Reorganization of States
Andhra Pradesh: Created by the State of Andhra Pradesh Act, 1953 by carving out some areas from the State of Madras.
Kerala: Created by the State Reorganisation Act, 1956. It comprised Travancor and Cochin
Karnataka: Created from the Princely State of Mysore by the State Reorganisation Act, 1956. It has been renamed Karnataka in 1973.
Gujarat and Maharashtra State of Bombay was divided into two States i.e., Maharashtra and Gujarat by the Bombay (Reorganisation) act.
Nagaland: It was carved out from the State of Assam by the State of Nagaland Act 1962.
Haryana: It was carved out from the State of Punjab by the Punjab (Reorganisation) Act, 1966.
Himachal Pradesh: The Union Territory of Himachal Pradesh was elevated to the status of State by the State of Himachal Pradesh Act, 1970.
Meghalaya: First carved out as a sub-State within the State of Assam by 23rd Constitutional Amendment. 1969. Later, in 1971, it received the status of a full-fledged State by the North-Eastern Areas (Reorganisation) Act, 1971.
Manipur and Tripura: Both these States were elevated from the status of Union Territories by the North-Eastern Areas (Reorganisation) Act, 1971.
Sikkim was given first the Status of Associate State by the 35th Constitutional amendment Act, 1974. It got the status of a full State in 1975 by the 36th Amendment Act, 1975.
Mizoram: was elevated to the status of a full State by the State of Mizoram Act, 1986.
Arunachal Pradesh: It received the status of a full State by the State of Arunachal Pradesh Act, 1986.
Goa: Goa was separated from the Union Territory of Goa, Daman and Diu and was made a full-fledged State by the Goa, Daman and Diu Reorganisation Act, 1987. But Daman and Diu remained as Union Territory.
Chhattisgarh: Formed by the Constitutional Amendment Act 2000 by dividing Madhya Pradesh on November 1, 2000.
Uttaranchal: Formed by the Constitutional Amendment Act 2000 by dividing Uttar Pradesh on November 9, 2000.
Jharkhand: Formed by the Constitutional Amendment Act 2000 by dividing Bihar on November 15, 2000.
The argument put forward for the creation of three new states are as follows:
• In the case of Uttaranchal comprising 11 hill districts of UP, the need arises due to the underdevelopment of the region; its geographical distinctness; administrative remoteness from the State capital and the consequent problems.
• The border districts believe that being strategically important, their being made into a new state will confer on them additional importance.
• Regarding the question of viability, Uttaranchal is viable as it has great potential in tourism, horticulture etc. which can help in generating revenue.
• The region is self-sufficient in irrigation and can generate enough electricity.
• UP, being the most populous State, is administratively unmanageable, unless it is carved into two or more States.
• In the case of Jharkhand (18 districts at the time of formation), the cultural neglect of the region by outsiders and economic backwardness were the main causes of resentment among the locals.
• The region is very rich in mineral resources and generated substantial revenues not only for the State of Bihar but also for the country.
• Unfortunately, very little is spent on the region.
The Union and its Territory
• Article 1 says, "India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of Slates".
• India has opted for the Federal form of Government due to its large size and socio-cultural diversities, but the word 'Federation' does not find mention in the Constitution.
• The term 'Union' was suggested by Dr BR. Ambedkar, which indicates two things, first, Indian Union is not a result of agreement of independent and sovereign states, and second, the Units/States do not have right to secede from the Union.
• Union of India includes only the States which share federal powers with the Centre.
• India is an indestructible Union of destructible States.
• The Drafting Committee thought that it was better to make it clear at the outset, rather than leave it to speculation.
• The expression 'Union of India' needs to be distinguished from the expression 'Territory of India'.
• While the Union of India includes only the States which share federal powers with the Centre, Territory of India includes the entire territory over which the sovereignty of the country is exercised.
• Apart from the States, the territory of the country includes the Union Territories and other territories acquired by India.
Kerala: Created by the State Reorganisation Act, 1956. It comprised Travancor and Cochin
Karnataka: Created from the Princely State of Mysore by the State Reorganisation Act, 1956. It has been renamed Karnataka in 1973.
Gujarat and Maharashtra State of Bombay was divided into two States i.e., Maharashtra and Gujarat by the Bombay (Reorganisation) act.
Nagaland: It was carved out from the State of Assam by the State of Nagaland Act 1962.
