GS Notes

17. Polity Notes 08

26 min read

Elaborate Notes

Evolution of States and UTs in India

The territorial organization of the Indian Union has been a dynamic process, evolving from the integration of disparate British provinces and princely states into the rational, linguistically and administratively defined states of today. This evolution is a testament to India’s unique model of federalism, which accommodates regional aspirations while preserving national unity.

  • Initial Integration and the Four-fold Classification (1950):

    • At independence in 1947, India consisted of British Indian Provinces and over 550 princely states. The monumental task of integrating these princely states was led by Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, then Home Minister. Through a combination of diplomacy, persuasion, and in some cases, military action (e.g., Operation Polo for Hyderabad, 1948), most states acceded to India.
    • The Constitution of India, which came into effect on January 26, 1950, organized the constituent units of the Indian Union into a four-fold classification under the First Schedule:
      • Part A States: Comprised 9 former governor’s provinces of British India, ruled by an elected governor and a state legislature. Examples included Bombay, Madras, and West Bengal.
      • Part B States: Consisted of 9 former princely states or groups of princely states, governed by a Rajpramukh (often the former ruler) and an elected legislature. Examples: Hyderabad, Mysore, and Saurashtra.
      • Part C States: Included 10 former chief commissioner’s provinces and some princely states, administered by a chief commissioner appointed by the President. Examples: Ajmer, Coorg, and Delhi.
      • Part D Territories: Contained only the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, administered by a lieutenant governor appointed by the central government.

  • The Demand for Linguistic States and Early Commissions:

    • The demand for reorganizing states on a linguistic basis predates independence. The Indian National Congress, in its Nagpur Session of 1920, had committed itself to the linguistic reorganization of provinces as a political goal.
    • However, post-independence, the national leadership, including Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, grew wary of this principle, fearing it might foster sub-nationalism and threaten the unity of the nascent nation.
    • S. K. Dhar Commission (1948): Officially the Linguistic Provinces Commission, it was appointed in June 1948 to examine the feasibility of linguistic states. The commission, in its report in December 1948, rejected language as the basis for reorganization and recommended reorganization on the basis of administrative convenience, historical and geographical considerations.
    • JVP Committee (1948): Disappointed with the Dhar Commission’s report, the Congress appointed its own committee in December 1948, consisting of Jawaharlal Nehru, Vallabhbhai Patel, and Pattabhi Sitaramayya. In its report in April 1949, the JVP Committee formally rejected language as the basis for reorganization, prioritizing national security, unity, and economic development. However, it conceded that a strong and persistent public demand could not be ignored.

  • The Creation of Andhra Pradesh and the States Reorganisation Commission (SRC):

    • The JVP report intensified popular agitation, particularly in the Telugu-speaking regions of the Madras Presidency. The movement culminated in the fast-unto-death of Potti Sriramulu, a Gandhian leader, who passed away after a 56-day hunger strike in December 1952.
    • His death triggered widespread riots and forced the government’s hand. In October 1953, the first linguistic state, Andhra Pradesh, was created by carving out Telugu-speaking areas from the Madras state.
    • The creation of Andhra Pradesh opened the floodgates for similar demands from across the country. In response, the Government of India appointed the States Reorganisation Commission (SRC) in December 1953.
    • The Commission was chaired by Fazl Ali, with two other members, K. M. Panikkar and H. N. Kunzru.
    • In its report submitted in September 1955, the SRC broadly accepted language as the basis of reorganization but rejected the rigid theory of ‘one language, one state’. It emphasized that national unity should be the primary consideration. It recommended the abolition of the four-fold classification and the creation of 16 states and 3 centrally administered territories.

  • The States Reorganisation Act, 1956 and Subsequent Reorganizations:

