LOK SABHA SECRETARIAT Research and Information Division INFORMATION BULLETIN No. LARRDIS (SAW) 2014/IB-1 FEBRUARY 2014 Re-organisation of States in India Ree-organisation of States isthe exercise under which diferent States have been formed in India trom time to time ater independence, Certain factors have guided the re-organisation and both the Parliament and the State Logisatures nave played thor rle nthe process as per the Gonsttuton of our county. Within the Tet few years othe enactment and enforcement of the Consttuton, a Sates Reorganisation Commission was set up which Suggested formation of 14 Statos and 8 Union Teriorios based on factors Ike fhancal vabity, national welfare and development, language and cul, etc, Parlament passed the Consituion (7th Amendment) Ack, 1986 10 {ve etlect to the recommendations of the Commission, Over the years, a few more Slates have been created in Conformity with the provisions spelt out inthe Constitution, At prosent, there are_28 Staas and 7 Union teriorios constituting the terrtory of India Under the Constitution, Pariament has the power to create a State by law through ordinary process of legislation Ze. through simple majority. But Legislation in this respect is subject to the condition that no Bill for this purpose shall be introduced in Parliament except on the Fecommendation of the President. There Is a further condition, namely, that before recommending the introduction of such’ Bill the President shall refer the Bill to the affected Legislature of State or States for views. If however, a State Legislature does not express its views within the time specified by the President, he may recommend the introduction of the Bill without obtaining the views of such a State. We have seen demands for new States in post independent India being made from different quarters and regions of the country trom time to time. Recently in the wake of one such demand pertaining to Telangana, the Union Cabinet on 3 October 2013 is learnt to have approved the creation of the proposed State by division of the existing State of Andhra Pradesh, The Union Cabinet, is reported to have approved the draft Bill pertaining to the same proposed State which the President of India, referred to the State Assembly for their views as per the Constitutional requirement. The next Constitutional step awaited in this regard is the introduction of the relevant Bil in Parliament, its passage and the Presidential assent bby which the proposed State can find a place in the political map of India, Constitutional Procedur of State Legislature Role of Parliament and The Constitution of India in its very first Chapter and in its maiden article Ze. article 1 provides the name of the country as ‘India that is Bharat’ and what its territories shall comprise. The same article in its Clause 3 specifies the territory of India to comprise the territories of the States, the Union territories and such other territories as may be acquired. The States and Union territories have been specified in the First Schedule of the Constitution. As regards the acquired territories, the same happened to have been acquired at different points of time by cession (or annexation. The details in this regard are given in the box below. Chandernagore, which was acquired by a Treaty ‘of Cession from France, was governed as an ‘acquired territory’ since June 9, 1952 to October 2, 1954, when it was merged with West Bengal as a result of the Chandernagore (Merger) Act, 1954, Goa, Daman and Diu, acquired from the Portuguese by annexation, were being administered since 20-12-61 as ‘acquired territory’ until they were incorporated as a Union territory, by the Constitution (Twelfth Amendment) Act, 1962, with effect from 29-3-62. ‘The French Settlement of Pondicherry (together with Karaikal, Mahe and Yanam), which was de facto ceded to India by the French Government in 1954 was being administered as a foreign territory under the Foreign Jurisdiction Act until 16-8-62, in as much as the Treaty of Cession had not yet been ratified by the French Parliament. After such ratification, the territory of this French Settlement was administered as ‘acquired territory’ until 28-12-62, when it was constituted into a ‘Union territory’, by the Constitution (Fourteenth Amendment) Act, 1962.Under article 2, Pariament may by law admit into the Union or establish new States on such terms and Conditions as it thinks fi AS per this article, Sikkim has been admitted into the Indian Union as a State in the First Schedule of the Constitution by the Constitution (6th Amendment) Act 1975 (the details regarding Sikkim are given in the box) Aticle 3 spells out the modesiways of formation of States in the country. The modes so spelt out are (i) by separation of territory trom any State (i) by uniting two or more