Concept of Federalism

A federal government is a system of government that separates the power between central
government and state government of the country. It delegates certain responsibilities to each sector
so that the central government has its own task to do and state government has its own.

A Quasi-Federal government is a system of government that separates the power between central
government and state government of the country but in quasi-federal government, the central
government assigned more power than the state government. In a quasi-central government system,
the central government can interfere in the decision which is made by the state government.

Nature of Indian federalism

The constitution of India has not described India as a federation. However, Article 1 of Indian
constitution describes India as a ‘’Union of States.’’ This means India is a union comprising of various
states which are an integral part of it. Here, the states cannot break away from the union. They do not
have the power to secede from the union. In a true federation, the constituting units or the states have
the freedom to come out of the union.

India is not a true federal government because it combines features of a federal government and the
features of unitary government which can also be called as a quasi-federal government.

Characteristics or Features of Unitary Form of Government

A federal government has an agreement and there are certain essential features that ensure

its proper working.

i) Dual Government:
In a unitary state as the name indicates there is only one government i.e. the Central

government. In a federation two sets of governments co-exist. The national (also called
1 of 21
central or federal) government and the government of each constituent State. These two

governments derive their powers from the same source (the Constitution) and are controlled

not by the other but by the Constitution. But it would be erroneous to assume that they work

in watertight compartments. They govern the same people and their object is to serve the

same populace so naturally their functions many at times touch and effect each other.

ii) A Written and Rigid Constitution:

Firstly, the federal government is the creation of agreement which takes place as a result of a

constitution in which the powers of the federal government and the federating units and the

details of their rights are listed. The Constitution is expected to be written and rigid enough

so that neither centre nor the federating units may change it at their own will. Also the

Constitution is sovereign in the sense that both centre and the units are subordinate to it.

Rigidity does not mean that the Constitution is not subject to any change and must remain in

the same static condition. But as a corollary of the necessity of having a written Constitution

it is required that the provisions containing and regulating the distribution of powers must

not be left to the discretion of the Centre or the States. The amending process should lay

down as a precondition the concurrence of both.

iii) Division of powers:

Secondly, an indispensable quality of the federal government is the distribution of powers of

government between central government and the federating units. Normally, the subjects of

national importance such as defence, foreign affairs, railways, communications, finance are

entrusted to the central government whereas subjects like education, health, agriculture etc.

2 of 21
are looked after by the provincial units. The powers may also be distributed in one of the

two ways: either the Constitution states the powers that the federal authority shall have and

leave the reminder to the units, or it states those powers the federating units shall possess

and leave the reminder to the federal authority. For example, in the American federation the

constitution defines the powers of the federal authority and leaves the rest to the federating

units. In Canada, it is the reverse i.e. the constitution prescribes only the powers of the

federating units and leave the rest to the central government. However, in India both the

powers of the centre and the units have been listed.

iv) Supremacy of the Constitution:

Constitution is regarded as a higher law which is there for the Union and States to obey and

honour. None of the Units has the authority to override or disregard the Constitution. In

some cases the Union may have overriding powers but not in relation to the divisions of

power. Federal Constitutions guard attentively the distribution of powers and do not tolerate

encroachments. Just as Public Corporations derive their powers from the Act creating them

the two sets of Government owe their power to the Constitution and are in a way controlled

by it and function within the limits marked by it.

v) Independence of judiciary:
Thirdly, there should be an independent institution to settle the disputes with regard to the

jurisdiction of the centre and the units and among the units. Such an institution can only be

the Supreme Court whose function is to see that the constitution is respected in so far as it

distributes the governmental powers between the contracting parties and the federal

authority which by their contract they establish authority to run the administration. In

3 of 21
completely federalised state, this court is absolutely supreme in its power to decide in cases

of conflict between the federal authority and the state authorities.

vi) Bicameral Legislature:

A federal state has two kinds of governments having different interests and rights. There is,

therefore, a need for the protection of these rights and interests. This can be done only when

there is a bicameral legislature. The two houses represent the two interests. Normally the

Lower House represents the interests of the nation and the upper house represents the

interests of the provinces. Normally representation in the Lower House is based on

population and for the upper house the principle of parity is followed that is whether a state

is small or large it will have equal number of seats. This method is followed in USA and in

Pakistan.

