ramchandra Guha in his book 'India After Gandhi' states that if Nehru was the maker of Modern India, then Potti
Sriramulu was the Mercator of Modern India
factors
(a) Preservation and strengthening of the unity and security of INDIA
(b) Linguistic and cultural homogeneity.
(c) Financial, economic and administrative considerations.
(d) Planning and promotion of the welfare of the people in each state as well as of the nation as a whole.
1953, the state of Andhra Pradesh was created as the first linguistically organized state in Independent India.
State reorganisation history
Maharashtra & Guiarat
1960
Dadra & Nagar Haveli
The Portuguese ruled this territory until its liberation in 1954
the administration was carried on till 1961 by an
administrator chosen by the people themselves
union territory of India by the 10th ConstitutionalAmendment Act, 1961.
Goa and Daman & Diu
union territory of India by the 10th Constitutional
Amendment Act, 1961.
Later, in 1987, Goa was conferred a statehood
Puducherry
Puducherry comprises the former French
establishments in India known as Puducherry, Karaikal, Mahe and yanam till 1954
it was administered as an ‘acquired territory’, till
1962 when it was made a union territory by the 14th CAA
Nagaland
1963, the State of Nagaland was formed by taking the Naga
Hills and Tuensang area out of the state of Assam.
Haryana, Chandigarh, Himachal Pradesh
1966
On the recommendation of the
Shah Commission (1966), the Punjabi-speaking areas were unilingual state of Punjab, the Hindi-speaking
areas were constituted into the State of Haryana
hill areas
were merged with the adjoining union territory of Himachal
In 1971, the union territory of Himachal Pradesh was
elevated to the status of a state (18th state of the Indian Union).
Manipur, Tripura & Meghalaya
1972
the two union territories of Manipur and Tripura
and the sub-state of Meghalaya
the two union
territories of Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh (originally known as North-East Frontier Agency–NEFA) came into being
Mizoram, Arunachal Pudueherry, Goa (1962)
1987
Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, Jharkhand
2000
Sikkim
1974 ,35TH CAA
Till 1947, Sikkim was an Indian princely state ruled by Chogyal. In
1947, after the lapse of British paramountcy, Sikkim became a
protectorate’ of India, whereby the Indian Government assumed
responsibility for the defence, external affairs and communications
1974, Sikkim expressed its desire for greater
association with India. Accordingly, the 35th CAA
introduced a new class of statehood under the
constitution by conferring on Sikkim the status of an ‘associate state’ of the Indian Union
1 more item...
Telangana
2014
SOME LATEST CURRENT AFFAIRS AND FACTS
Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh
latest J& K ISSUE
2019
on 4 August 2019, a resolution to repeal Article 370was passed by both the houses of the Parliament
At the same time, a reorganization act was also passed, which reconstituted the state into two union territories, Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh.
On August 5, 2019, President Ram Nath Kovind initially issued an Order “with the concurrence of the State government of Jammu and Kashmir”
As the State was then under President’s Rule, it is presumed that the State Governor gave such concurrence.
1 more item...
The President’s August 5 Order made crucial changes to definitions in Article 370.
For this, it added provisions to Article 367 of the Constitution which describes how to interpret some terms
all references to the ‘SadariRiyasat’, acting on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, would be construed as references to the Governor of Jammu and Kashmir.
1 more item...
the reference to the “Constituent Assembly” in a proviso to Article 370 (3) was amended to read “Legislative Assembly of the State”.
Recent delimitation award:
Delimitation became necessary when the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganization Act, 2019 increased the number of seats in the Assembly.
The erstwhile J&K state had 111 seats — 46 in Kashmir, 37 in Jammu, and 4 in Ladakh — plus 24 seats reserved for Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK)
The Delimitation Commission was set up on 6th
March 2020. It was headed by retired Supreme Court Justice Ranjana Prakash Desai
o In recent award, the Commission has increased seven Assembly seats — six in Jammu (now 43 seats) and one in Kashmir (now 47).