    • The government accepted the SRC’s recommendations with some modifications. The States Reorganisation Act, 1956, and the 7th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1956, were passed. This led to the abolition of the Part A, B, C, D distinction and the creation of 14 states and 6 union territories on November 1, 1956.
    • 1960: The bilingual state of Bombay was bifurcated into Maharashtra (for Marathi-speakers) and Gujarat (for Gujarati-speakers) following the intense Mahagujarat Andolan.
    • 1961-62: Dadra and Nagar Haveli was constituted as a UT by the 10th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1961. Goa, Daman and Diu were acquired from the Portuguese via police action (‘Operation Vijay’) and made a UT by the 12th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1962.
    • 1962: Puducherry (comprising the former French establishments) was made a UT by the 14th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1962, following the de-facto transfer in 1954.
    • 1963: Nagaland was carved out of Assam to address the demands of Naga tribes and the ongoing insurgency, becoming the 16th state.
    • 1966: Following the Punjabi Suba movement, the state of Punjab was trifurcated based on the recommendations of the Shah Commission (1966). The Punjabi-speaking areas constituted the state of Punjab, Hindi-speaking areas became Haryana, and the hill areas were transferred to Himachal Pradesh. Chandigarh was made a UT and a common capital.
    • 1972: The North-Eastern region was significantly reorganized. The UTs of Manipur and Tripura, and the sub-state of Meghalaya were granted full statehood.
    • 1975: Sikkim, a protectorate of India, expressed a desire for integration. The 35th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1974, created a unique ‘Associate State’ status for it. This was a transient phase. Following a referendum in 1975 where the populace voted overwhelmingly for integration, the 36th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1975, made Sikkim a full-fledged state of India and added Article 371F providing it special status.
    • 1987: Three new states came into being: Mizoram (from a UT, following the Mizo Accord of 1986), Arunachal Pradesh (from a UT), and Goa (which was separated from Daman and Diu and became a state).
    • 2000: Three new states were created on the basis of developmental neglect and distinct socio-cultural identities: Chhattisgarh (from Madhya Pradesh), Uttarakhand (from Uttar Pradesh), and Jharkhand (from Bihar).
    • 2014: After a prolonged agitation, Telangana was carved out of Andhra Pradesh as the 29th state.
    • 2019: The Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019, bifurcated the state of Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories: Jammu & Kashmir (with a legislature) and Ladakh (without a legislature). This was accompanied by the effective abrogation of Article 370.
    • Presently, India has 28 states and 8 union territories (Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu were merged into a single UT in 2020).

  • Renaming of States and UTs:

    • The power to rename states lies with the Parliament under Article 3 of the Constitution.
    • United Provinces was the first to be renamed as Uttar Pradesh in 1950.
    • Madras was renamed Tamil Nadu in 1969.
    • Mysore State became Karnataka in 1973.
    • The Laccadive, Minicoy and Amindivi Islands were renamed Lakshadweep in 1973.
    • The Union Territory of Delhi was redesignated as the National Capital Territory of Delhi by the 69th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1991 (implemented in 1992).
    • Uttaranchal became Uttarakhand in 2006.
    • Pondicherry was renamed Puducherry in 2006.
    • Orissa was renamed Odisha in 2011.

The Debate on Creation of Small States

The creation of Telangana in 2014 reignited a nationwide debate on the viability and desirability of creating smaller states.

  • Arguments in Favour of Small States:

    • Administrative Efficiency: Smaller administrative units are considered easier to govern. It is argued that they bring the administration closer to the people, improving service delivery and grievance redressal. The unmanageable size of states like Uttar Pradesh is often cited.
    • Fulfilling Democratic Aspirations: The creation of new states often satisfies long-standing demands of people with distinct cultural, linguistic, or ethnic identities, thus strengthening national integration by accommodating diversity. Suppressing these demands could lead to alienation and secessionism.
    • Balanced Regional Development: Large states often witness concentration of development in a few areas, while peripheral regions are neglected. Creating new states out of these neglected regions is seen as a way to ensure focused development and equitable distribution of resources. The creation of Jharkhand from Bihar is a case in point.

  • Arguments Against Small States:

    • Economic Non-Viability: Many proposed small states lack the resource base to be economically self-sufficient and would become heavily dependent on central grants. This places a significant financial burden on the Union government and could lead to a clamour for ‘special category status’.
    • Increased Administrative Expenditure: Creating a new state involves substantial costs for setting up a new capital, secretariat, assembly, and other administrative infrastructure, which could be used for development instead.
    • Inter-State Disputes: The creation of new states often leads to contentious issues like sharing of river waters (e.g., the Krishna river water dispute between Telangana and Andhra Pradesh), boundary disputes, and division of assets and liabilities.
    • No Guarantee of Better Governance: There is no conclusive empirical evidence to prove that smaller states are always better governed. The performance of the states created in 2000 has been mixed; while Uttarakhand has performed relatively well, Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh have faced significant governance challenges, including political instability and corruption.