States or parts of States or (ii) by uniting any territory to a part of any State. And all the aspects that are included in the process are as follows: (a) increase in the area of any State or (b) reduction in the atea of any State or (c) alteration in the boundary or (a) name of any State. Parliament can only do this by Law. But a Bil to this effect can only be introduced in Parliament on prior recommendation of the President and the President can only make such recommendation after obtaining the views of the State Legislature on the proposals in the Bil. Thus, both Parliament and the State Legislature have a defined role in the formation of the State under the Constitution. Before delving deeper into the relative ‘role aspect’ of both the Parliament and the State Legislature, it may be worthwhile to throw a litle light on the changed position in this regard after 1955 in the country. In the Constitution, before 1955 the President of India was required to ‘ascertain’ the views of the State Legislature. But in 1955, following the Constitution (Fifth Amendment) Act, the word ‘ascertain’ has been substituted by the word ‘refer’. The article 3 thus now reads as given in the box. Coming further to the introduction of the Bill in Parliament based on Presidential recommendation after referral and obtaining of views from the affected State where the changes are to be effected as per the proposals in the Bil, the Constitution does not specify the time within Addition of Sikkim as a State Sikkim was a Protectorate of the Union of India. The Government of India had the responsibility with regard to the defence, external affairs and ‘communications of the Stal By the Constitution (35th Amendment) Act, 1974 Sikkim became an associate state [Art. 2A and 10th Schedule] which were to this effect added by the Constitution (35th Amendment) Act, 1974, The introduction of the status of an ‘associate State’ into the Indian federal system, however, lost all practical significance, because Sikkim shortly thereafter was admitted into the Indian Union as a State in the First Schedule of the Constitution of India, by the Constitution (36th Amendment) Act, 1975, which was given retrospective effect from 26 Apri 1975. which the State Legislature is required to give its views, ‘The President only specifies the time in this regard and he can also extend the period so specified. It may be noted that the President while referring the States Re-organisation Bill, 1956 to the respective State Legislatures had asked them to give views within one month's time. The present proposed Bill as learnt has the referral time limit of six weeks. Further, it may be noted that the President is not bound by the views of the State Legislature, Moreover, he can recommend the introduction Of the Bill in Parliament even if the State Legislature under, referral has not given its views within the reference time. Similar is also the case with Parliament. It is not bound by the views even if the State Legislature gives its views within the expiry time of the reference. Parliament can introduce amendments to the Bill which is usually introduced in this regard after being referred to the State Legislature and after obtaining their views. There is no further need of referring the amendment to the State Before 1955 ‘The proviso in Article 3 read "provided that no Bill for the purpose shall be introduced in either House, of Parliament except on the recommendation of the President and unless, where the proposal contained in the Bill affects the boundaries of any State or States specified in Part A or Part B of the First Schedule or the name or names of any such State ‘or States, the views of the Legislature of the State or, as the case may be, of each of the States both with respect to the proposal to introduce the Bill and with respect to the provisions thereof have been ascertained by the President After 1955 ‘The proviso in Article 3 reads “provided that no Bill for the purpose shall be introduced in either House of Parliament except on the recommendation of the President and unless, where the proposal contained in the Bill affects the areas, boundaries or name of any of the States. “the Bill has been referred by the President to the Legislature of that State for expressing its views thereon within such period as may be specified in the reference or within such further period as the President may allow and the Period so specified or allowed has expired [words and letters “specified in Part A or Part B of the First Schedule" omitted by the Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act, 1956]Legislature again for views, The States Re-organisation Bill, 1956 which was referred to the Bombay Legislature proposed for the re-organisation of the State of Bombay into three separate units, namely, () Union