Five-judge Constitution Bench hearing a clutch of petitions challenging changes made by the Centre to Article 370
said that nothing wrong in doing away with 370
The Supreme Court said that after the 1948 Instrument of Accession (IoA) of Jammu and Kashmir to India is subsumed in the J&K Constitution, which came into effect in 1957, the IoA cannot be said to place any fetters on Parliament’s power to make laws regarding the erstwhile state.
CJI said, the J&K Constitution “imposes limitations on the executive power of the Union and the legislative power of an organ of the Union, namely Parliament”.
the fetters were placed by way of the 1954 Constitution order. “The 1954 order and J&K Constitution speak to each other,” once that order is removed fetters are gone
Now 248 says Parliament has exclusive power to make any law with respect to prevention of activities directed towards disclaiming, questioning or disrupting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of India.
Therefore, the 1972 order makes it beyond the pale of doubt that sovereignty vested exclusively in India and, therefore, no vestige of sovereignty was retained post the instrument of accession
Special Category Status (
not mentioned in constitution
The Center categorises states with socioeconomic and geographic disadvantages as having special category status to help them flourish.
Under the Fifth Finance Commission’s advice, this classification was made in 1969.
3 more items...
The Constitution does not contain any SCS provisions.
To provide central assistance and tax breaks to underprivileged states as preferential treatment.
Benefits of Special Category Status
90% of all state expenditures for all centrally sponsored programs and outside assistance are covered by the central government, and the remaining 10% is given to the state as a zero-interest loan.
For states in the general category, the typical loan-to-grant ratio is 70% loan and 30% grant.
Receiving special consideration when applying for government funding.
Reductions in excise taxes to draw enterprises to the state.
States in the special category are given 30% of the total federal budget.
These states have access to programs for debt reduction and debt exchange.
To entice investment, states with Special Category Status are excluded from excise taxes, customs taxes, corporate taxes, income taxes, and other taxes.
Unique Category When it comes to receiving central funds, states are given preference, attracting development projects there.
Unique Category States have the option to carry over any unused funds from one fiscal year to the following without having them expire.
Special Status
Given to States (Article 370 to Article 371 J)
371
1 more item...
Article 371 A
1 more item...
Article 371 B
1 more item...
Article 371 C
1 more item...
Article 371 D
2 more items...
Article 371 F
1 more item...
Article 371 G
1 more item...
Article 371-I
1 more item...
Article 371 J
1 more item...
Article 371 H
1 more item...
While India was then ruled under the provisions
of the Government of India Act, 1935, Jammu and Kashmir had its own Constitution since
1939
In Instrumen of accession it was specified that
matters on which the Dominion legislature maymake laws for Jammu and Kashmir, but the rest
of the powers were to be retained by the State.
These subjects were Defence, Foreign Affairs
and Communications.
In the Instrument of Accession, Hari Singh
had laid down a condition that it cannot be altered unless he accepted the change
When Article 370 was adopted in the
Constituent Assembly of India, care was taken tosee that it reflected the clauses and spirit of the
Instrument of Accession
Hence, the key issue of
whether the status could have been abrogated unilaterally is being argued in historical terms,
and not merely in legal terms
article 370
(a)On items in the Union List and Concurrent List, the power of Parliament to make laws for the State will be limited to those matters that correspond to those specified in the Instrument of Accession; and, even that will be in ‘consultation’ with the State government
(b) On other matters in these Lists, Parliament can make laws for the State only with the State government’s ‘concurrence’. This is why until before the abrogation, Indian laws did not automatically apply to Jammu and Kashmir.
(c) Article 1 (which declares India a Union of States) and Article 370 itself were made applicable as such to J&K
However, the rest of the Constitution of India would be applicable only through Orders passed by the President from time to time “with exceptions and modifications”
Finally, the Article provided for its own demise: the President could declare it inoperative if there is such a recommendation from the State Constituent Assembly
Government's Response to Reorganization Demand
Provision of development packages if the demand for a new state stems from development deficit.
like for the region of
Bundelkhand
Provision of autonomous councils if the demand is regarding more democratic rights as seen in Darjeeling through the Gorkhaland Territorial Administration.
