Indian Federalism In Bluff Not In Sense

Advocate Arjun *

Assembly building as a component of the Capitol Complex at Chingmeirong, Imphal :: Pix - Bullu Raj

The Constitution of India establishes a dual polity in the nation consisting of the Union Govt., and the State Govts. The States are the regional administrative units into which the Country has been divided into States . Thus, India as a whole has been characterised as the Union of states. Each level of Govt., at the Centre and Govt., at State levels is supreme in its own spheres. The provisions of the Constitution which are concerned with Federal Principle cannot be altered without the consent of the majority of the states.

The Constitution establishes a Supreme Court to decide disputes between the Union and the States or the States inter-se and the Supreme Court interpret finally the provisions of the Constitution. The strength of the Centre lies in its large legislative and financial powers and in its emergency powers. So on, the flexibility of the Indian Federalism lies in expedients adopted to mitigate the rigidity of a Federal system and to increase temporarily the central powers if a situation so demands.

The federal method to amend the federal portion of the Constitution is also not as rigid as found in other Federal Nations. As said earlier by some scholars, it is hesitated to characterise the Indian Constitution as truly federal because in certain circumstances, the Constitution empowers the Centre to interfere in many matters of the States thus places the States in a subordinate position. They use such expressions for it as Quasi-Federal, Unitary with federal features or federal with unitary features.

The Constitutional provision relevant for solving questions of repugnancy between a Central and a State law is to be found in Art. 254. According to Art. 254(1) , any provision of a State law is repugnant to a provision in a law with respect to a matter in the Concurrent List, (Schedule Seven , List III) then the Parliamentary or existing Law would be prevailing over the State Law. It doesn’t matter whether the Parliamentary law has been enacted before or after the State law has been enacted.

To the extent of repugnancy, the State law is void. The most common application of this provision arises when both the Central law and State Law happen to be with respect to the same matter in the concurrent list. The power of Parliament to legislate in regard to the matters in Schedule Seven List III is supreme. After article 246, Schedule Seven List I is the Union List in which many matters are only enacted or legislated by the Parliament.

The Schedule Seven List II is the list of matters which are State concerned. To some extent, rigidity of federalism has been mitigated by the newly arising concept of Co-Operative Federalism but even it has its own limitations. It is a product of non-availability of better and more effective methods of effecting the needed adjustments in Central – State relationship.

The Constitution of India contains several provisions to create a mechanism for effecting temporary adjustments in the frame of the distribution of powers and thus introduces an element of flexibility and otherwise, inherently rigid federal structure and some of these methods are original in so far. Other rigid Federal Govts., in the world faces difficulties through a very rigid distribution of powers which often deny powers to the Centre to take up effective measures to meet immediate solve in a harsh or given situation.

However, the Indian Constitution takes adequate care to create Federal structure which could easily be moulded to regard to the needs of the situation without mush resorting to the tedious and elaborate procedure of amending the Constitution. It is very clear that even in the sphere allotted to the State, the Centre exercises appreciable control over the state’s legislation. Every year, the Central control over the State legislation is justified in some situations. These are consideration of uniformity of Law and uniformity of approach in certain basic matters.

For example, if a State Govt., were to embark on a large scale indiscriminating operation, its impact might be felt not merely within the State but the National Economic interests as a whole may be effected, it may drive away foreign investors from the Country and so the Centre maynot remain like a passive spectator for long. Perhaps mere differences of approach between the Centre and State legislation are not the determining factor. However, certain subjects like defence, foreign affairs, currency are regarded as being of national importance everywhere and every time and thus its risks and responsibilities are given to the Centre. But beyond this, what other subjects should be allowed to the Centre depends on the exigencies of the situation existing in the Country.

The pattern of division of functions are largely conditioned by the interaction of two contending and conflicting forces favouring a Federal Union and promoting a strong balanced Centre. That the forces/factors supporting local on particular tendencies which are also born out from such forces/factors are the regional or local religion, culture, linguistic, economic , beliefs, social origin, demographic character, etc. Therefore, the scheme which was finally emerged with ideas of federalism in Indian Polity was / is the resultant from balancing those conflicting forces/factors between regions, states or locals etc. at the time of making the Constitution.

Under the impacts of World War, International crisis of Scientific and Technology progress and development and the emergence of the ideal of Social Welfare State, the whole concept of Federation had been underlying a change for some time throughout the world. The framers of the Indian Constitution took note of the tendencies keeping in view the practical needs of the Country designed on federal structure on conforming to some theoretical definition or standard pattern, but on the basis it should be able to sub serve the need of the vast and diverse Country like India.

The Indian Constitution constitutes a new bold experiment in the area of federalism. In short, it may be concluded that the Constitution of India is neither purely Federal nor purely unitary but is a subordination of both. It is Union of Corporate State of a novel type. Therefore, according to Indian Constitution, it is merely federal with unique safeguards for enforcing National Unity and Growth.

Practically but not theoretically, the Central Govt. (Delhi Parliament) could interfere and overpower the policy and plan of the State if the State is marginalised or small in terms of population and land areas. For a peaceful and co-existence Development of India, certain serious distribution of power between Centre and State in proportionate manner or in a meaningful federal system needs to be implied in India.