Non-Federal Features of Indian Constitution

1. Division of power is not equal

In India central government has been given more powers than state government. Usually in federal
government powers are divided equally between the two government.

2. Single Constitution
Another non-federal feature of Indian constitution is that it only have single constitution. There are no
separate constitutions for the states in India and it is applicable to both the union as a whole and the
states. In a true federal system there are separate constitutions for the state and union.

3. The constitution is not strictly rigid

4 of 21
Another non-federal feature of Indian constitution is that it can be amended by the Indian parliament.
Parliament on many subject matters does not need the approval of the state legislature to amend the
constitution. However, in true federal government both state and central government take part in the
amendment of the constitution with respect to all matters. Therefore, those constitutions are rigid
and not easy to amend.

4. Central control over states

Another non-federal feature of Indian constitution is that central government has control over state
government. This means that any law made by the central government has to be followed by the state
government and the state government cannot interfere in the matters of central government.

5. Single Citizenship
In India citizens only have single citizenship of the whole country. But in true federal government,
citizens are alloted dual citizenship. First, they are the citizens of their respective provinces or states
and then they are the citizens of their country.

6. Parliament does not represent the states equally

In India the upper house (Rajya Sabha) and lower house (Lok Sabha) do not have equal representation
in states. The state which is more populous have more representatives in the Rajya Sabha than the
state which is less populous. But, in a true federal government the upper house of the legislature has
equal representation from the constituting states.

7. Unified judiciary
The Indian judicial system is unified or integrated and supreme court of India is regarded as the
highest court of justice in the country. High courts and all other subordinate courts are under the
supervision of the supreme court.

8. Proclamation of emergency
President of India has been given emergency powers by the constitution of India. However, he can
execute such powers and declare emergency in the country under three conditions. Once emergency

5 of 21
is declared by the president the central government become dominant and the state governments
come under the total control of it. The state governments lose their liberty and this is against the
principles of a federal government.

What makes India Quasi-Federal?

There are many examples which clearly shows that the Indian constitution has federal features but it
also shows that it has been evident with quasi-federal features too. Some of the examples which
show that India is a quasi-federal are followed as-

– Division of power between the central and state government but the central government has been
given more power than the state government.

– Parliament can override the laws which are passed by the states for the reason of national interest.

– Residual powers are vested with the central government.

– Major taxation powers are also vested with the central government.

– Parliament does not represent the states equally, however, in a pure federal government the upper
house of the legislature has equal representation from the constituting states. But in our Rajya Sabha,
the states do not have equal representation. The populous state has more representatives in the
Rajya Sabha that the less populous states.

– In India, citizens are allotted single citizenship which is not a feature of pure federal government. As
in true federal nation, citizens are allotted dual citizenship. First, they are the citizens of their
provinces then they are the citizens of their nation.

Constitutional Debate on Federalism

Dr. Ambedkar listed several features of the draft constitution which mitigated the rigidity and
legalism of federalism in his historic speech in the constituent assembly in november 1949. The
following features are follows as:

Article 246 of Indian constitution distributes legislative power between union and states. It gives
union exclusive power to legislate in respect of matters contained in list 1 and concurrent power to
legislate in respect of matters contained in list 3 of schedule 7 of the constitution.

6 of 21
Parliament is given power to legislate on exclusively state subjects matters namely:

Article 249 of Indian constitution gives power to parliament with respect to matter in the state list in
the national interest.

Article 250 of Indian constitution gives power to parliament in respect of any matter in the state list if
a proclamation of emergency is in operation.

Article 252 of Indian constitution gives power to parliament to legislate two or more states by consent
of those states.

Article 352 and 353 states about provisions for the proclamation of emergency and the effect of such
proclamation.

There are provisions included in the constitution which are to be operative unless parliament made
any contrary provision or word to the same effect.

Article 368 of Indian constitution states about provisions regarding the amendment of the
constitution.