  • Way Forward:

    • The creation of new states should be a carefully considered decision based on a rational framework examining administrative feasibility, economic viability, and long-term sustainability, rather than on emotive or purely political grounds. A Second States Reorganisation Commission has been suggested by some experts to look into the matter comprehensively.
    • The focus should be on decentralized governance and democratic deepening within existing state structures. Empowering local self-governments (Panchayats and Municipalities) and regional autonomous councils (under the Sixth Schedule) can address issues of regional neglect and fulfill local aspirations without the need for state division.

Citizenship

Citizenship confers a legal status and a relationship between an individual and a state, involving specific rights and duties.

  • Distinction between Citizens and Aliens:

    • Citizens: Are full members of the state and owe allegiance to it. They enjoy all civil and political rights.
    • Aliens: Are citizens of another state. They are further divided into ‘friendly aliens’ (citizens of countries with cordial relations with India) and ‘enemy aliens’ (citizens of a country at war with India). Enemy aliens enjoy fewer rights (e.g., they are not protected against arrest and detention under Article 22).

  • Rights Exclusive to Citizens of India:

    • Article 15: Prohibition of discrimination on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth.
    • Article 16: Equality of opportunity in matters of public employment.
    • Article 19: Protection of six fundamental freedoms (speech and expression, assembly, association, movement, residence, and profession).
    • Articles 29 & 30: Cultural and educational rights for minorities.
    • Right to Vote: In elections to the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies.
    • Right to Contest Elections: For membership of the Parliament and State Legislatures.
    • Eligibility for Constitutional Offices: Such as President, Vice-President, Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts, Governor, Attorney General, and Advocate General.

  • Constitutional Provisions (Articles 5-11):

    • The Constitution, in Part II, does not lay down a permanent or elaborate law of citizenship. It only identifies the persons who became citizens of India at its commencement (on January 26, 1950).
    • Article 5: Deals with citizenship by domicile. A person who had his domicile in India and fulfilled one of three conditions (born in India; or either parent born in India; or ordinarily resident in India for 5 years before commencement) became a citizen.
    • Article 6: Granted citizenship rights to persons who migrated to India from Pakistan.
    • Article 7: Dealt with persons who migrated to Pakistan from India after March 1, 1947, but later returned to India for resettlement.
    • Article 8: Provided for citizenship of Persons of Indian Origin (PIOs) residing outside India.
    • Article 9: Explicitly states that no person shall be a citizen of India if he has voluntarily acquired the citizenship of any foreign state. This enshrines the principle of single citizenship.
    • Article 10: States that a person’s citizenship will continue, subject to the provisions of any law made by Parliament.
    • Article 11: Empowers the Parliament to make any provision with respect to the acquisition and termination of citizenship and all other matters relating to it.

  • The Citizenship Act, 1955:

    • Exercising its power under Article 11, the Parliament enacted the Citizenship Act, 1955. This Act provides for the acquisition and loss of citizenship after the commencement of the Constitution. It has been amended several times, notably in 1986, 1992, 2003, 2005, and 2019.

  • Acquisition of Citizenship: The Act prescribes five ways of acquiring citizenship:

    1. By Birth (Jus Soli):
      • 26 Jan 1950 - 1 July 1987: Any person born in India was a citizen by birth, regardless of their parents’ nationality.
      • 1 July 1987 - 3 Dec 2004: A person born in India was a citizen only if at least one of their parents was a citizen of India at the time of their birth. This amendment was made to curb citizenship claims arising from illegal immigration.
      • From 3 Dec 2004 onwards: A person born in India is a citizen only if both parents are citizens of India, OR one parent is a citizen and the other is not an illegal migrant at the time of birth.
    2. By Descent (Jus Sanguinis):
      • A person born outside India can acquire citizenship if, at the time of their birth, either of their parents is a citizen of India.
      • From December 3, 2004, such a person’s birth must be registered at an Indian consulate within one year, and the parents must declare that the minor does not hold a passport of another country.
    3. By Registration:
      • The Central Government may register certain categories of persons as citizens. This is typically applicable to Persons of Indian Origin (PIOs). Key categories include:
        • A PIO who is ordinarily resident in India for 7 years before applying.
        • A person married to an Indian citizen and ordinarily resident in India for 7 years.
        • Minor children of Indian citizens.
    4. By Naturalisation:
      • A foreigner can acquire citizenship by naturalisation if they meet certain qualifications. These include residing in India for 12 years (11 years in aggregate and 1 continuous year before applying), having a good character, and possessing adequate knowledge of a language specified in the Eighth Schedule. They must also renounce their previous citizenship. The government can waive these conditions for persons who have rendered distinguished service to science, philosophy, art, literature, world peace, or human progress.
    5. By Incorporation of Territory:
      • If a foreign territory becomes a part of India, the Government of India specifies the persons who among the people of the territory shall be the citizens of India. For example, when Pondicherry became a part of India, the Government issued the Citizenship (Pondicherry) Order, 1962.