Haryana: It was carved out from the State of Punjab by the Punjab (Reorganisation) Act, 1966.
Himachal Pradesh: The Union Territory of Himachal Pradesh was elevated to the status of State by the State of Himachal Pradesh Act, 1970.
Meghalaya: First carved out as a sub-State within the State of Assam by 23rd Constitutional Amendment. 1969. Later, in 1971, it received the status of a full-fledged State by the North-Eastern Areas (Reorganisation) Act, 1971.
Manipur and Tripura: Both these States were elevated from the status of Union Territories by the North-Eastern Areas (Reorganisation) Act, 1971.
Sikkim was given first the Status of Associate State by the 35th Constitutional amendment Act, 1974. It got the status of a full State in 1975 by the 36th Amendment Act, 1975.
Mizoram: was elevated to the status of a full State by the State of Mizoram Act, 1986.
Arunachal Pradesh: It received the status of a full State by the State of Arunachal Pradesh Act, 1986.
Goa: Goa was separated from the Union Territory of Goa, Daman and Diu and was made a full-fledged State by the Goa, Daman and Diu Reorganisation Act, 1987. But Daman and Diu remained as Union Territory.
Chhattisgarh: Formed by the Constitutional Amendment Act 2000 by dividing Madhya Pradesh on November 1, 2000.
Uttaranchal: Formed by the Constitutional Amendment Act 2000 by dividing Uttar Pradesh on November 9, 2000.
Jharkhand: Formed by the Constitutional Amendment Act 2000 by dividing Bihar on November 15, 2000.
The argument put forward for the creation of three new states are as follows:
• In the case of Uttaranchal comprising 11 hill districts of UP, the need arises due to the underdevelopment of the region; its geographical distinctness; administrative remoteness from the State capital and the consequent problems.
• The border districts believe that being strategically important, their being made into a new state will confer on them additional importance.
• Regarding the question of viability, Uttaranchal is viable as it has great potential in tourism, horticulture etc. which can help in generating revenue.
• The region is self-sufficient in irrigation and can generate enough electricity.
• UP, being the most populous State, is administratively unmanageable, unless it is carved into two or more States.
• In the case of Jharkhand (18 districts at the time of formation), the cultural neglect of the region by outsiders and economic backwardness were the main causes of resentment among the locals.
• The region is very rich in mineral resources and generated substantial revenues not only for the State of Bihar but also for the country.
• Unfortunately, very little is spent on the region.
The Union and its Territory
• Article 1 says, "India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of Slates".
• India has opted for the Federal form of Government due to its large size and socio-cultural diversities, but the word 'Federation' does not find mention in the Constitution.
• The term 'Union' was suggested by Dr BR. Ambedkar, which indicates two things, first, Indian Union is not a result of agreement of independent and sovereign states, and second, the Units/States do not have right to secede from the Union.
• Union of India includes only the States which share federal powers with the Centre.
• India is an indestructible Union of destructible States.
• The Drafting Committee thought that it was better to make it clear at the outset, rather than leave it to speculation.
• The expression 'Union of India' needs to be distinguished from the expression 'Territory of India'.
• While the Union of India includes only the States which share federal powers with the Centre, Territory of India includes the entire territory over which the sovereignty of the country is exercised.
• Apart from the States, the territory of the country includes the Union Territories and other territories acquired by India.
Formation of new States
• Article 3 deals with the formation of a new State out of the territories of the existing States.
• Parliament, under Article 3, can increase or diminish the area of any State or alter the boundaries or change the name of any State.
• The Indian Constitution empowers the Parliament to alter the territory or names, etc, of the States without their consent or concurrence.
• Thus, it is clear that the very existence of a State depends upon the sweet will of the
Part I: union and territory:
Article:
1. Name and territory of the Union.
2. Admission or establishment of new States.
2 A [Repealed.]
3. Formation of new States and alteration of areas, boundaries or names of existing States.
4. Laws made under Articles 2 and 3 to provide for the amendment of the First and the Fourth Schedules and supplemental, incidental and consequential matters.
• The Articles 2, 3 and 4 thus demonstrate the flexibility of the Indian Constitution.
• By a simple majority and by ordinary legislative process, Parliament may form a new State or alter the boundaries etc of the existing States and thereby, can change the political map of lndia.