Dr Ambedkar made it clear that the provisions make the Indian constitution both unitary as well as
federal according to the requirements of time and circumstances. He further stated that in normal
times it is framed to work as a federal system. But in times of war it is designed as to make it as
though it was a unitary system. He also made it clear that Article 250, 352, 353 of Indian constitution
can only be exercise by the President of India and requires the approval of both houses of the Indian
parliament.

Important Cases

State of Rajasthan v Union of India, 1977[1]

In State of Rajasthan v Union of India, 1977 former chief justice Beg, called the constitution of India as
“amphibian” he further stated that if our constitution creates a central government which is
amphibian in the sense that it can be either federal or unitary according to the need of the situation
and the circumstance of the case.

2. S.R. Bommai v Union of India[2]

7 of 21
In this case the court stated that the president should exercise his powers only after his proclamation
is approved by both houses of parliament. The power of president to dismiss a state government is
not absolute.

3. Haryana v State of Punjab[3]

In State of Haryana v State of Punjab the term semi-federal was used for India and in Shamsher singh
v State of Punjab the constitution was called more unitary than federal.

4. State of West Bengal v Union of India[4]

This case dealt with the issue of the exercise of sovereign powers by Indian states. In this case, the
Supreme Court held that the Indian constitution does not promote a principle of absolute federalism.
The court further states 4 characteristics highlighting the facts that the Indian constitution is not a
traditional federal constitution.

The first characteristic is highlighted by the court is that constitution of India is the supreme
document which governs all states and there is no provision of separate constitutions for each state
as required in the federal state.

The second characteristic is highlighted by the court is that the states have no power to alter the
constitution but only central government has the power to alter the constitution of India.

The third characteristic is highlighted by the court is that the Indian constitution renders supreme
power upon the courts to invalidate any action which violates the constitution.

The fourth characteristic is highlighted by the court is that the distribution of powers facilitates
national policies matter by central government and local governance by the state government.

The Supreme Court further held that the central government is the final authority for any issue. The
political power distributed between both union and state government with greater weight given to
union government.

Another thing which is against the pure form of federalism is there is concept of single citizenship in
India.

The learned judges finally concluded that the structure of India as provided by the constitution is
centralized, with the states occupying a secondary position vis-à-vis the Centre.
8 of 21
Conclusion
The Indian government is quasi-federal in nature as it contains features of single citizenship, a single
constitution, and flexibility of constitution which are not the features of a pure federal government
which is only followed in the United States of America. Although the Indian government contains
features of Federal government such as division of power, partly rigidity of constitution it does not
consider as pure federal government but as quasi-federal government.

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FEDERATION AND

CONFEDERATION
Sometimes the terms Federation and Confederation are misused with the same meaning. Because of
few countries which started their journey as confederations retained the word in their titles even
after officially becoming federations. For example, Switzerland constitution of 1874 was titled as
Swiss Confederation. The United States of America (USA) was a confederation before it became a
federation with the ratification of the U.S. constitution in 1788. Hence, the distinction between
Federation and Confederation is significant. A confederation is a voluntary association of sovereign
independent states formed for specific objectives, which is less binding in its character. A central
authority is established for achieving common objectives and interests; however, the joining states
would not lose their sovereignty, independence and retain the right of secession. The member states
of the confederation maintain their respective military and diplomatic representation also. Contrary
to that, states entering into a federation lose their sovereignty and separate entity on the global
political map. A federation creates a single sovereign state. Federation is permanent, and states lose
the right of secession, and any such attempts are considered illegal and unconstitutional. In a
federation, both the center and states derive powers from the constitution, and the constitution is
the supreme law of the land. Any change in federal powers and functions in a Federation requires a
constitutional amendment, and both the center and states cannot modify federal structure
unilaterally.

Models of Federal Government -USA, Australia, Canada

Federalism in Australia
9 of 21
Australian federalism came into existence on 1st January 1901, with six British colonies as its
constituents. However, deliberations about the establishment of a federation in Australia
started in the mid-Nineteenth century. Economic considerations were leading factors.
Security concerns had a minor role in the making of the Australian federalism. In Australian
federalism, the province is called ‘State’, while the national government is known as the
‘Commonwealth of Australia’.