Prelims Pointers

  • The original Constitution (1950) had a four-fold classification of states: Part A, Part B, Part C, and Part D.
  • The S. K. Dhar Commission (1948) recommended the reorganization of states on the basis of administrative convenience.
  • The JVP Committee (1948), comprising Nehru, Patel, and Sitaramayya, also rejected language as the basis for state reorganization.
  • The first linguistic state to be formed was Andhra Pradesh in 1953.
  • The States Reorganisation Commission (1953) was headed by Fazl Ali, with K. M. Panikkar and H. N. Kunzru as members.
  • The States Reorganisation Act, 1956, created 14 states and 6 Union Territories.
  • The 7th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1956, abolished the four-fold classification of states.
  • The state of Bombay was bifurcated into Maharashtra and Gujarat in 1960.
  • Nagaland became a state in 1963.
  • The Shah Commission (1966) recommended the reorganization of Punjab into Punjab, Haryana, and Himachal Pradesh.
  • Manipur, Tripura, and Meghalaya became full states in 1972.
  • Sikkim was integrated into India as a full state in 1975 by the 36th Constitutional Amendment Act. Article 371F contains special provisions for Sikkim.
  • Goa was conferred statehood in 1987.
  • Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, and Jharkhand were formed in the year 2000.
  • Telangana was formed in 2014.
  • The state of Jammu & Kashmir was reorganized into two UTs (J&K and Ladakh) in 2019.
  • India currently has 28 states and 8 UTs.
  • Part II of the Constitution (Articles 5-11) deals with Citizenship.
  • Article 9 establishes the principle of single citizenship in India.
  • Article 11 grants Parliament the power to regulate the right of citizenship by law.
  • The Citizenship Act was passed by Parliament in 1955.
  • Exclusive rights for Indian citizens include those under Articles 15, 16, 19, 29, and 30.
  • Cut-off date for citizenship by birth for anyone born in India was July 1, 1987. After this date, at least one parent had to be an Indian citizen.
  • The cut-off date was further amended to December 3, 2004. After this, both parents must be Indian citizens or one parent is Indian and the other is not an illegal migrant.

Mains Insights

  1. Linguistic Reorganisation: A Double-Edged Sword?

    • Cause-Effect: The initial suppression of linguistic demands (by Dhar and JVP Committees) led to violent agitations (death of Potti Sriramulu), forcing the government to concede. The successful creation of Andhra Pradesh set a precedent, leading to the formation of the SRC and a nationwide reorganization.
    • Historiographical Debate: Early leadership feared linguistic states would lead to the ‘balkanization’ of India. However, scholars like Ramachandra Guha in his work “India After Gandhi” (2007) argue that the linguistic reorganization actually strengthened Indian unity by giving a political voice to different linguistic-cultural groups, thus preventing their alienation from the Indian state. It replaced a potentially divisive factor with a stable administrative framework.
    • Continuing Challenges: While it strengthened unity, it also created new fault lines, such as inter-state river water disputes (e.g., Cauvery, Krishna) and border disputes (e.g., Belgaum between Karnataka and Maharashtra), which continue to strain federal relations.

  2. The Small States Debate: Governance vs. Viability

    • Analytical Perspective: The demand for new states has shifted from language (post-1960s) to ethnicity and developmental neglect (post-1970s). The creation of Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, and Uttarakhand in 2000 was a response to perceived internal colonialism by the parent states.
    • Governance Conundrum: The argument that small states lead to better governance is not empirically proven. While it may bring administration closer to the people, it can also lead to the capture of state machinery by local elites, increased political instability, and corruption, as seen in some of the smaller states.
    • The Federal Balance: Creation of new states, especially economically unviable ones, increases the dependency on the Centre for financial resources. This can skew the federal balance, making states more subservient to the Union government and diluting the principles of fiscal federalism.

