Class | Subject | Book | Chapter | Session | Questions covered |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XI | Political Science | Indian Constitution at Work (NCERT) | 7 – Federalism | 2026-27 | 11 of 11 |
Chapter at a glance
Topic | Key points |
|---|---|
Federalism | Two (or more) levels of government with powers divided by a written constitution; independent judiciary resolves disputes |
Indian federalism | “Union of States”; Union, State and Concurrent Lists; residuary powers with the Centre |
Strong centre | Art 3 (reorganising states), emergency powers, Governor and President’s rule (Art 356), All India Services, financial dependence on Centre |
Conflicts | Demands for autonomy, Governor’s role, new states, inter-state disputes (rivers) |
Special provisions | Art 371 for north-eastern and other states; Sixth Schedule tribal areas; (J&K’s Art 370 abrogated in 2019) |
Exercise Questions
From the list of following events which ones would you identify with the functioning of federalism? Why?
Answer
- Sixth Schedule status to the GNLF-led Darjeeling Gorkha Hill Council, after a tripartite settlement between the Centre, West Bengal and the GNLF.
- Centre asks rain-hit States to submit action plans for reconstruction to get extra relief.
- New Commissioner for Delhi (MCD) — an IAS officer transferred.
- Central University status for Manipur University by a Bill passed in Rajya Sabha.
- Centre releases ₹553 lakh to Arunachal Pradesh under its rural water supply scheme.
- Shiv Sainiks storm J.J. Hospital, threatening non-Maharashtrian students.
- Congress Legislature Party asks the Governor to dismiss the Nagaland government.
- Bihar government asks naxalites to surrender arms.
Answer
Related to federalism
- Darjeeling Gorkha Hill Council — autonomy to a region within a state through an agreement between the Centre, the state and the regional body.
- Action plan for rain-hit states — Centre–state cooperation; the Centre gives financial relief to states.
- Central University status for Manipur University — the Centre taking up a responsibility in a state.
- Funds released to Arunachal Pradesh — fiscal transfers from the Centre to states.
- Demand for dismissal of Nagaland government — the role of the Governor (and possible President’s rule), a key issue in Centre–state relations.
- Attack on non-Maharashtrian students — touches federalism negatively: it violates the freedom of citizens to live and study anywhere in the country, showing regional tensions in a federation.
Not directly related: transfer of the MCD Commissioner (administrative matter) and Bihar’s appeal to naxalites (a law-and-order matter of the state government) — though both relate to the working of state-level government.
Federal: Gorkha Hill Council autonomy, central relief to rain-hit states, central university in Manipur, funds to Arunachal, Governor’s role in Nagaland, and regional hostility in Mumbai (negative aspect). Others are administrative or law-and-order matters.
Think which of the following statements would be correct. State why.
Answer
- Federalism enhances the possibility of people from different regions to interact without the fear of one’s culture being imposed upon them by others.
- Federal system will hinder easier economic transaction between two different regions that have distinct types of resources.
- A federal system will ensure that the powers of those at the centre will remain limited.
Answer
- Correct. Federalism gives regions autonomy to protect their language and culture, so people can interact without fear of domination.
- Incorrect. A federation creates a common market with free movement of goods, people and capital across states, making economic exchange easier.
- Correct. Powers are divided by the constitution, so the Centre’s powers are limited to its list (though in India the Centre is strong).
First and third are correct; the second is incorrect because a federation creates a common market.
Based on the first few articles of Belgian constitution — given below — explain how federalism is visualised in that country. Try and write a similar Article for the Constitution of India.
Answer
Article 1: Belgium is a Federal State made up of communities and regions. Article 2: three communities — French, Flemish, German. Article 3: three regions — Walloon, Flemish, Brussels. Article 4: four linguistic regions — French-speaking, Dutch-speaking, bilingual Brussels Capital, German-speaking. Article 5: lists the provinces of each region.
Answer
Belgian federalism
- Belgium is explicitly a federal state.
- Federalism is based on both communities (based on language and culture, not territory) and regions (territorial units).
- It recognises linguistic diversity directly in the constitution, giving each language group its own sphere; Brussels is bilingual.
- It is a “coming together” of linguistic groups to share power and prevent domination.
A similar Article for India
Article 1. India, that is Bharat, is a federal Union of States and Union Territories, which share sovereign powers as distributed by this Constitution.