Darjeeling
Gorkhaland Hill Council (West Bengal), LAHDC (J&K)
Awarding 8th Schedule status to the language if the demand for new state is due to a linguistic basis.
Konkani, Bodo, Maithili
• Provision of Development Boards ifthere are claims of uneven development as seen in the provision of Vidarbha Development Board.
Vidharbha and
Saurashtra which are in Maharashtra and Gujarat
Provision of autonomus state status within a state as seen in Meghalaya within Assam through Article 244A, which was later converted to a full-fledged state in 1972
Meghalaya within Assam
Question of Small States and Arguments in Favour
Administrative convenience is cited as a benefit
Large state has various terrains, development priorities and thus needs multiple perspectives in a
single state to bring about equitable development
Case for a 2nd State Reorganization Commission:
here have been demands for new states such as
Koshal (Odisha),
Vidarbha and Kon kan (Maharashtra),
Gorkhaland(West Bengal).
Kodagu(Karnataka),
Bodoland (Assam),
Maru Pradesh (Rajasthan),
Mithlanchal (Bihar),
Delhi's Demand for Statehood
J&K Demand for Statehood
LADAKH Demand for Statehood
when such demands arise, the government at the Union level sees these demands through the political lens rather than the rationality and modern scientific criteria that is expected.
Thus a 2nd SRC would help us evolve a rational, scientific and objective criterion towrads such
demands
The process of state reorganization is an evolving exercise and not a one stop exercise and as the
demands for statehood arise, they have to be examined properly.
30 years of LPG reforms has brought about many demographic, economic, social and regional
imbalances and allegations of regional neglect.
• Population in certain states has grown very large leading to concerns about governance
small state is
more homogenous in nature and thus the planning and development exercise is relatively easier too
smaller states have historically had higher growth rates in retrospect in case of Punjab and Haryana; successor states like Uttarakhand, Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh,
capital in smaller states is much nearer to the population and hence more democratic
participation can be expected but this has not beared out in reality
In November 1956, State Reorganization Act of 1956
came into being force.
Through this act, the distinction of between the part
A and B states was done away with.
The part C states were abolished through this act
The Act created 14 States and 6 UTs as under
Daman and Diu union territory was merged with Dadra and Nagar Haveli union territory in
2020.
Rationale behind the creation of Union Territories
Financial Hardship
Location Factor
Lakshadweep and the Andaman and Nicobar Islands
Preserving time-tested culture
Daman and Diu, Dadra Nagar Haveli, Puducherry (French),Ladakh
Administrative convenience
Delhi and Chandigarh
Constitutional Provisions related to Union Territories-
Articles 239 to 241 of Part VIII of the Constitution:
The union territories are dealt with in Articles 239 to 241 of Part VIII of the Constitution, and their administrative system is not consistent
Article 239
It allowed the President to administer
UTs directly through the administrators
In 1962, Parliament passed Article 239A, allowing it to construct legislatures for the UTs.
Article 239AA
69th Amendment of the constitution
Act, 1991 inserted Article 239AA to the Indian
Constitution, which has unique provisions for the National Capital Territory of Delhi.
The National Capital Territory of Delhi is the only one
that has its own High Court
Except for Puducherry and Delhi, none of the union territories have their own LEGISLATIVE ASEMBLY
Delhi Government has no control over:
3 more items...
Article 239AB provides that the President may by order suspend the operation of any provision of Article 239AA or of all or any of the provisions of any law made in pursuance of that article. This provision resembles Article 356 (President’s Rule).
Judgement of the Supreme Court
In the Government of NCT of Delhi vs Union of India and Another in 2018 case, the SC held that:
The government was not under obligation to seek the concurrence of the L-G on its decisions and
That any differences between them should be resolved keeping in view the constitutional primacy of representative government and cooperative federalism.
GNCT of Delhi (Amendment) Act 2021
It amended the Sections 21, 24, 33 and 44 of the 1991 Act.
States that the “government” in the National Capital Territory of Delhi meant the Lieutenant-Governor of Delhi.
It gives discretionary powers to the L-G even in matters where the Legislative Assembly of Delhi is empowered to make laws.