  3. Parliament’s Power to Reorganise States (Article 3): Unitary Bias in a Federal Structure?

    • Constitutional Provision: Article 3 gives Parliament the ultimate power to form new states, alter their boundaries, or change their names, without the consent of the concerned state. The President only needs to refer the bill to the state legislature for expressing its views within a specified period, but these views are not binding on the Parliament.
    • Implication: This provision highlights the ‘indestructible union of destructible states’ nature of Indian federalism, as described by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. It gives the Union a significant upper hand and is often cited as a feature of unitary bias. This was clearly demonstrated in the creation of Telangana and the reorganization of Jammu & Kashmir, where the will of the central government prevailed.

  4. Citizenship: From Inclusive Jus Soli to Restrictive Jus Sanguinis

    • Policy Shift: The Citizenship Act, 1955, originally leaned heavily towards jus soli (right of the soil), making Indian citizenship relatively inclusive. The amendments of 1986 and 2003 reflect a significant shift towards jus sanguinis (right of blood), linking citizenship to the parentage of the individual.
    • Cause-Effect: This shift was driven by political and demographic concerns, primarily illegal immigration from Bangladesh. The aim was to prevent immigrants from automatically gaining citizenship for their children born in India.
    • Socio-Political Impact: This evolution has significant implications for contemporary debates around the National Register of Citizens (NRC) and the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), 2019. It raises complex questions about secularism, equality (Article 14), and the very definition of who belongs to the Indian nation-state.

Previous Year Questions

Prelims

  1. Consider the following statements: (UPSC CSE 2021)

    1. The Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms of 1919 recommended granting voting rights to all women above the age of 21.
    2. The Government of India Act of 1935 gave women reserved seats in legislature.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (a) 1 only (b) 2 only (c) Both 1 and 2 (d) Neither 1 nor 2

    Answer: (b) Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. The Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms did not grant universal adult franchise; it left the decision to the provincial legislatures. Franchise was limited based on property, tax, or education. Statement 2 is correct. The Government of India Act, 1935, provided for separate electorates for different communities and also reserved seats for women.

  2. With reference to India, consider the following statements: (UPSC CSE 2021)

    1. There is only one citizenship and one domicile.
    2. A citizen by birth only can become the Head of State.
    3. A foreigner once granted the citizenship cannot be deprived of it under any circumstances.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (a) 1 only (b) 2 only (c) 1 and 3 (d) 2 and 3

    Answer: (a) Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. The Constitution of India provides for single citizenship. The Supreme Court in Pradeep Jain v. Union of India (1984) held that while there is one citizenship, the concept of a separate state domicile is recognized in law. However, for constitutional purposes, there is only one domicile. Statement 2 is incorrect. Any citizen of India, whether by birth or by naturalization, is eligible for the office of President (unlike the USA). Statement 3 is incorrect. The Citizenship Act, 1955, provides for deprivation of citizenship under circumstances like obtaining citizenship by fraud, showing disloyalty to the Constitution, etc.

  3. Apart from the fundamental rights, which of the following parts of the Constitution of India reflect/reflects the principles and provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)? (UPSC CSE 2020)

    1. Preamble
    2. Directive Principles of State Policy
    3. Fundamental Duties

    Select the correct answer using the code given below: (a) 1 and 2 only (b) 2 only (c) 1 and 3 only (d) 1, 2 and 3

    Answer: (d) Explanation: The Preamble (justice, liberty, equality, fraternity), DPSP (social and economic rights like right to work, education), and Fundamental Duties (promoting harmony, humanism) all reflect the principles enshrined in the UDHR.

  4. How many of the above (States) are generally known as ‘tea-producing States’? (UPSC CSE 2023 - a question on state recognition)

    1. Andhra Pradesh
    2. Kerala
    3. Himachal Pradesh
    4. Tripura (a) Only one State (b) Only two States (c) Only three States (d) All four States

    Answer: (d) Explanation: This question, while geography-based, requires knowledge of Indian states. All four states listed—Andhra Pradesh (in the Araku Valley), Kerala (Munnar, Wayanad), Himachal Pradesh (Kangra, Mandi), and Tripura—are known for tea production, although Assam and West Bengal are the largest producers.

