The document discusses concepts related to federalism and center-state relations in India. It provides historical context for India's federal structure and discusses some key aspects: - India has a federal system of government outlined in the Constitution, though the term "federation" is not used. Power is divided between the central/union government and state governments. - The central government has significant power over states. Various authorities like the President, Governors, and imposition of President's Rule allow New Delhi to influence states. - Bodies like the National Development Council and Planning Commission were created to better coordinate center-state relations, though they have no constitutional status. - The judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court,

1. 1
Concept of Federation and Centre-State Relations.
Historical Background of Federation.
In fact, a federal structure is a design of government in which there is division of power on
territorial basis between the Centre and States. This limits the concentration of power and
authority in the hands of only one government as the country’s powers get divided between
the Centre and States. Thus, both are limited governments.
After independence, the Indian Constitution- makers also adopted the federal structure for
the governance. The Constitution- makers, who drafted it, ensured limited government by
adopting the federal structure of governance without referring to the term federation.
In the Indian federal system there is the provision of imposition of national emergency that
could also be imposed in case of internal disturbance in the States. Along with the national
emergency, there is a provision of President’s Rule in the States, if the constitutional
machinery fails in States.
Concept of Indian Federation and Centre-State Relations
The Indian Constitution provides for a federal system of government but the term ‘federation’
has nowhere been used in the Constitution. On the other hand, Article 1 of the Indian
Constitutiondescribes ‘India,thatis Bharat’asa ‘UnionofStates’, anexpression which implies
two things. Firstly, unlike the USA the Indian federation is not the result of an agreement
between the units. Secondly, the units have no right to secede from the federation. In fact the
States of the Indian federation have no independent existence of their own. Parliament can
alter their names and territories without their consent.
This federal character was given by the framers of the Constitution primarily for two
reasons:
(a) a federal state is more effective than a unitary one when the size of its territory is
as large as India.
(b) A federal state is more effective than a unitary one when diverse groups of its
population live in a discrete territorial concentration as in India.
State governments are not agents of the Central Government nor do they draw their
authority from them. On the other hand, both the Central and Stategovernmentsdraw
their authority from the Constitution.
Development of Federation after Independence.
After the attainment of independence, the founding fathers of the Indian Constitution realised
that the cultural configuration of India—unity in the midst of diversity—lent itself to a federal
structure of political organisation. The Indian Constitution was, therefore, based on the
federal principle. The constituent units of the Indian federation (Union) are the Centre and
the States.
Even though there is a distribution of powers between the Union and States as under a federal
system, the distribution has a strong Central bias and the powers of the States are hedged in
with various restrictions which impede their sovereignty even within the sphere limited to
them by the distribution of powers basically provided by the Constitution. In view of this

2. 2
principle of the federal structure, the Indian Constitution provides a system of government
which is quasi-federal.
Role of Some Authorities in the Context of Centre-State Relations
The role of the President, Governors, Chief Ministers, Inter-State Council, National
Development Council etc. are crucial in the Centre-State relations. It is, therefore,
imperative to examine the roles of these authorities in the context of Centre-State
relations.
Role of the President and Central Government
Article 354 empowers the President to order suspension of the provisions of Articles
268 to 279 relating to distribution of revenues between the Union and States, while a
Proclamation of Emergency is in operation. In other words, the Union can, in an
emergency, actual or apprehended, withdraw all powers from the States and also the
financial support it gives and functions as a Unitary State. In the US and Australian
Constitutions, even the declaration of war does not impinge on the distribution of
power between the Federation and the States, nor does it empower the Federal
Legislature to legislate on any subject exclusively in the State List.
There are certain other provisions relating to the authority of the President in the
matter of State Legislation and administration which could be used to interfere with
and even suppress the State’s autonomy. The Governor may reserve a Bill passed by
the State Legislature for the consideration of the President (Article 200). It is nowhere
enjoined that the Governor, in making such reference, should act on the advice of the
Council of Ministers. Though constitutional experts are of the opinion that the
Governor has no authority to act on his own, this interpretation is not implicit in the
express provisions of the Constitution. Nor is any remedy provided if the Governor
was to act on his own responsibility in making such a reference.
Imposition of President’s Rule in States
The unitary character of our Constitution is exemplified in Article 365 which says: “Where any
State has failed to comply with, or to give effect to any direction given in the exercise of the
executive power of the Union under any of the provision of the Constitution, it shall be lawful
for the President to hold that a situation has arisen in which the Government of the State
cannot be carried on in accordance with the provision of the Constitution. The purpose of
Article 356 is, however, to provide for the administration ofa State when no political party can
command a majority in the House to form a stable government either by it or by forming a
coalition with another party.
National Development Council
The Planning Commission, which is an extra-constitutional and non-statutory body,
was set up to formulate an integrated Five-Year Plan for economic and social
development and to act as an advisory body to the Union Government.

3. 3
The working of the Planning Commission led to the setting up of another extra-
constitutional and extra-legal body, namely, the National Development Council. The
Council was formed in 1952, as an adjunct to the Planning Commission, to associate
the States in the formulation of the Plans.
The functions of the Council are “tostrengthen and mobilise the efforts and resources
of the nation in support of the Plans, to promote common economic policies in all vital
spheres and to ensure the balanced and rapid development of all parts of the country.
Centre’s Power to appoint Commission of Inquiry
TheCentrehas the power toappoint a Commission under the Commission of Inquiries
Act, 1952 toenquire into any offence committed or misuse of power or position by the
Chief Minister.

4. 4
Judicial Reviewin India
Judicial Review refers to the power of the judiciary to interpret the
constitution and to declare any such law or order of the legislature
and executive void, if it finds them in conflict the Constitution of
India.
The Constitution of India is the supreme law of the land. The Supreme Court of India
has the supreme responsibility of interpreting and protecting it. It also acts as the
guardian-protector of the Fundamental Rights of the people. For this purpose, the
Supreme Court exercises the power of determining the constitutional validity of all
laws.
It has the power to reject any law or any of its part which is found to be un-
constitutional. This power of the Supreme Court is called the Judicial Review power.
State High Courts also exercise this power but their judgements can be rejected or
modified or upheld by the Supreme Court.
(II) Features of Judicial Review in India:
1. Judicial Review Power is used by both the Supreme Court and High
Courts:
Both the Supreme Court and High Courts exercise the power of Judicial Review. But
the final power to determine the constitutional validity of any law is in the hands of
the Supreme Court of India.
2. Judicial Review of both Central and State Laws:
Judicial Review can be conducted in respect of all Central and State laws, the orders
and ordinances of the executives and constitutional amendments.
3. A Limitations:
Judicial Review cannot be conducted in respect of the laws incorporated in the 9th
Schedule of the Constitution.

5. 5
4. It covers laws and not political issues: