AMITY UNIVERSITY

R A J A S T H A N

AMITY LAW SCHOOL

FEDERALISM

Critical Assessment of the Federal system of India

Submitted to: Submitted by:

Ass. Prof. ABHINAV BHARADWAJ --ARYAN ATRAY--
Faculty, Law RollNo.=A21511119030
B.A., LL.B. (Hons.)
ALS - AUR Semester-9

AMITY UNIVERSITY RAJASTHAN

Abstract:
This research paper aims to identify the characteristics of India's federal structure. Following
this determination, the paper addresses the question of whether the country should adhere to
the federal structure by citing relevant reasons. India's federal structure is dynamic and has
evolved over the years. To understand its current status, the paper explores the meaning of
federalism, its evolution, challenges faced by the country, reasons for these challenges,
judicial interpretations, and the effectiveness of this system in governing a developing nation
like India. An analysis of the merits and demerits of the existing federal structure is crucial
for assessing its efficiency. The paper draws on various sources, including articles by
different authors, judicial interpretations, and interviews with different personalities, to
contribute to the ongoing debate on India's governing system.

Introduction:
Government, in simple terms, refers to a group of people officially controlling a country. This
research focuses on the critical assessment of the federal structure in India, considering its
diverse cultures, religions, and languages, which can give rise to potential issues.
Understanding the evolution and meaning of federalism in the Indian context is essential for a
critical evaluation of the country's federal structure. The paper explores whether India's
federalism is truly federal or if it exhibits characteristics of a unitary state with subsidiary
federal principles.

Meaning of Federalism:
Federalism generally entails the division of powers between different layers of government to
ensure both regional autonomy and national unity. The lack of a universally agreed definition
complicates the classification of countries as federal. While India has a federal government,
its constitution does not explicitly provide for it. The paper delves into the Indian context,
emphasizing the quasi-federal nature of India's federalism, as described by scholars. The
evolving and dynamic nature of federalism is highlighted, emphasizing the importance of an
enduring constitution in delineating powers between the center and states.

History of Federation in India:

Tracing the roots of federalism in India from the Regulating Act of 1773 to the Government
of India Act of 1935 reveals the evolution of this concept. The centralization of power during
British rule paved the way for federal ideas to emerge during the Montagu-Chelmsford
Reforms of 1919. The Government of India Act, 1935, marked a significant step, providing
for the establishment of an All-India Federation. However, challenges arose as princely states
did not join, and the implementation of federal provisions was lacking. The debates within
the constituent assembly, especially regarding residuary powers, shed light on the unique
characteristics of India's federalism, blending federal and unitary principles.
In summary, this research paper critically examines India's federal structure, tracing its
historical evolution, exploring the meaning of federalism, and addressing the ongoing debate
on the nature of India's governance system.

Challenges Under Indian Federalism

Reasons for Challenges in the Indian Federal System
While India is often celebrated for its successful federal system, it has faced challenges over
the years due to shifts in politics, economic processes, liberalization, territorial changes, and
uneven distribution of power among states. Differing opinions from experts contribute to a
constant tussle between agencies, state governments, and the central government, impacting
the overall federal structure.

Challenges Within the System

a). Division of Powers: The most prevalent issue in the Indian federal structure revolves
around the division of powers. Amendments by the union government have altered the
distribution of competencies between the center and states, leading to unequal power
dynamics. The use of President's rule under Article 356 imposes compulsory compliance by
states, resulting in potential misuse and abuse of such powers.

b.) Regionalism: Excessive preference to Hindu religion over national identity contributes to
regionalism as a challenge in Indian federalism. Unequal distribution of power and resources
among states, coupled with central control of funds, exacerbates regional disparities. Recent
demands for statehood and aggressive regionalism pose threats to the federal structure.

c). Centralized Power: Despite the distribution of powers in a federal system, there is a strong
central bias in India. The president's rule, with suo motu power to suspend the constitutional
machinery of a state, diminishes state autonomy. Economic incompatibilities among states,
controlled financial resources by the union, and lack of fiscal freedom for states further
challenge the federal system.

d). Economic Incompatibilities of the State: Financial imbalances among states, controlled
financial resources by the union, and Parliament's authority to confer powers upon states
without their consent create economic incompatibilities. These disparities pose a threat to the
overall federation.

