Federal And Unitary Features Of India’s Constitution

The Constitution of India is a unique blend of federal and unitary features, reflecting the nation’s need for unity amidst diversity. While it establishes a dual polity with a clear division of powers between the Centre and states, it also incorporates strong centralizing provisions to ensure national integrity and effective governance.

This dual character allows the Constitution to function flexibly, adapting to the requirements of both federal autonomy and centralized control under specific circumstances.

Also Read | Understanding Federalism And Unitary Systems

Federal Features Of India’s Constitution

The federal features of India’s Constitution, such as dual polity, division of powers, supremacy of the Constitution, and an independent judiciary, ensure a balance between the Union and state governments. These elements promote unity while preserving regional autonomy, enabling efficient governance across diverse regions.

The federal features of the Constitution of India are explained below:

Dual Polity

• Dual Polity Framework: The Constitution outlines a governance structure with two levels of authority – the Union at the central level and the states at the regional level.
• Distribution of Powers: Both the Union and state governments hold sovereign powers within their respective domains as assigned by the Constitution.
• Union Government Responsibilities: The central government manages issues of national significance, including defence, foreign relations, currency, and communication.
• State Government Responsibilities: State governments handle matters of regional and local relevance, such as public order, agriculture, health, and local governance.

Written Constitution

• Lengthiest Constitution: The Indian Constitution is not only a written document but also the longest in the world.
• Original Structure: Initially, it included a Preamble, 395 Articles spread across 22 Parts, and 8 Schedules.
• Current Structure: Presently, it consists of a Preamble, approximately 470 Articles divided into 25 Parts, and 12 Schedules.
• Comprehensive Framework: It defines the structure, organisation, powers, and functions of both Central and state governments.
• Clarity and Coordination: By clearly outlining the scope and limits of authority, it helps prevent misunderstandings and conflicts between the Central and state authorities.

Division of Powers

• Division of Powers: The Constitution allocates authority between the Centre and the states through the Union List, State List, and Concurrent List under the Seventh Schedule.
• Union List: This list includes 98 subjects (originally 97) under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Central government.
• State List: It comprises 59 subjects (originally 66) that fall under the authority of state governments.
• Concurrent List: Containing 52 subjects (originally 47), this list allows both the Centre and states to legislate. However, in cases of conflict, Central laws take precedence.
• Residuary Powers: Subjects not included in any of the three lists are assigned to the Centre.

Supremacy of the Constitution

• Supreme Law of the Land: The Constitution holds the highest authority in the country, overriding all other laws.
• Conformity with the Constitution: Laws made by the Centre and states must align with the Constitution’s provisions; otherwise, they risk being invalidated.
• Judicial Review: The Supreme Court and high courts have the authority to declare unconstitutional laws invalid through the power of judicial review.
• Limits on Government Organs: The legislative, executive, and judicial branches at both Central and state levels must function within the boundaries defined by the Constitution.

Rigid Constitution

• Rigidity of the Constitution: The division of powers and the Constitution’s supremacy are safeguarded through a rigid amendment process.
• Federal Provisions: Amendments related to federal aspects, such as Centre-state relations and judicial organisation, require collaboration between the Central and state governments.
• Special Majority Requirement: These provisions can only be amended with a special majority in Parliament.
• State Legislature Approval: In addition, approval from at least half of the state legislatures is necessary for such amendments.

Independent Judiciary

• Independent Judiciary: The Constitution ensures an autonomous judiciary, with the Supreme Court as its apex body.
• Purpose of Judiciary: It serves two key functions: safeguarding the Constitution’s supremacy through judicial review and resolving disputes between the Centre and states or among states.
• Judicial Independence: Measures such as security of tenure for judges and fixed service conditions are in place to maintain the judiciary’s independence from governmental influence.

Also Read | Removing Judges Under The Indian Constitution

Bicameralism

• Bicameral Legislature: The Constitution establishes a two-house legislative system, comprising the Upper House (Rajya Sabha) and the Lower House (Lok Sabha).
• Representation in Rajya Sabha: The Rajya Sabha represents the states within the Indian Federation.
• Representation in Lok Sabha: The Lok Sabha represents the collective population of India.
• Role of Rajya Sabha: Although less powerful, the Rajya Sabha plays a crucial role in maintaining federal balance by safeguarding state interests from excessive central interference.

Unitary Features Of The Constitution

The Indian Constitution, while incorporating federal features, also possesses several unitary or non-federal characteristics, such as a strong Centre, single Constitution, integrated judiciary, and emergency provisions. These ensure a centralized authority capable of maintaining unity and addressing national concerns, providing flexibility to adapt to diverse governance needs.