Territory of Bombay, (i) the State of Maharashtra, and (li) the State of Gujarat. But instead of three separate units, the Parliament approved and provided for a composite State ‘of Bombay with an amendment. The same amendment was not referred to the State Legislature. Several Members in Lok Sabha raised a point of order regarding admissibility of the amendment, The Speaker then observed as follows: two conditions are necessary for introduction of a Bill under article 3 of the Constitution: Firstly the recommendation of the President and Secondly the sending ofthe Bil to the various Legislatures for getting their views on the proposals...” Under these ‘neither the decisions of the various States are invited nor is it necessary to send every provision of the Bill to the various legislatures. Further, the decisions of the various legislatures are not asked, but only their views oF opinions, So far as this Bill s concerned, both the provisions are satisfied..”. "When once the Bill comes. before the House, the House is in possession of it and it Is in possession of every amendment that is sought to be moved for amending any provisions of the Bill tis open to the States to give their views or opinion on the Bill, but the ultimate authority is given to this House to pass or reject the Bil Speaker thus gave the following ruling: article 3 does not apply to this amendment. It is not necessary to have the President's recommendation and It is not necessary to send the Bill again to the State Legislatures. The amendment is not beyond the scope of tho Bill” ‘A few years later, in 1960, the same matter came for a hearing in the Supreme Court of India in Babula/ vs. the ‘State of Bombay! case. While observing that the Proviso regarding referring the Bill o State legislature in article 3 constitutes a Constitutional limitation upon the power of the Union Legislature to affect a federal unit by the Unilateral act, the Court drawing attention to the Speaker's ruling gave its view that the Constitution does not specifically require a fresh reference during any further slate of the Bill. But the Court further observed that it Would be a serious matter if the Billi substantially replaced by another Bil by the process of amendment. The Court Viewed that while it is debarred from invalidating a particular Act of Parliament granting formation of a State on the ground that its introduction was not recommended by the President, there is nothing in the Constitution preventing it from questioning the validity of such Act on the ground that it was not referred tothe States as required by the Proviso to Article 3 (Excerpts of Judgment given in the box below) “Lak Sabha Debate, 7 August 1956, Col. 2427 2 it Co, 2492 ‘Babul v. the State of Bombay, AIR 1960 SC 51(68) cg eta See OR UUM acm ceca) Dee Cn ee) ‘once this condition has been fulfilled, the future Pee Oe ay Legislature and that the Constitution does not Fee ee ce eg ten ku Crna os It constitutes a Constitutional limitation upon the power of the Union Legislature to affect a federal unit by its unilateral act, and it is the Peete eee) uae Reece Eu een Mera Its a serious matter for consideration whether Pea et a as Union Government is allowed to introduce a Bill DO aCe a ec) Pe oer eae aI Ree Rea SO eee Cas tee eet nt amendment was so drastic as to virtually eee ee) PU un aca) emis ey OOo CU a) invalidating the Act on the ground that its Dorie COR autre Saeed eee ee a ery a Sus Lg Pe en eRe eee ere een ey OCC a SCR aay 1960 SC 51(54)] Jammu and Kashmir forms a part of the ‘territory of India’ as defined in article 1 of the Constitution. But keeping in view the special Constitutional position of the State Under article 370, applicability of article 3 to the Stale of Jammu and Kashmir is under the condition that no Bill providing for increasing or diminishing the area of the State of Jammu and Kashmir or altering the name or boundary of that State shall be introduced in Parliament without the consent of the Legislature of that State The details of the Constitutional provisions concerning formation of States and their re-organisation in Part |, as per articles 1 to 4 of the Constitution of India titled the Union ‘and its Territory is reproduced in the Table given below. “*Consttation (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order 1954; Constitution, of Inia, article 370();D.D. Basu, Commontary on the Constuton of India, VoL 1, . 