Creating new states
• Of late, there are many demands for new States. For e.g. Telangana (Andhra Pradesh), Vidharbha (Maharashtra), Bodoland (Assam), Gorkhaland (West Bengal), Kodagu (Karnataka), Pondicherry Harit Pradesh (UP), Delhi etc.
• Needless to say, all the demands cannot be met as it would lead to proliferation of States to a point of federal burdens; they are economically unviable; national unity would be threatened; small States are not necessarily better-governed as seen in the north-east; administrative problems about creation of institutions like High Court, Secretariat etc; the costs of setting up a capital etc, to name some problems of creating new states.
• However, Union Parliament has passed three Acts in 2000 for the creation of three new states—Uttaranchal, Jharkhand and committee accepted its recommendations in 1949, but the demand for the linguistic reorganisation of the States persisted in the southern States particularly in the Telugu speaking areas. As the agitation took a violent turn in the Telugu speaking areas, the Congress conceded the reorganization of the Telugu speaking area in the State of Andhra Pradesh in 1953.
To make an exhaustive study of the problem, the Government of India set up the State Reorganization Commission in 1953 which was headed by Fazal.
Creation of more States:
• The Constitution (One hundred and second Amendment) Bill, 2003 and the State of Delhi Bill, 2003 seeking to grant Statehood to Delhi, which were introduced in the Lok Sabha on 18.8.2003 and referred to the Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs, lapsed with the dissolution of the thirteenth Lok Sabha.
• An Inter-Ministerial Committee headed by an Additional Secretary in the Ministry has been entrusted to examine the earlier Bills in the light of observations made by the Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee and suggestions made by the Chief Minister, Delhi with a view to exploring the possibility of introducing fresh Bills.
• Under the Common Minimum Programme, the Government declared that it is committed to consider the demand for the formation of a Telangana State at an appropriate time after due consultations and consensus.
Demand for Smaller States:
• It was in the year 2000 that 3 new small states Uttaranchal, Chhatisgarh and Jharkhand were carved out from UP, MP and Bihar respectively.
• Demands for several other states like Vidarbha, Telangana, Harit Pradesh, Mithilanchal, Bodoland etc have been constantly made.
• It was the victory of TRS in 2004 elections in Andhra Pradesh, which has again fuelled the demand for new states.
Why such demands arise?
1. The relative under development of a particular region as compared to the other regions of the same state.
2. Lack of participation in mainstream politics and decision making from a particular region.
3. Distinct cultural identity based on language, tribe etc existing in a particular pocket of the state.
4. Distance from the power centre in the state leading to problem of administrative inefficiency and sense of alienation among the people.
5. Politics of vote bank.
Advantages of small states
• It will increase administrative efficiency leading to proper utilization of resources.
• Development will take place and regional disparities will become narrow.
• Small states are more effective for fiscal management.
• The popular demands, needs and problems of the region may be addressed to efficiently.
• There shall be greater competition among states for more development.
• Smaller states will have more homogenous preferences. Disadvantages
• It will open the Pandora's box creating demand for more states.
• It will add to the burden of administrative expense, which could have been utilized for development work.
• Smaller states do not necessarily show better economic performance, e.g. North eastern states.
• It may increase inter-state conflicts e.g. water.
• The disputes may lead to more and more demand for special packages for development by the parent state
State Reorganization Act:
Chairman: Fazal Ali Members
1. Hriday Nath Kunzru
2. KN Panikkar
• The Commission in its report, submitted in 1955, accepted the language as the basis of the reorganisation of the States.
• It suggested the reorganisation of 27 States of various categories into 16 States and three Union Territories.
• The State Reorganisation Act, 1956 was passed by the Parliament to give effect to the recommendations of the Commission.
Chhattisgarh (16 districts) is the rice bowl of the then Madhya Pradesh, but is economically backward. It has mineral resources that can make it economically viable. Madhya Pradesh, being the biggest state of the country, needed to be divided so that administrative problems and a feeling of neglect among the locals do not arise.
• While it is true that the grievances are genuine and the demands need to be met, the concerns of the Federal government about other regions and ethnicities of the country raising similar demands must be understood.
• Given the fact that ours is a federal system which is going through a process of democratic consolidation in times of transition, characterised by coalition governance, the option of creating new states needs to be considered with utmost caution, howsoever convincing the reasons for such creation may be.