Strong Centre

• Imbalance in Power Division: The distribution of powers under the Constitution is skewed in favor of the Centre, making it less equitable from a federal perspective.
• Union List Dominance: The Union List contains more subjects than the State List, granting the Centre broader authority.
• Important Subjects with the Centre: Critical subjects are primarily included in the Union List, enhancing Central control.
• Control Over Concurrent List: The Centre holds overriding authority over subjects in the Concurrent List, limiting state autonomy.
• Residuary Powers: Unlike in the United States, where they are assigned to the states, residuary powers in India are vested in the Centre, further strengthening its position.

States Not Indestructible

• Lack of Territorial Integrity for States: Unlike other federations, Indian states do not have a guaranteed right to territorial integrity.
• Parliament’s Unilateral Power: The Parliament can alter the area, boundaries, or name of any state through unilateral action.
• Simple Majority Requirement: Such changes require only a simple majority in Parliament, not a special majority.
• Nature of Indian Federation: India is described as “an indestructible Union of destructible states,” in contrast to the American Federation, which is considered “an indestructible Union of indestructible states.”

Single Constitution

• Unified Constitution: Unlike typical federations, Indian states do not have the authority to draft their own Constitutions separate from the Centre.
• Single Framework: The Indian Constitution serves as the governing document for both the Centre and the states, binding them within a unified framework.
• No Separate State Constitutions: States operate within the provisions of the single Constitution, with no independent constitutions of their own.
• Exception of Jammu and Kashmir: The only exception was the former state of Jammu and Kashmir, which had its own Constitution until its special status was revoked.

Also Read | Federalism In India: A Living Framework Of Governance

Flexibility of the Constitution

• Flexible Amendment Process: The Indian Constitution allows for a relatively less rigid amendment process compared to other federations.
• Parliament’s Unilateral Power: Most amendments can be made by Parliament alone, requiring either a simple majority or a special majority, depending on the provision.
• Exclusive Central Authority: The authority to propose amendments rests solely with the Central government, leaving states without this power.
• Contrast with the US: In the United States, states also have the right to propose amendments to the Constitution, ensuring a more balanced federal approach.

No Equality of State Representation

• Representation in Rajya Sabha: In India, states are represented in the Rajya Sabha based on their population, leading to varying membership numbers ranging from 1 to 31.
• Population-Based Representation: Larger states have more members in the Rajya Sabha, while smaller states have fewer.
• Contrast with US Senate: In the United States, the principle of equal representation is upheld in the Senate, with each state, regardless of size, having two representatives.
• Safeguard for Smaller States: The American approach ensures protection for smaller states by granting them equal voice in the Upper House.

Emergency Provisions

• Types of Emergencies: The Constitution provides for three types of emergencies—national, state, and financial.
• Centralisation of Power: During an emergency, the Central government assumes complete control, with states falling entirely under its authority.
• Federal to Unitary Shift: The federal structure is effectively transformed into a unitary one without requiring a formal constitutional amendment.
• Unique Feature: This temporary conversion of the federal system into a unitary system during emergencies is a distinctive feature not seen in other federations.

Single Citizenship

• Single Citizenship: Despite having a dual polity, the Indian Constitution, similar to Canada’s, provides for a system of single citizenship.
• Uniform Rights: All citizens are considered Indian citizens, with no separate state-level citizenship, ensuring equal rights across the entire country.
• No State Citizenship: Citizenship is not tied to the state of birth or residence, maintaining uniformity throughout India.
• Contrast with Other Federations: Federations like the United States and Australia follow a dual citizenship model, granting individuals both national and state-level citizenship.

Integrated Judiciary

• Integrated Judicial System: India has a unified judicial system with the Supreme Court at the apex and state high courts below it.
• Enforcement of Laws: This single system administers both Central and state laws, ensuring uniformity in legal interpretation.
• Contrast with US Judiciary: In the United States, a dual court system exists, where federal laws are handled by federal courts and state laws by state courts.
• Unified vs. Dual Systems: India’s integrated approach contrasts with the US model, which separates judicial responsibilities between federal and state systems.

All-India Services

• Separate Public Services: Both the Centre and the states in India have their own public services, similar to the US federal and state systems.
• All-India Services: In addition to separate services, India has all-India services like the IAS, IPS, and IFoS, which serve both the Centre and the states.
• Recruitment and Control: Members of all-India services are recruited, trained, and ultimately controlled by the Centre.
• Impact on Federalism: The existence of these shared services deviates from the federal principle by granting the Centre significant influence over state administration.