Features of Australian Federalism:

Written and Rigid Constitution:

Both the Commonwealth and states derive their powers directly from the Constitution.
Australian constitution is a rigid Constitution. To make a change in a constitution is very
difficult. The constitutional amendment requires the majority of voters‘ support at the
national level in a referendum and the majority of voters’ support at least four out of the six
states. As a consequence of the complex amendment procedure, only eight out of thirty-six
proposed constitutional amendments could be passed in the referendum till now. The rigidity
of the constitution provides a de facto guarantee to states and the Commonwealth that their
respective rights cannot be violated unilaterally.

Division of power:

Section 51 of the Australian Constitution states that the jurisdiction to make law on the listed
issues rests with the Australian Commonwealth. Forty subjects have been listed or reserved
for the Commonwealth. These include defence and external affairs; overseas trade and
commerce; immigration; trade; currency, and social functions such as marriage and
matrimonial causes. The rest or unlisted subjects, formally known as residual powers, rest
with the states. The states have exclusive rights to make laws on the residual subjects.

In addition to the listed and residual powers, the concurrent list identifies subjects over which
both the Commonwealth and states can legislate. However, in case of inconsistency between
the Commonwealth and state laws, the Commonwealth laws will prevail over the state laws.

Bicameral Legislature:
10 of 21
Australian Parliament is made of the Crown and two chambers, namely, the Senate and the
House of Representatives. The Senate is made of 76 senators, while the House of
Representatives has 151 members. The states are represented in the Senate. For
representation in the Senate, the principle of equality is followed. Each state, irrespective of
its population and territory size, has been allotted equal twelve seats in the Senate. The
mainland territories the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory- send two
senators each. Of the twelve members elected from every state through the proportional
representation system for six years. The 151 members of the House of Representatives are
elected for three years terms by the preferential voting system.

Dispute Settlement Mechanism:

In the Australian federal system, the Courts and inter-governmental bodies play significant
roles in resolving disputes between the states and national government or between states.
The High Court is the highest court in Australia. It has played an essential role in sustaining
federalism for over.

According to Section 77 of the Australian Constitution, the final court of appeal is in dispute
between federal and state jurisdiction. It has the authority to interpret the Constitution. The
inter-governmental Councils and Committees representing national and state governments
such as Loan Councils, Premiers Conference, Special Premiers Conference, and Council of
Australian Governments manage federal relations.

Federalism in Canada:
The British North America Act, 1867, passed by the British Parliament, established a Dominion
of Canada as a self-governing part of the British Empire. It introduced federalism in Canada by
bringing together the Provinces of Upper and Lower Canada, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick
together in one federal union. Other provinces joined the Dominion later. The Canadian
federation comprises four regions: Ontario, Western Provinces, Quebec, and the Maritime
Provinces. In addition to regions, North-west territories and Yukon are also parts of Canadian
federalism. The Canada Act 1982 has further strengthened federalism in Canada.

11 of 21
Features of Canadian Federalism:
Written and Rigid Constitution:

The 1867 Act had no formula to amend the constitution. In 1949, the Canadian Parliament was
given the power to amend some parts of the constitution. According to the Canada Act, 1982,
the Canadian constitution can be amended in five ways:

provisions affecting the federal government can be amended by the federal Parliament.

provinces have exclusive power to amend the constitution of the province.

few amendments also require the approval of two-thirds of provinces, containing the majority
of the population. It is also referred to as the 7/50 procedure.

other amendments require the federal consent and the approval of all states (Section 41).

Parliament’s amendment affecting only one or more, but not all states, requires approval from
the concerned state only.

Thus, the amendment process of the Canadian constitution affecting federal structure can be
regarded as rigid.

Bicameral Legislature:

Canada’s federal legislature called Parliament is bicameral. It consists of the Queen and two
chambers, namely the Senate (the upper chamber) and the House of Commons (the lower
chamber). The Senate represents the provinces. Initially, the Senate had 71 members.
However, presently it has 104 members. The membership can be expanded up to 118. Out of
104, four regions of the Canadian federation, namely Ontario, Western Provinces, Quebec and
the Maritime Provinces, send twenty-four representatives each to the Senate. Two Senators
represent each of the North-west Territories and Yukon. As per the Constitution of 1867, the
House of Commons was a 181 membered chamber. Nevertheless, now the membership of the
house has been extended up to 282.