• The State of Jammu & Kashmir has been given special status under Article.37Q, which became operative on November 17,1952. The separate Constitution of the State was drafted by the Constituent Assembly of Jammu & Kashmir and became effective on January 26,1957.
• There are special provisions for the States of Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat and Maharashtra under Article 371, for the State of Nagaland under Article 371 A, for Assam
• Parliament can form new States, alter the area, boundaries or names of the existing States by a law passed by a simple majority.
• No Bills for the formation of new States or alteration of the boundaries or names of the existing States shall be introduced in either House of the Parliament, except orMhe recommendation of the President.
• The President, before introducing the Bill in the Parliament, shall refer it to the concerned State Legislature for its opinion within a specified time limit.
• If the State Legislature does not give its opinion within the specified time limit, the time limit may be extended.
• The Bill may be introduced even if the opinion has not come.
• The Parliament is not bound to accept or act upon the views of the State legislature.
• It is not necessary to make fresh reference to the State Legislature every time on an amendment to the bill, proposed and accepted under Article 37IB and for Sikkim under Article 37 IF.
Reorganisation of States: Background
• After independence, the demand for the reorganization of the States on the linguistic basis was raised from different regions.
• The Constituent Assembly appointed the S.K. Dhar Commission in November 1947 to study the issue of the reorganisation of the States on linguistic basis.
• The Congress, in its Jaipur session in 1948, appointed a three member committee to consider the recommendations of the Dhar Commission.
• The Committee is popularly known as the JVP Committee after the names of its three members- Jawaharlal Nehru, Vallabh Bhai Patel and Pattabhi Sitarammaiah.
• The Committee rejected language as the basis for the reorganisation of the States.
• Article 3 deals with the formation of a new State out of the territories of the existing States.
• Parliament, under Article 3, can increase or diminish the area of any State or alter the boundaries or change the name of any State.
• The Indian Constitution empowers the Parliament to alter the territory or names, etc, of the States without their consent or concurrence.
• Thus, it is clear that the very existence of a State depends upon the sweet will of the
Part I: union and territory:
Article:
1. Name and territory of the Union.
2. Admission or establishment of new States.
2 A [Repealed.]
3. Formation of new States and alteration of areas, boundaries or names of existing States.
4. Laws made under Articles 2 and 3 to provide for the amendment of the First and the Fourth Schedules and supplemental, incidental and consequential matters.
• The Articles 2, 3 and 4 thus demonstrate the flexibility of the Indian Constitution.
• By a simple majority and by ordinary legislative process, Parliament may form a new State or alter the boundaries etc of the existing States and thereby, can change the political map of lndia.
Creating new states
• Of late, there are many demands for new States. For e.g. Telangana (Andhra Pradesh), Vidharbha (Maharashtra), Bodoland (Assam), Gorkhaland (West Bengal), Kodagu (Karnataka), Pondicherry Harit Pradesh (UP), Delhi etc.
• Needless to say, all the demands cannot be met as it would lead to proliferation of States to a point of federal burdens; they are economically unviable; national unity would be threatened; small States are not necessarily better-governed as seen in the north-east; administrative problems about creation of institutions like High Court, Secretariat etc; the costs of setting up a capital etc, to name some problems of creating new states.
• However, Union Parliament has passed three Acts in 2000 for the creation of three new states—Uttaranchal, Jharkhand and committee accepted its recommendations in 1949, but the demand for the linguistic reorganisation of the States persisted in the southern States particularly in the Telugu speaking areas. As the agitation took a violent turn in the Telugu speaking areas, the Congress conceded the reorganization of the Telugu speaking area in the State of Andhra Pradesh in 1953.
To make an exhaustive study of the problem, the Government of India set up the State Reorganization Commission in 1953 which was headed by Fazal.
Creation of more States:
• The Constitution (One hundred and second Amendment) Bill, 2003 and the State of Delhi Bill, 2003 seeking to grant Statehood to Delhi, which were introduced in the Lok Sabha on 18.8.2003 and referred to the Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs, lapsed with the dissolution of the thirteenth Lok Sabha.
• An Inter-Ministerial Committee headed by an Additional Secretary in the Ministry has been entrusted to examine the earlier Bills in the light of observations made by the Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee and suggestions made by the Chief Minister, Delhi with a view to exploring the possibility of introducing fresh Bills.