472i] Be UDR ISL SRO Cc ce cots [(2) The States and the territories thereof shall Cee ers (8) The territory of India shall comprise— or RUC Cay [(b) the Union territories specified in the eee ae) OCC ame LS cere Pea eo Cees eC ORC er] Cr eee Lee Oe Cc Rn) Commune Cumin eed Amendment) Act, 1975, s.5 (w.e.. 26.4.1975). Pe aa (a) form a new State by separation of territory from any State or by uniting two or Dg roe Ce eR em eC gcc OR RU Re Ue Oe ee a ULL eg Ore eas [Provided that no Bill for the purpose shall ete eg een ra eee rercen ncaa ry ee eee Tc er ee oe cee meee Sree Bill has been referred by the President to the ete te ns coe ee as) Pee a eee cree eet eee errors conc Ts Paes] . (1) Any law referred to in article 2 or article 3 ee ue eu Ca em sce Roy ee ae a ric) Ce nem Bee ecu el Preece nL er Le] eee en ona Ruger gee ey Sansa ae Umr To ied DTC ce CO Oe) to be an amendment of this Constitution for ent Cc ee ec ed The Story of States formation so far In the original Constitution, the States which formed the Union of India were classified into three categories viz, Part A, B and C States in the First Schedule of the Constitution. Part A States were the former Governors’ Provinces of British India, which were ruled by Governor and an elected State Legislature. These States were Assam, Bihar, Bombay, Madhya Pradesh (Central Provinces and Berar), Madras, Orissa, Punjab (East Punjab), Uttar Pradesh (United Provinces) and West Bengal. Part B States were former Princely States or groups of Princely States, governed by a Aajoramukh (who was usually the ruler of a constituent State) and an elected legislature. The Aajoramukh was appointed by the President of India. These States were Hyderabad, Jammu and Kashmir, Madhya Bharat, Mysore, Patiala and East Punjab States Union, Rajasthan, Saurashtra and Travancore-Cochin. The Part C States included both the former Chief Commissioners’ Provinces and some Princely States, and each was governed by a Chief Commissioner appointed by the President of India. These States were Ajmer, Bhopal, Bilaspur, Coorg, Delhi, Himachal Pradesh, Kutch, Manipur, Tripura and Vindhya Pradesh. Besides these, there was another category viz, territory specified in Part D of the First Schedule Ze. the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, which was administered by a Lieutenant Governor appointed by the Central Government ‘Over the years however, there has been much change effected in the organisation of States in India. Etfected in conformity with and as per the provisions of the Constitution starting from alteration of boundaries to change of name, one can see creation of altogether new States in India during the span of more than 60 years of independence. Parliament by law brought into existence a new Part A State namely, Andhra Pradesh which, according to the statement made by the Deputy Home Minister in. Parliament on 17 August 1953, was a province which ‘ Repor ofthe StalosFe-rgansaton Comission, 1955, pp. 69, 71,258: 1.D. Basu, Intoaueton af Conituton of Ina, 9. 440approximated as much as possible to a linguistic Province®. ‘Andhra Pradesh came into existence on 1 October 1953, by the State of Andhra Pradesh Act, 1953, On 22 December 1959, the Prime Minister, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru made a statement in Parliament to the effect that a Commission would be appointed to ‘examine “objectively and dispassionately" the question of the Re-organisation of the States of the Indian Union “so that the welfare of the people of each Constituent Unit as well as the Nation as a whole is promoted’. This was followed by the appointment ofthe States Re-organisation Commission (SRC) on 28 December 1953, comprising three members namely, Justice Saiyid Fazi Al, Hriday Nath Kunzru and Kavalam Madhava Panikkar. ‘The Resolution of the Government of India in respect of the Re-organisation said: “The language and culture of an area have an undoubted importance as they represent a pattern of living which is common in that area. In considering a Re-organisation of States, however, there are other Important factors which have also to be borne in mind. ‘The first essential consideration is the preservation and strengthening of the unity and security of India. Financial, economic and administrative considerations are also equally important, not only from the point of view of each State, but for the whole Nation.” ‘As far as re-organisation was concerned, the States Re-organisation Commission made their final recommendations on 30 September 1955. As por the ‘Commission Report, the factors bearing on re-organisation of States in the country wore, ‘cost of change’, ‘unity and security of India’, language and cutture’, financial viability’, ‘requirements of national development plan’, ‘regional planning and balanced economy’, ‘smaller versus larger States’, etc ‘Amendment of certain provisions of the Constitution was necessary to implement the Scheme of States Re-organisation recommended by the States Re-organisation Commission. An enabling Constitution (Ninth Amendment) Bill was introduced in Lok Sabha in this rogard on 18 April 1956. The Bill was referred to a Joint Committee of Parliament which