Article 2. The Union is made up of the States and Union Territories specified in the First Schedule, many of which have been organised on the basis of language.
Article 3. The Union recognises the languages specified in the Eighth Schedule, and guarantees to every linguistic, religious and cultural community the right to preserve its language and culture.
Belgium’s constitution defines a federation of linguistic communities and territorial regions, recognising language groups explicitly; an Indian version would declare India a federal Union of States and UTs, largely linguistic, protecting all languages and cultures.
Imagine that you were to rewrite the provisions regarding federalism. Write an essay of not more than 300 words making your suggestions about: a. division of powers among the centre and the States, b. distribution of financial resources, c. methods of resolving inter-State disputes and d. appointment of Governors.
Answer
Answer
Rewriting Indian federalism
India needs a strong Union to preserve unity, but its states must have enough power to meet the needs of a diverse people.
a. Division of powers. The three lists should be retained, but some subjects — such as agriculture-related matters, police reforms and local government — should stay firmly with the states. Before legislating on Concurrent subjects, the Centre should consult the states through the Inter-State Council, which should meet regularly. Residuary powers could be shared after consultation.
b. Financial resources. States carry most development responsibilities but have limited revenue. A larger, assured share of central taxes should be devolved through the Finance Commission on transparent criteria. The GST Council should work by consensus. Centrally sponsored schemes with rigid conditions should be reduced, and states given untied funds.
c. Inter-state disputes. River water and boundary disputes should be resolved by permanent tribunals with fixed time limits, and their awards enforced quickly. The Inter-State Council and zonal councils should be used for negotiation before disputes reach courts.
d. Appointment of Governors. Governors should be non-partisan persons of eminence from outside the state, appointed after consulting the Chief Minister (as recommended by the Sarkaria Commission). They should have a fixed term and not be removed at the Centre’s will. President’s rule should be used only as a last resort, after a floor test, following the Supreme Court’s guidelines in the S.R. Bommai case.
Such reforms would build cooperative federalism, balancing national unity with regional autonomy.
Strengthen state autonomy and consultation (Inter-State Council), devolve more assured funds, resolve disputes through time-bound tribunals, and appoint non-partisan Governors in consultation with states, limiting President’s rule.
Which of the following should be the basis for formation of a State? Why?
Answer
- Common Language b. Common economic interests c. Common religion d. Administrative convenience
Answer
- (a) Common language and (d) administrative convenience are the best bases.
- Language helps people participate in government in their own tongue and protects culture; most Indian states were reorganised on linguistic lines in 1956 (States Reorganisation Commission).
- Administrative convenience and development needs (size, geography) led to new states like Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Uttarakhand (2000) and Telangana (2014).
- (b) Common economic interests can also be considered (regional development).
- (c) Common religion should not be a basis, as it violates secularism and could divide the country on communal lines.
Language and administrative convenience (with regional economic considerations); religion should never be a basis, as it violates secularism.
Majority of people from the States of north India — Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar — speak Hindi. If all these States are combined to form one State, would it be in tune with the idea of federalism? Give arguments.
Answer
Answer
No, it would not be in tune with federalism.
- The new state would be huge in area and population (over a third of India), making administration very difficult and distant from people.
- It would dominate Parliament and the Union, upsetting the balance among states — the opposite of federal balance.
- Language is not the only identity; these regions have distinct histories, dialects, cultures and economic needs (e.g. Rajasthan, Bihar, Bundelkhand).
- Federalism aims at decentralisation and bringing government closer to people; India has in fact created smaller states for better governance.
No; such a giant state would be unmanageable, dominate the Union, ignore regional diversity and defeat federalism’s purpose of decentralisation.
List four features of the Indian Constitution that give greater power to the central government than the State government.
Answer
Answer
- Article 3: Parliament can create new states, change boundaries and names of states without their consent.
- Emergency provisions: during an emergency, the country becomes virtually unitary; President’s rule (Art 356) can be imposed on a state.
- Union List and residuary powers: the Centre has more and important subjects, residuary powers, and its laws prevail on Concurrent subjects; Parliament can legislate on State List subjects in the national interest (Art 249).
- Financial dominance: major sources of revenue are with the Centre; states depend on grants and loans.
- Governor: appointed by the Centre; can reserve state bills for the President.
- All India Services controlled by the Centre; integrated judiciary; single citizenship.