• Under the Common Minimum Programme, the Government declared that it is committed to consider the demand for the formation of a Telangana State at an appropriate time after due consultations and consensus.
Demand for Smaller States:
• It was in the year 2000 that 3 new small states Uttaranchal, Chhatisgarh and Jharkhand were carved out from UP, MP and Bihar respectively.
• Demands for several other states like Vidarbha, Telangana, Harit Pradesh, Mithilanchal, Bodoland etc have been constantly made.
• It was the victory of TRS in 2004 elections in Andhra Pradesh, which has again fuelled the demand for new states.
Why such demands arise?
1. The relative under development of a particular region as compared to the other regions of the same state.
2. Lack of participation in mainstream politics and decision making from a particular region.
3. Distinct cultural identity based on language, tribe etc existing in a particular pocket of the state.
4. Distance from the power centre in the state leading to problem of administrative inefficiency and sense of alienation among the people.
5. Politics of vote bank.
Advantages of small states
• It will increase administrative efficiency leading to proper utilization of resources.
• Development will take place and regional disparities will become narrow.
• Small states are more effective for fiscal management.
• The popular demands, needs and problems of the region may be addressed to efficiently.
• There shall be greater competition among states for more development.
• Smaller states will have more homogenous preferences. Disadvantages
• It will open the Pandora's box creating demand for more states.
• It will add to the burden of administrative expense, which could have been utilized for development work.
• Smaller states do not necessarily show better economic performance, e.g. North eastern states.
• It may increase inter-state conflicts e.g. water.
• The disputes may lead to more and more demand for special packages for development by the parent state
State Reorganization Act:
Chairman: Fazal Ali Members
1. Hriday Nath Kunzru
2. KN Panikkar
• The Commission in its report, submitted in 1955, accepted the language as the basis of the reorganisation of the States.
• It suggested the reorganisation of 27 States of various categories into 16 States and three Union Territories.
• The State Reorganisation Act, 1956 was passed by the Parliament to give effect to the recommendations of the Commission.
Chhattisgarh (16 districts) is the rice bowl of the then Madhya Pradesh, but is economically backward. It has mineral resources that can make it economically viable. Madhya Pradesh, being the biggest state of the country, needed to be divided so that administrative problems and a feeling of neglect among the locals do not arise.
• While it is true that the grievances are genuine and the demands need to be met, the concerns of the Federal government about other regions and ethnicities of the country raising similar demands must be understood.
• Given the fact that ours is a federal system which is going through a process of democratic consolidation in times of transition, characterised by coalition governance, the option of creating new states needs to be considered with utmost caution, howsoever convincing the reasons for such creation may be.
• The State of Jammu & Kashmir has been given special status under Article.37Q, which became operative on November 17,1952. The separate Constitution of the State was drafted by the Constituent Assembly of Jammu & Kashmir and became effective on January 26,1957.
• There are special provisions for the States of Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat and Maharashtra under Article 371, for the State of Nagaland under Article 371 A, for Assam
• Parliament can form new States, alter the area, boundaries or names of the existing States by a law passed by a simple majority.
• No Bills for the formation of new States or alteration of the boundaries or names of the existing States shall be introduced in either House of the Parliament, except orMhe recommendation of the President.
• The President, before introducing the Bill in the Parliament, shall refer it to the concerned State Legislature for its opinion within a specified time limit.
• If the State Legislature does not give its opinion within the specified time limit, the time limit may be extended.
• The Bill may be introduced even if the opinion has not come.
• The Parliament is not bound to accept or act upon the views of the State legislature.
• It is not necessary to make fresh reference to the State Legislature every time on an amendment to the bill, proposed and accepted under Article 37IB and for Sikkim under Article 37 IF.
Reorganisation of States: Background
• After independence, the demand for the reorganization of the States on the linguistic basis was raised from different regions.
• The Constituent Assembly appointed the S.K. Dhar Commission in November 1947 to study the issue of the reorganisation of the States on linguistic basis.
• The Congress, in its Jaipur session in 1948, appointed a three member committee to consider the recommendations of the Dhar Commission.
• The Committee is popularly known as the JVP Committee after the names of its three members- Jawaharlal Nehru, Vallabh Bhai Patel and Pattabhi Sitarammaiah.
• The Committee rejected language as the basis for the reorganisation of the States.
No comments:
Post a Comment