after examination presented its report on 16 July 1956. Both the Houses debated and discussed the recommended scheme of re-organisation of States during April, May, August and September 1956. After receiving President's assent on ‘1 October 1956, the Constitution (Seventh Amendment) ‘Act, 1956 came into force from 1 November 1956. The report of the States Re-organisation Commission recommended fundamental changes both in the nomenclature and description of the constituent units of India. Accordingly, the categorization as Part A, Part B and Part C States was done away with by the Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act 1956, which declared that the territory of India would comprise the territories of the Sates, the Union territories and such other temitories as might be acquired As per the SRC and the following Constitution ee Cu ee) Cece CR COMA UC Ley ee ea rT! et ee ean POO ae ee Coe) Jammu and Kashmir—and six Union territories Ce ae ee eer Cue re uC ea ee) Cerra eae rt) Ree On Omi Tua) eeu Alter the States Re-organisation of 1956, there have been further changes/alterations effected in the boundaries of States in the country with the passage of time, Some new States have been created from the existing ones while some Union territories have attained full Statehood, ‘Subsequent development in this regard from 1960 onwards Jn the country is given in the Table below. Re-organisation/Creation of States after 1960 and till date Gujarat and Maharashtra The State of Bombay was divided into two States Ze. Maharashtra and Gujarat by the Bombay (Re-organisation) Act, 1960) Nagaland Itwas carved out from the State of Assam by the State of Nagaland Act, 1962 comprising the territory of the ‘Naga Hills- Tuensang area which was previously a Tribal Area in the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution, forming part of the State of Assam, Haryana The Punjab Re-organisation Act, 1966, resulted in splitting the State of Punjab into the State of Punjab and Haryana and the Union Territory of Chandigarh with effect from 1.11.1966. The Union Territory of Himachal Pradesh was elevated to the status of State by the State of Himachal Pradesh Act, 1970. Himachal Pradesh First carved out as a sub-State within the State of Assam by 23rd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1969, Later in 1971, it received the status of a full-fledged Stato by the North-Eastern Areas (Re- organisation) Act, 1971 MeghalayaManipur and Both these States were elevated Tripura from the status of Union territories by the North-Eastern ‘Areas (Re-organisation) Act, 1971 ‘Arunachal It received the status of a full Pradesh state by the State of Arunachal Pradesh Act, 1986. Sikkim Sikkim was first given the Status of Associate State by the 35th Constitution Amendment Act, 1974. It got the status of a full State in 1975 by the 36th Constitution Amendment Act, 1975. Goa Goa was separated from the Union territory of Goa, Daman and Diu and made a {ull-fledged State by Goa, Daman and Diu Re-organisation Act, 1987. But Daman and Diu remained as Union territory. Mizoram twas elevated to the status of a {ull State by the State of Mizoram Act, 1986, Chhattisgarh Formed by the Madhya Pradesh Re-organisation Act, 2000. Uttarakhand Formed by the Uttar Pradesh Re- ‘organisation Act, 2000. ‘Jharkhand Formed by the Bihar Re- ‘organisation Act, 2000. Change in the Name of States/Union territories, Name of the old State Name changed ‘Act under which it was effected Mysore Karnataka Mysore State (Alteration of Name) Act, 1973. Madras: Tamil Nadu Madras State (Alteration of Name) Act, 1973, Uttaranchal Uttarakhand Uttaranchal (Alteration of Name) Act, 2006. Orissa Odisha rissa (Atteration of Name) Act, 2011 Pondicherry Puducherry Pondicherry (Alteration of Name) Act, 2006, Union territories becoming States Name of the Union territory _ Name of the State ‘Act Under which it attained Statehood Himachal Pradesh Himachal Pradesh The State of Himachal Pradesh Act, 1970. Mizoram Mizoram ‘The North Eastern Areas (Re-organisation) Act, 1971 ‘Arunachal Pradesh ‘Arunachal Pradesh The State of Arunachal Pradesh Act, 1986. Goa Goa The Goa, Daman and Diu Re-organisation Act, 1987, Sources ensuite +. Constitution of India 2 Report ofthe States Reorganisation Commission, 1955 43. D.D. Basu, Commentary on tho Constution of Ina, VoL 4 DID. Basu, Introduction to Constitution of ina 5, Latest Press ReleasesiPress Reports may be sent to [email protected] Prepared by Shri Pradosh Panda, Additional Director and Shri P.K. Mallick, Joint Director under the supervision of ‘Shri PK. Misra, Additional Secretary and Shri Sayed Kafl Ahmed, Director of Lok Sabha Secretariat. The information. Bulletin is based on published sources and is intended to serve as a background aid, Feedback is welcome and