  5. Which one of the following statements best reflects the chief purpose of the ‘Constitution’ of a country? (UPSC CSE 2023) (a) It determines the form of government and the nature of the political system. (b) It lays down the objectives for the creation of a good society. (c) It defines and limits the powers of government. (d) It secures social justice, social equality, and social security.

    Answer: (c) Explanation: While a constitution does all the things mentioned in the options, its chief purpose is to serve as a fundamental law that defines the framework of government and, most importantly, limits its powers to protect citizens’ rights. This concept is known as constitutionalism.

Mains

  1. Has the formation of linguistic states strengthened the cause of Indian unity? (UPSC GS Paper I - 2016)

    • Answer Structure:
      • Introduction: Briefly explain the historical context of the demand for linguistic states and the initial apprehensions of the national leadership regarding national disintegration.
      • Arguments for strengthening unity:
        • Democratic Deepening: It enabled administration and politics to be conducted in the regional language, increasing citizen participation.
        • Accommodation of Diversity: It addressed the aspirations of linguistic-cultural groups, preventing alienation and secessionist tendencies.
        • Preservation of Culture: It fostered the growth of regional languages and literature, strengthening the diverse cultural fabric of India.
        • Refutation of Fears: The feared ‘balkanization’ did not occur; instead, states remained firmly within the Indian Union.
      • Arguments against (or challenges created):
        • Rise of Regionalism: It sometimes promoted aggressive regional chauvinism over national identity.
        • Inter-State Conflicts: It created new fault lines leading to disputes over borders (e.g., Belgaum), river waters (e.g., Cauvery), and resources.
        • Issues for Minorities: It created linguistic minorities within each state who faced discrimination.
      • Conclusion: Conclude that, on balance, the decision to form linguistic states, as argued by scholars like Ramachandra Guha, has been a positive step. It has managed India’s diversity democratically and has ultimately strengthened the cause of Indian unity by creating a more inclusive and representative federal structure.

  2. Discuss the main objectives of Population Education and point out the measures to achieve them in India in detail. (UPSC GS Paper I - 2021)

    • Answer Structure: (This question links demographics to governance, which is relevant to the state reorganization debate on population size).
      • Introduction: Define Population Education as an educational process to help people understand the implications of population dynamics for family, community, and national well-being.
      • Main Objectives:
        • To develop an understanding of the relationship between population growth and socio-economic development.
        • To promote responsible parenthood and small family norms.
        • To create awareness about issues like gender equality, women’s empowerment, and reproductive health.
        • To foster rational attitudes towards population issues, free from superstition and prejudice.
      • Measures to Achieve Objectives in India:
        • Integration into Curriculum: Incorporating population-related themes in school and university curricula.
        • Mass Media Campaigns: Using television, radio, and social media for awareness programs (e.g., ‘Hum Do, Hamare Do’).
        • Role of Health Workers: Empowering ASHA workers and ANMs to provide counselling on family planning and reproductive health at the grassroots level.
        • Legislative Measures: Enforcing laws against child marriage (Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006) and promoting girl-child education (Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao).
        • Incentive Schemes: Schemes to incentivize small families and institutional deliveries.
      • Conclusion: Emphasize that Population Education is crucial for sustainable development and that a multi-pronged approach involving education, healthcare, and women’s empowerment is the most effective way forward.

  3. The political and administrative reorganization of states and territories has been a continuous process since the mid-nineteenth century. Discuss with examples. (UPSC GS Paper I - 2022)