Division of Powers:
12 of 21
There is an explicit system of division of power in Canada. The Constitution Act, 1867, is the
primary source of division of powers in Canadian federation. Under sections 91 and 92(10) of
the Constitution, the federal government has the power to make laws on items of ‘national’
interest such as national defence, foreign affairs, employment insurance, banking, federal
taxes, the post offices, fisheries, shipping, railways, telephones and pipelines, Indigenous
lands and rights, and criminal law. Under sections 92, 92(A) and 93, the provincial
governments can make laws on ‘local’ items like direct taxes, hospitals, prisons, education,
marriage, property and civil rights.

In the Concurrent list, the Canadian constitution enumerates items like agriculture, old-age
pensions, and immigration. In case of inconsistency, under section 95, the federal law will
prevail on agriculture and immigration, while under section 94A, provincial laws will prevail in
the case of the old-age pension. The residual powers rest with the federal Parliament.

Dispute Settlement Mechanism :

Before 1949, the power to interpret the constitution was vested with the Judicial Committee
of the Privy Council. Since then, the interpretive power has been handed over to the Supreme
Court of Canada. The Supreme Court seems to favour the strong federal government.

Two Tiers of Government:

Like other federal states, Canada has two levels of government called federal and provincial.
The Lieutenant-Governor acts as Crown’s representative. If Prime Minister functions as the
head of the government at the federal level, the Premiers exercise the executive powers at
the province level. In provinces, there also exists a cabinet and ministers. Like the federal
government, states have their legislature, executive and judiciary. Initially, the legislature of
the four provinces was bicameral. At present, they are single-chambered and elected by
people. The size of the provincial legislature varies as Prince Edward Island has only twenty -
seven membered legislature while Quebec has 125 membered legislature.

Federalism in the US:

13 of 21
Under American federalism, power and sovereignty are constitutionally divided between the
states and the federal government. American federalism gives more powers to the states
than most other federal systems. This is evident because 3/4 of states need to agree to any
constitutional amendments, states have equal representation in the Senate, and the 10th
amendment gives states broad powers (any powers not explicitly given to the federal
government belong to the states).

Features of the US Federalism:

Written and Rigid Constitution:

The Constitution of the US is a written Constitution written in 1787, which provides for a
federal political structure where both the governments exercise their respective powers. The
US Constitution is very rigid and more formal. The US Constitution has been amended only 27
times.

Bicameral Legislature:

The upper and the lower houses of US legislature are called as the House of Senate and the
House of Representatives respectively. In the US, the President is the head of the state and so
his government is popularly referred as the Presidential form of government. The President of
US holds office for a period of four years. The US follows the bi-party system and has a
complicated process of election. In the US, all provinces, irrespective of their size and
population, are given equal seats in the Senate.

Divisions of Power:

Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution describes specific powers which belong to the federal
government. These powers are referred to as enumerated powers. The Tenth Amendment
reserves powers to the states, as long as those powers are not delegated to the federal
government. Among other powers, this includes creating school systems, overseeing state
courts, creating public safety systems, managing business and trade within the state, and
managing local government. These powers are referred to as reserved powers.

14 of 21
FULL FAITH AND CREDIT
The several States in the USA, before the creation of the Federation, were sovereign entities and each was
thus free to ignore obligations created under the laws, or by the judicial proceedings of the other. It was,
therefore, necessary to evolve a mechanism by which rights legally established in one State could be given
nation-wide application, and so there is the Full Faith and Credit clause in the US Constitution. On the same
model, the Indian Constitution has Article 261, Since under Article 245(1), the jurisdiction of each State is
confined to its own territory, it could possibly have been argued that the acts and records of one State could
not be recognised in another State. Article 261 removes any such difficulty. Article 261(1) lays down that “full
faith and credit” is to be given throughout the territory of India to ‘public acts’, records and judicial proceedings
of the Union and the States.