Suitability of Centralized Tendency in Indian Federalism

The suitability of a centralized tendency in Indian federalism depends on the country's
characteristic nature. Despite the presence of two tiers of government, the constitution grants
more powers to the central government. While India's federalism may seem centralized due to
the concentration of power in the union, crucial federal features exist, making it a quasi-
federal nation. The need for a strong centralized power was emphasized during the
constitution's formation to address India's vast diversity.

In conclusion, the challenges within the Indian federal system are interconnected, creating a
complex scenario. The balance between centralized and decentralized tendencies is essential
to strengthen Indian federalism and maintain unity amidst diverse cultures.

3) Efficiency of India’s Federal Structure in Governance

In assessing the efficiency of India's federal structure in governance, it is crucial to recognize
the interdependence of states on various factors, such as natural and financial resources.
While no state can be entirely independent, the need for coordination and cooperation among
states is met through federalism as a governing structure.

Senator Benjamin Louis 'Ben' Cardin, a Democrat and ranking member of the US Senate
Foreign Relations Committee, highlighted challenges to good governance in India's
federalism system. He noted that the current federalism system poses challenges to the
effectiveness of national policies in addressing issues like corruption and human rights
violations.

India's governance system cannot be easily labeled as purely federal, as it exhibits mixed
characteristics of both unitary and federal government structures. This unique blend, often
referred to as a unitary federal government, adds complexity to the evaluation of its
efficiency.

Judicial Interpretation
The framers of the Indian constitution engaged in debates to determine the nature of
governance in the country. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar emphasized the deliberate use of the term
'Union' to signify that India's federation was not a result of a state agreement but rather a
constitutional creation, making the Union indestructible.

Several court cases have shaped the understanding of India's federal government. In the case
of 'The Automobile v State of Rajasthan,' Justice Das S.K emphasized the essential structure
of a federal or quasi-federal constitution, acknowledging the powers of both the Union and
the states.

The landmark judgment in Keshavananda Bharti v State of Kerala recognized federalism as a

basic feature of the constitution, limiting the Parliament's powers to alter its basic structure.
However, a shift occurred with the State of West Bengal v Union of India case, where the
court asserted that India's constitution did not adhere to the principle of absolute federalism.
It highlighted the centralized nature of the constitution, with states having a secondary
position relative to the Centre.

The evolution of judicial interpretation has shown a departure from a traditional federal
constitution to a more centralized structure. The courts acknowledged the need for centralized
powers to facilitate the implementation of national policies by states. The absence of dual
citizenship and the overarching powers of the Union further emphasized the centralized
nature of the Indian Union.

In the State of Rajasthan v Union of India case, the court acknowledged that federalism in the
Indian Union has been diluted to meet the needs of progress, development, and national
integration.

Conclusion:
Described by KC Wheare as 'quasi federal,' India's constitution deviates from traditional
federal systems. It incorporates non-federal features such as single citizenship, centralization,
and economic disparities among states. The term 'quasi-federal' reflects the union-oriented
nature of the country's governing system.
In the Bommai case, the court emphasized that while the Centre holds greater power under
the constitution, states have an independent constitutional existence and are not mere
appendages. The exceptions, such as during emergencies, do not negate the essential federal
feature of the constitution.
India's constitution is interpreted as quasi-federal to strike a balance between unitary and
federal features, considering the diverse cultures, religions, languages, and ethnic groups. The
framers aimed to ensure unity while allowing for centralized powers when necessary to
safeguard the nation.
In conclusion, India's constitution is a unique blend of federal and unitary elements, aptly
termed as quasi-federal. The nuanced approach allows for flexibility in governance, ensuring
both unity and the ability to address diverse challenges.