It seeks to ensure that the L-G is “necessarily granted an opportunity” to give her or his opinion before any decision taken by the Council of Ministers (or the Delhi Cabinet) is implemented.
It bars the Assembly or its committees from making rules to take up matters concerning day-to-day administration, or to conduct inquiries in relation to administrative decisions.
latest services issue
1 more item...
Role of Home Ministry
The Centre's Ministry of
Home Affairs is the nodal ministry for all things concerning Union Territories, including legislation,
money and budget, services, and the appointment of Administrators
Article 1
India = Bharat, shall be a Union of States
Not a Federation
Even though we have a two tier government set up, we have not used the
word federal or termed India as a federation of states
The country is an integral whole and divided intodifferent states only for the convenience of administration
The term union of states was preferred because:
No state has the right to secede
Our federation is not the
resuIt of contract as USA
no unanimity in the Constituent Assembly with
regard to the name of the country
Territories that may be acquired by the Government of Indiaat any time.
Territories can be acquired by
-Occupation, -Conquest
-Subjugation
-Gift Lease
Purchase
Notably, the ‘Territory of India’ is a wider expression than the
‘Union of India’ because The term territory of India includes the states and union territories but also such territories that
may be acquired later.
apex court wondered that the usage of the term 'acquired' gives the right to State to use an
expansionist foreign policy
The court termed that acquisition of foreign territories is done under the
aegis of international law and just the mere usage of the term 'acquired' doesn't confer the government a right to acquire territory.
The states and UTs are mentioned in First Schedule
The states are the members of the federal system and share a distribution of powers with the Centre
Union territories and the acquired territories,on the other hand, aredirectly administered by the Central government
Territories of the states
Union territories
ARTICLE 2
Empowers for Admission of New State in the Union of India or establish, New State on such condition that it thinks fit
i.e.,
2.Power to Establish new States
1.Powers to admit Union of India new States
ARTICLE 3
Authorises Parliament to
Form any State by uniting
Increase size of Area
Diminish the size of Area
Does the power of Parliament to diminish the areas of a state
(under Article 3) include also the power to cede Indian territory ?
in the he
Beruberi Case
(1960)SC said that
Only territory can be ceded by the CA Bill
separate constitutional amendment has to be brought to bring into such effect. Hence the 9
th Constitutional Amendment Act was passed.
SC in 1969 ruled that settlement of a boundary dispute between India and another
country does not require a constitutional amendment
can be done by executive action as it does not involve cession of Indian territory to a foreign country
in the recent times, with respect to the issues of enclaves in Bangladesh, the 100th CAA
Alter Boundaries of State
Alter-name of any State
Form a New State by Separation of Territories
a bill contemplating the above changes can be introduced in the Parliament only with the prior
recommendation of the President
before recommending the bill, the President has to refer the same to the state legislature concerned for expressing its VIEWS
President (or Parliament) is
not bound by the views
of the state legislature and may either accept or reject them,
it is not necessary to make a
fresh reference
to the state legislature every time an amendment is moved
(Babulal vs state of bombay)
therefore Parliament can redraw the political map of India according to its will
India is
rightly described as ‘an indestructible union of destructible states’.
Assembly remarked that use of this power should not be arbitrary such that it reduces the states
to glorified municipalities.
Union Government can destroy the states whereas the state
governments cannot destroy the Union
Procedure
for
Change
Recommendation of President
Referred to State Legislature
After Receiving Opinion
A Bill for Change
presented in
Either house of the
Parliament
fixing a time limit within which an
opinion may be expressed.
The President may extend the time limit so
specified. Beyond which it should be deemed as pass
In the case of Union Territories, it is not necessary to obtain the views of legislatures of Union Territories before a Bill affecting their boundaries or
names is introduced
Article 4
alteration and changes done through Article 2 & Article 3 are not to be
considered as amendments of the Constitution under Article 368.
Article 4 allows for consequential changes in the
First Schedule: Names of the States in the Union of INDIA
Fourth Schedule: A number of seats allotted in the Rajya Sabha for each state.