Audit Mechanism

• Role of Comptroller and Auditor-General (CAG): In India, the CAG audits the accounts of both the Centre and the states, ensuring financial oversight across all levels of government.
• Central Appointment: The President appoints and removes the CAG without consulting the states, centralizing authority over this critical office.
• Impact on Financial Autonomy: This arrangement limits the financial independence of the states, as their accounts are subject to audit by a centrally appointed authority.
• Contrast with the US System: In the United States, the Comptroller-General does not oversee state accounts, preserving the financial autonomy of state governments.

Parliament’s Authority Over State List

• Limited State Control: Even within their constitutionally assigned areas, states do not have complete autonomy over their subjects.
• Parliament’s Legislative Authority: The Parliament can legislate on subjects in the State List if the Rajya Sabha passes a resolution declaring it necessary in the national interest.
• No Need for Constitutional Amendment: This extension of Parliament’s legislative competence does not require any constitutional amendment.
• Non-Emergency Provision: Importantly, this power can be exercised even when no emergency is in effect, further limiting the exclusive jurisdiction of states.

Appointment of Governor

• Appointment of Governor: The governor, serving as the head of a state, is appointed by the President of India and holds office at the President’s discretion.
• Agent of the Centre: The governor acts as a representative of the Centre, enabling Central control over state affairs.
• Contrast with US System: In the United States, states have elected heads, ensuring greater state autonomy in governance.
• Similarity with Canadian Model: India’s system of appointing governors is influenced by the Canadian model, where the provincial head is appointed rather than elected.

Also Read | Governor’s Role And Controversy

Elections

• Election Commission’s Role: In India, the Election Commission oversees elections for both the Central and state legislatures, ensuring a unified electoral process.
• Central Appointment: The Election Commission is constituted by the President without any involvement from the states.
• Removal of Members: The removal of Election Commission members is also decided by the Centre, leaving states without influence in this matter.
• Contrast with US System: In the United States, separate electoral bodies manage elections at the federal and state levels, preserving state autonomy in electoral matters.

Also Read | Navigating Political Defections And Anti-Defection Law In India: A Critical Look

Veto Over State Bills

• Governor’s Bill Reservation Power: The governor can reserve specific bills passed by the state legislature for the President’s consideration.
• President’s Veto Power: The President can withhold assent to these bills, not only initially but also upon reconsideration, exercising an absolute veto.
• No Autonomy in Reserved Bills: This mechanism undermines the autonomy of states over their legislative matters.
• Contrast with US and Australia: In the United States and Australia, states are fully autonomous within their domains, and no such provision for reserving state bills exists.

Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s Perspective on the Federal Nature of the Indian Constitution

• Dual Polity: Dr. B.R. Ambedkar emphasized that the Indian Constitution establishes a federal system by creating a dual polity, where both the Union and states derive their authority from the Constitution rather than being dependent on each other.
• Not a Loose Federation: He clarified that India is neither a league of loosely connected states nor are the states mere agents of the Union. Both are independent entities created by the Constitution.
• Flexible Federalism: The Constitution is designed to be adaptable, functioning as a federal or unitary system depending on the requirements of time and circumstances.
• Criticism of Over-Centralisation: Dr. Ambedkar rejected claims that the states are excessively controlled by the Centre, describing such views as exaggerated and misunderstood.
• Partition of Authority: He highlighted that legislative and executive powers are divided between the Centre and states by the Constitution itself, not by laws enacted by the Centre.
• Co-Equal Relationship: States and the Centre are co-equal in terms of legislative and executive powers, and states are not dependent on the Centre for their authority.
• Immutability of Division: The Centre cannot unilaterally alter the constitutional division of powers, nor can the judiciary interfere with this partition.
• Conclusion: Dr. Ambedkar asserted that such a framework cannot be accurately labeled as centralism, as the Constitution preserves a balance of power between the Centre and the states.

Federalism As a Basic Feature: Insights From The Bommai Case (1994)

• Constitutional Federalism: The Supreme Court in the Bommai case (1994) affirmed that the Indian Constitution is federal in nature and federalism is one of its basic features.
• States’ Independence: It emphasized that states have an independent constitutional existence and are not mere appendages, satellites, or agents of the Centre.
• Supremacy Within Sphere: States are supreme within their allocated domains as defined by the Constitution.
• Emergency Provisions as Exceptions: While the Centre can override state powers during emergencies or specific situations, these are exceptions and not the general rule.
• Federalism as Principle: The Court clarified that Indian federalism is not merely for administrative convenience but is rooted in principle, reflecting India’s unique circumstances and ground realities.