Article 261 is prospective and not retrospective. This provision does not apply to decrees passed before the
coming into force of the Constitution. The term ‘public acts’ in this Article refers not only to statutes but to all
other executive and legislative acts. The clause, however, does not envisage that a greater effect be given to
the public act of one State in another State than it is entitled to in the ‘home’ State itself.

According to Article 261(2), the manner in which, and the conditions under which, the acts, records and
proceedings referred to in Article 261(1) are to be proved, and the effect thereof determined shall be ‘as
provided by law made by Parliament’. Article 261(2) thus empowers Parliament, to lay down by law:

(a) the mode of proof, as well as,

(b) the effect of acts and proceedings of one State in another State.

Under Article 261(3), a final judgment or order delivered or passed by a civil court in any part of India is capable
of execution anywhere within India according to law. This is a constitutional provision which enjoins that a
decree shall be executable in any part of the territory of India according

To law. The words ‘final judgment’ in this clause include ‘decrees’ also. The clause applies to civil and not to
criminal courts. A decree passed by a civil court in any other State is executable in any other State ‘according to
law’ and the word ‘law’ here means ‘procedural’ law relating to the execution of the decrees, eg the law of
limitation. It does not refer to the merits of the decision which cannot be re-opened in another court.

The Bombay High Court passed a decree on 29 June 1960. Goa became a part of India and was made a Union
Territory in 1962. The Code of Civil Procedure was made applicable to Goa in 1965. The Supreme Court ruled that
as the decree was passed by the Bombay High Court after the Constitution came into force, Article 261(3) would
apply to the decree in question. Further, this Article would also apply to Goa because at the time of its

15 of 21
execution, Goa had become a part of India. The decree would be executed according to the CPC which became
applicable at the time of the execution of the decree.

INTER-STATE COUNCIL
Article 263 provides that the President may by order appoint an Inter-State Council if it appears to him
that public interest would be served by its establishment. The President may define the organisation,
procedure and duties of the Council. Generally, it may be charged with the duty of:
(a) inquiring into and advising upon disputes which may have arisen between States;
(b) investigating and discussing subjects in which some or all the States, or the Union and one or more
of the States, have a common interest;
(c) making recommendations upon any subject and recommendations for the better co -ordination of
policy and action with respect to that subject.
It appears from the above that the Council is envisaged to be an advisory body having no authority to
give a binding decision. The Council’s function to inquire and advise upon Inter -State disputes is
complimentary to the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction under Article 131 to decide a legal controversy
between the governments.
The Council can deal with any controversy whether legal or not, but its function is advisory unlike that
of the Court which gives a binding decision. The Council is envisaged to be a mechanism of
intergovernmental consultation. The Supreme Court can decide intergovernmental disputes of a legal
nature. But there may arise inter-governmental disputes of a non-legal character and the Council can
play a role in settling such disputes.
The Council can play a role in promoting vertical (Centre-State) and horizontal (Inter-State)
Intergovernmental cooperation and co-ordination.
The Council may be appointed either on a permanent basis or from time to time on an ad hoc basis. It
is also possible to appoint not only one but any number of such bodies to deal with various matters as
Article 263 is of a general nature. Such a Council could deal with any matter whether of a legal or a
non-legal character in which the States themselves or the Centre and the States may be interested.
The function of the Council to inquire and advise upon interstate disputes might be regarded as
complimentary to Article 131 under which the Supreme Court can decide a legal controversy among
the governments.