Art 3 power over states’ boundaries, emergency powers and President’s rule, more important Union List and residuary powers, financial dominance (also: Governor, All India Services).
Why are many States unhappy about the role of the Governor?
Answer
Answer
- The Governor is appointed by the Centre (President) and holds office at its pleasure; Governors are often active politicians or loyalists of the ruling party at the Centre.
- Governors are seen as agents of the Centre, especially when different parties rule the Centre and the state.
- Discretionary powers — inviting a party to form government in a hung assembly, recommending President’s rule (Art 356), dismissing governments — have been misused to dislodge opposition governments.
- Reserving or delaying assent to state bills, sometimes for long periods.
- Interference in the working of state governments and universities.
The Sarkaria Commission and the Supreme Court (S.R. Bommai) have suggested safeguards.
Because Governors are central appointees often seen as partisan agents, and their discretionary powers (government formation, President’s rule, withholding assent) have been misused against state governments.
President’s rule can be imposed in a State if the government is not being run according to the provisions of the Constitution. State whether any of the following conditions are a fit case for imposition of President’s rule in the State. Give reasons.
Answer
- Two members of the State legislative assembly belonging to the main opposition party have been killed by criminals and the opposition is demanding dismissal of the State government.
- Kidnapping of young children for ransom is on rise. The number of crimes against women are increasing.
- No political party has secured majority in the recent elections of the State Legislative Assembly. It is feared that some MLAs from the other parties may be lured to support a political party in return for money.
- Different political parties are ruling in the State and at the centre and they are bitter opponents of each other.
- More than 2000 people have been killed in the communal riots.
- In the water dispute between the two States, one State government refused to follow the decision of the Supreme Court.
Answer
- Not a fit case. It is a serious law-and-order problem, but it does not show constitutional breakdown; the state should act against the criminals.
- Not a fit case. Rising crime requires better policing, not dismissal of an elected government.
- Not a fit case at once. The Governor should first invite the party/alliance most likely to form a stable government and test it on the floor of the House. President’s rule is justified only if no stable government can be formed.
- Not a fit case. Political rivalry is normal in a federal democracy.
- Possibly a fit case. If the state government is unable or unwilling to protect life and the constitutional machinery has broken down, President’s rule may be justified — but only after the state fails to control the situation.
- Possibly a fit case. Defiance of the Supreme Court and the Constitution can be seen as the government not functioning according to the Constitution (Art 365 also allows this when a state fails to comply with Union directions).
Not fit: (1), (2), (4), and (3) until a floor test fails. Possibly fit: (5) massive riots indicating constitutional breakdown, and (6) defiance of the Supreme Court.
What are the demands raised by States in their quest for greater autonomy?
Answer
Answer
- More powers: transfer of more subjects to the State List and less interference by the Centre (e.g. Anandpur Sahib Resolution, 1973; DMK in Tamil Nadu; West Bengal’s 1977 document).
- Financial autonomy: more independent sources of revenue and a greater share of central taxes; fewer conditional grants.
- Administrative autonomy: less control by the Centre over All India Services and the state administration.
- Cultural and linguistic autonomy: protection of regional languages and culture; opposition to imposition of Hindi.
- Limiting the Governor’s role and the use of President’s rule.
More legislative powers, greater financial resources, administrative independence, protection of language and culture, and curbs on the Governor’s role and President’s rule.
Should some States be governed by special provisions? Does this create resentment among other States? Does this help in forging greater unity among the regions of the country?
Answer
Answer
Yes, special provisions are justified for some states.
- States of the North-East (Nagaland, Mizoram, Manipur, etc. under Article 371) and other regions have distinct tribal cultures, customary laws, land systems and histories. Special provisions protect these, and ensure development of backward regions (e.g. Article 371 for parts of Maharashtra, Gujarat, Karnataka).
- Resentment: some states may feel that others are getting favoured treatment, and it can create a sense of unequal citizenship.
- Unity: on balance, special provisions strengthen unity by accommodating diversity: people of these regions feel their identity is respected and are more willing to be part of the Union. India’s experience shows that accommodation is better than forced uniformity.
Yes; special provisions protect distinctive cultures and backward regions. They may cause some resentment, but by accommodating diversity they help forge greater unity.
Topic checklist
- Meaning of federalism
- Federalism in the Indian Constitution; three lists
- Strong central government provisions
- Conflicts: Governor, President’s rule, new states, inter-state disputes
- Special provisions for some states