    • Answer Structure:
      • Introduction: State that the map of the Indian subcontinent has been in constant flux due to political and administrative imperatives, starting from the British era and continuing into independent India.
      • Mid-19th to Pre-Independence Era (British India):
        • Doctrine of Lapse: Annexation of states like Satara, Jhansi, Nagpur.
        • Administrative convenience: Creation of provinces like the North-West Frontier Province (1901) and the partition of Bengal (1905) for administrative and political reasons.
        • Creation of Bihar and Orissa province (1912) and separation of Burma (1937).
      • Post-Independence Era:
        • Integration of Princely States (1947-50): Accession of over 550 states.
        • Initial Classification (1950): The four-fold classification (Part A, B, C, D states).
        • Linguistic Reorganisation (1956): The States Reorganisation Act based on the Fazl Ali commission report. Give examples like the creation of Andhra Pradesh, Kerala, Karnataka.
        • Bifurcation of larger states: Division of Bombay (1960), Punjab (1966).
        • Reorganisation based on Ethnicity/Insurgency: Creation of Nagaland (1963), and Mizoram (1987).
        • Reorganisation based on Developmental Neglect: Creation of Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Uttarakhand (2000).
        • Recent Reorganisation: Creation of Telangana (2014) and reorganization of J&K (2019).
      • Conclusion: Conclude that the reorganization process reflects India’s evolving federal dynamics, accommodating various aspirations—linguistic, ethnic, and developmental—within the framework of a united nation.

  4. From the resolution of contentious issues regarding distribution of legislative powers by the courts, ‘Principle of Federal Supremacy’ and ‘Harmonious Construction’ have emerged. Explain. (UPSC GS Paper II - 2022)

    • Answer Structure:
      • Introduction: Explain that the distribution of legislative powers between the Union and States (Article 246, Seventh Schedule) is a core feature of Indian federalism and a frequent source of litigation. The Supreme Court, through its interpretations, has evolved principles to resolve these conflicts.
      • Principle of Federal Supremacy:
        • Explain Article 246 and Article 254 (doctrine of repugnancy).
        • When there is a conflict between a Union law and a State law on a subject in the Concurrent List, the Union law prevails.
        • The Union List has supremacy over the State and Concurrent Lists, and the Concurrent List has supremacy over the State List.
        • Cite landmark cases like State of West Bengal vs. Union of India (1963) which upheld the Centre’s supremacy.
      • Principle of Harmonious Construction:
        • Explain that this principle is used when entries in the different lists appear to overlap.
        • The court tries to interpret the entries in a way that gives effect to both, reconciling them rather than declaring one void. The aim is to avoid conflict and “harmonize” the provisions.
        • If harmonization is impossible, the principle of federal supremacy is applied as a last resort.
        • Cite cases like Gujarat University vs. Shri Krishna (1963) where the court harmonized entries related to education.
      • Conclusion: Conclude that these judicial principles provide a balanced mechanism. While federal supremacy ensures uniformity and national interest on key issues, harmonious construction protects the autonomy of states, thereby maintaining the delicate federal balance of the Indian Constitution.

  5. Critically examine the procedures through which the Presidents of India and France are elected. (UPSC GS Paper II - 2022)

    • Answer Structure:
      • Introduction: Briefly state that both India and France are republics with elected Presidents as heads of state, but their election procedures differ significantly, reflecting their distinct political systems (parliamentary vs. semi-presidential).
      • President of India - Election Procedure:
        • System: Indirect election.
        • Electoral College: Comprises elected members of both Houses of Parliament (Lok Sabha & Rajya Sabha) and elected members of the Legislative Assemblies of the States (and UTs of Delhi and Puducherry).
        • Voting Method: Proportional representation by means of a single transferable vote.
        • Rationale: To ensure the President represents the entire nation (both the Union and the States) and to avoid the politicization and expense of a direct election in a parliamentary system where the real power lies with the Prime Minister.
      • President of France - Election Procedure:
        • System: Direct election by universal adult suffrage.
        • Voting Method: A two-round runoff system. If no candidate secures an absolute majority (50% + 1 vote) in the first round, a second round is held two weeks later between the top two candidates.
        • Rationale: The French President holds significant executive power in their semi-presidential system, so a direct mandate from the people is considered essential for legitimacy.
      • Critical Examination (Comparison and Contrast):
        • Direct vs. Indirect: France’s direct election provides a strong popular mandate, whereas India’s indirect election ensures a consensus candidate who can act as a neutral arbiter.
        • Political System: The French system can lead to ‘cohabitation’ if the President and Prime Minister are from different parties. The Indian system is designed to have a nominal head who acts on the aid and advice of the council of ministers.
        • Stability: The two-round system in France ensures the winner has a majority, providing stability. India’s system is more about representation and federal balance.
      • Conclusion: Conclude that each procedure is well-suited to its own constitutional and political context. India’s indirect election reinforces its parliamentary and federal character, while France’s direct election underpins its semi-presidential system with a powerful, popularly-elected head of state.

Graph View