16 of 21
The main idea underlying the provision is to enable the creation of a regular and recognised
machinery of inter-governmental consultation so that coordination may be maintained amongst the
various governments in such matters as agriculture, forestry, irrig ation. education, etc.
Not much use has been made of Article 263 so far and only a few bodies of minor importance have
been created under it. The Central Council of Health. created by a Presidential Order under article 263,
consists of the Central Health Minister as the Chairman, and the State Health Ministers, members. The
Council is an advisory body. Its function is to consider and recommend broad lines of policy in regard
to all matters concerning health: to make proposals for legislation in this area. to examine the whole
field of possible co operation in regard to inter State quarantine during festivals and outbreaks of
epidemics: to recommend to the Central Government the method of distribution of grants -in-aid for
health purposes to the States: to review the work accomplished with the help of these grants, and to
establish organisations invested with appropriate functions to maintain and promote co -operation
between the Central and State Health Administrations. All questions are decided by a majority of
members present at a meeting.
Under Article 263. four regional councils have been set up for making recommendations for the better
co-ordination of policy and action with respect to sales tax, a State subject. A regional council has
been established in each of the four zones—Northern, Eastern, Western and Southern. Each regional
council is to consist of the Secretary in charge of sales tax, and the Commissioner of Sales tax in each
of the States and Union Territories concerned; the Deputy Secretary to the Government of India in
charge of sales tax and the Deputy Secretary to the Government of India, in the Ministry of Home
Affairs, in charge of the Union Termitaries concerned. The Under Secretary to the Govemment of
India. in the Ministry of Finance, in charge of sales tax is to function as the Secretary of each regional
council and convene its meetings. All administrative work relating to the regional councils is to be
attended to by the Sales-tax Branch of the Ministry of Finance of the Govemment of India.

A decision taken at a meeting of a council is recommendatory in nature and is to be forwarded to the

Governments concerned for implementation. If a recommendation made by a council is not
implemented by a State or a Union Territory, and if the council thinks that its non-implementation
Would adversely affect the interests of any other State or Union Territory, the council may
recommend that the matter may be discussed at a meeting of the Ministers in charge of sales tax in
the States and the Union Territories comprised in the zone to be presided over by the Union Minister

17 of 21
of State wn the Ministry of Finance. A council considers matters relating to the levy of sales -tax
(including Central sales-tax) in any State or Union Territory in the zone.
A council is to meet at least once in six months. All questions are to be decided by a majority of Votes
of the members. Joint meetings of two or more regional councils can also be held necessary. The
main purpose in establishing these councils is to secure a measure of uniformity in the rates of sales
tax and other matters pertaining thereto in respect of the States in each zone. Sales tax is a very close
relationship with, and an indiscriminate exercise of power to levy sales tax may injure, movement of
commodities in inter-State trade and commerce and hence the great need for Co-ordinating the
State sales taxation to the extent possible.
The Sarkaria Commission has again recommended the setting up of an all-embracing Inter-State
Council under Article 263. Since 1967, parties or coalition of parties other than the one running the
Central Government, have come in power in the States. These State Governments of diverse hues
have different views on regional and inter-State problems. In such a situation, the setting up of a
standing Inter-State Council with a comprehensive charter under Article 263 has become an
imperative necessity. The council is to consist of the Prime Minister as the Chairman, all State Chief
Ministers and all Union Cabinet Ministers dealing with subjects of common interest to the Union and
the States as members.
The Council is to be a recommendatory body. It should be charged with duties in broad terms
embracing the entire gamut of clauses (b) and (c) of Article 263. The Council should have such
investigative, deliberative and recommendatory functions as would fall within the ambit of clause (b)
and (c) of Article 263.
In 1990, in Dabur India Ltd v State of Uttar Pradesh,” the Supreme Court suggested the setting up of a
Council under Article 263 to discuss and sort out problems of Central -State taxation.
In between the Centre and the States, Zonal Councils have been introduced in India by the state's Re -
organisation Act, 1956. Great heat and passion were generated in the country at the time of re -
organisation of the States on the linguistic basis which imperiled the unity of the country, therefore,
Zonal Councils were created as instruments of intergovernmental consultation and cooperation
mainly in socio-economic fields and also to arrest the growth of controversies and particularistic
tendencies among the various States. There exist the following five Zonal Councils:

(1) Northern—comprising the States of Punjab, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Rajasthan, Jammu and
Kashmir, and the Union Territories of Delhi and Chandigarh. (2) Eastern —comprising the States of
Bihar, West Bengal, Orissa and Sikkim.
18 of 21
(3) Western—comprising the States of Gujarat, Maharashtra, Goa and the Union Territories of Daman
and Diu and Dadra and Nagar Haveli;

(4) Central - comprising the States of Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh;

(5) Southern - comprising the States of Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Kerala and the
Union Territory of Pondicherry.

A Zonal Council consists of a Union Minister to be nominated by the Central Government, and the
Chief Minister and two other Ministers from each State to be nominated by the State Government, A
Union Territory in the Zone has only two members (and not three as in the case of a State) tobe
nominated by the Central Executive.

The Union Minister is to be the Chairman of the Zonal Council. A Chief Minister of a member of State
acts as its Vice-Chairman for a year by rotation. A Zonal Council has the following advisers to assist it
in the performance of its duties: a person nominated by the Planning Commission; the Chief
Secretary to the Government of each State in the Zone; the Development Commissioner or any other
officer nominated by the Government of each State in the Zone. An adviser is entitled to Participate
without the right of vote in the discussions of the Council.

A Zonal Council meets in each State in the Zone by rotation, all questions at a meeting of the ry Zonal
Council are decided by a majority of the members present. The presiding officer has a casting vote in
case of an equality of votes. Proceedings of every meeting of a Zonal Council are to be forwarded to
the Central Government and also to each member-State, A Zonal Council may have a Secretariat of its
own. The office of the Secretary of the Council is to be held by a Chief Secretary of a member -State,
by rotation, for a year at a time. The office of the Zonal Council is to be located within a member -State
as determined by the Council. The administrative expenses of each council office are to be borne by
the Central Exchequer.

A Zonal Council has rule-making power conferred on it by various sections of the Act. It may lay down
rules of procedure, with the approval of the Central Government, transact business at its meetings. A
Zonal Council may discuss any matter in which some State represented in it, or the Union and one or
more of such States, have a common interest. It may advise the Centre and the member-states as to
the action to be taken on any such matter. More particularly, a Zonal Council May discuss the following
matters and make recommendations—(a) a matter of common interest in the field of economic and
social planning;

19 of 21
(b) a matter concerning water disputes, linguistic minorities or inter-State transport;

(c) a matter connected with, or arising out of, the re-organisation of the States under the States Re-
organisation Act.

Joint meetings of several Zonal Councils may be held to discuss matters of common interest to the
States included therein. The Central Government may make rules for regulating the procedure at joint
meetings of the Zonal Councils.

A Zonal Council is an advisory body and has no executive or legislative function to discharge. But,
perhaps, its advisory character is its strong point for, otherwise, the States might have felt that the
Zonal Council was being designed to reduce their autonomy. The way the Zonal Councils have been
designed does not derogate from the State autonomy in any manner. It does not impinge on the
legislative or executive authority either of the Centre or of the States.

The sole aim of a Zonal Council is to promote interstate co-operation and consultation by bringing
together the States in a region so that they may discuss their common problems and take cooperative
action to solve them and pool their resources for the common good. The association of a Central
Minister with each Council helps in promoting co-operation and consultation between the centre and
the States and evolution of common policies for the common good of the nation as a whole.

However, in practice, so far, the Councils do not have many spectacular achievements to this credit.
Nevertheless, they have helped in developing some common approach to some regions) problems.
For example, the Southern Council has generally agreed on the question of safeguard for linguistic
minorities in the States in the Zone. The Northern Council has been devoting its attention to the
development of the crucial hilly areas in the region, to introducing uniform rates of sales tax and to
promote inter-State trade and commerce within the Zone. The Eastern Zonal Council has agreed to
form a common reserve police and set up a standing committee to review implementation of Minority
safeguards.

These bodies provide forums for development of a community of interests transcending differences
and rivalries amongst the neighbouring States, especially when governments of different political
complexion are in power in different States. It is perhaps possible to activate these bodies and use
them for promoting much more fruitful regional co-operation and in toning down causes of friction
among the states than has been possible so far.

Reference may also be made here to the North-Eastern Council, discussed earlier,
20 of 21
Which ha peen set-up by Parliament under the Northeastern Council Act, 1971. This Council consists
of Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya Nagaland and Tripura, Arunachal Pradesh and Mizoram. It has its own
secretariat. The underlying idea is to promote co-operation among the various units in eastern India.

21 of 21