Is the Indian Constitution a federal structure ?

 Why is it in the news?

Hon’ble Shri DY Chandrachud, the Chief Justice of India, while delivering inaugural Lok Satta lecture in Mumbai on 26th October, said “States and union are both creatures of the constitution. They must act in deference to their legislative boundaries in finding meaningful solutions to modern day problems. Our ability to address these challenges is the litmus test for our imperfect federalism and the framers’ faith in it. If federalism in the years gone by was about adjusting to political realities in terms of legislative powers, in the years to come should be evaluated based on its ability to foster democracy and constitutional ideals of equality, liberty, dignity and fraternity. “

Introduction

The Indian Constitution does not use the word federation. Instead, it uses the term union. Article 1 says that India, that is , Bharat shall be a union of states. It means that unlike federation, the central government is not the outcome of agreement among federating units. Secondly,  the federating units have no right to secede from the central government. However, the Indian constitution postulates a federation with a centralising tendency. In the Bommai case (1994), the Supreme Court laid down that the constitution of India is federal and federalism is its basic feature. The court held that the states have independent constitutional existence. They are not subordinates or agents of the centre. Within the sphere allotted to them, states are supreme. 

What is Federalism ?

1.Federalism pre-supposes a dual government where both central and the state governments derive their power from the constitution. The power is divided between the national and state governments with clear boundaries. Secondly, it has a written constitution where both central and state governments have defined jurisdictions.  An independent judiciary which acts as the guardian of the constitution. Bicameral legislature is established whereby the second chamber represents the interests of the states. Federalism pre-supposes a rigid constitution so that no constitutional amendment can be made by ordinary legislation. In a federal structure, supremacy of the constitution is of paramount importance and thus, whenever Parliament or State legislature exceeds its power or does not conform to the provisions of the constitution, the laws passed by the Parliament or state assemblies are struck down. 

2.On the contrary, in a unitary government, all powers are vested in the central government. Moreover, the central government creates regional governments like in the UK. 

Federal features of the Indian Constitution

1.The constitution of India establishes a dual polity consisting of the union and state governments. At present, there are 28 states. They have been assigned powers separately. They are not subordinate to the Union Government. While, the Union Government deals with foreign, defence, currency, communication and so on the state governments have been bestowed with to work for regional interests like public order, agriculture, health, local self government, police etc. 

2. The Seventh Schedule of the constitution of India consists of three lists - The Union List comprising 100 subjects, the State List comprising 59 subjects and the Concurrent List comprising 52 subjects. Both the central and state governments can make laws on the subjects included in the concurrent list. But in case of any conflict, the laws made by the Parliament would supersede the laws made by state assemblies under concurrent lists. However, unlike the US constitution, the residuary subjects are vested in the central government. 

3.Our constitution clearly gives its supremacy. Thus, in case the Parliament or State Legislature exceeds its powers or its limitations, the laws passed by the legislature or parliament are declared null and void by the Supreme Court under judicial review. 

4. Ours is a written constitution. The constitution was drafted and prepared by the constituent assembly represented by 299 members from the nook and corner of the country. It contains 470 articles and 12 schedules. The constitution has clearly discussed and demarcated  the structures and functions of the central, state and local governments. 

5.Our constitution is a mixture of flexibility and rigidity. While some of the provisions of the constitution can be amended by both Houses of the Parliament with special majority, the federal structure like the central state relations, judiciary, inter-state commerce can only be amended by both Houses of Parliament and  the concurrence of half of the state legislature by the simple majority. 

6. Our constitution has made provisions for an independent judiciary by securing the tenures of judges, fixed conditions of service and independence from the executive. It has also been assigned the task to settle the disputes between the union and the state governments or between state governments. 

7. Our constitution lays down a bicameral legislature consisting of an Upper House (Rajya Sabha) and a Lower House (Lok Sabha). While the Lower House is elected on the basis of universal suffrage, the Upper House is represented by states to protect their interests.  

8.The judicial intervention by the Supreme Court further strengthened the federal features of our constitution. For example, the Supreme Court held that a bill passed by the state legislature and presented before the Governor for his assent, cannot withhold the bill indefinitely. Rather a Governor can withhold with the assent of the bill only to send it for reconsideration, thereby circumscribing the discretionary power of the Governor.   Similarly, in the Bommai case (1994), the Supreme Court held that the test of the majority can only be held at the floor of the House, thereby, limiting the misuse of article 356 by the Governor for the imposition of  the President’s Rule in the state. 

9. Assertion of autonomy by states, demand for more financial grants by the states from the divisible pool of the central proceeds, disputes between states over the sharing of river water, territorial disputes between different states, creation of new states and finally emergence of regional parties to reduce regional disparities and for balanced regional development are some of the important federal trends that are being reflected in the working of the constitution of India for the last 75 years. 

Centralising features of the constitution of India  

There are certain centralising features which contrast the Indian constitution from the US constitution in so far as  the federal features are concerned. These are 

• Emergency Provisions under articles 352, 356 and 360

• Integrated judiciary 

• All India Services 

• Integrated audit system

• Integrated election commission

• Appointment/ Powers and Functions of Governor

• Parliament's authority even in the matters relating to the state list

• Single citizenship 

• Single constitution

• No equality of state representation in the Rajya Sabha

• More powers to the union government than state governments 

• The President enjoys absolute veto over state bills 

Conclusion

1. The Indian constitution postulates cooperative federalism where the union and state governments work together to iron out the differences that arise in governance to achieve the common goal of development. 

2. The states are in no way dependent upon the centre for the legislative or the executive authority. Both the centre and the state derive their power from the constitution itself. 

3.However, to strengthen the unity and integrity of India, certain exceptional provisions were made to face the challenges in abnormal/ exceptional situations so that in case of emergencies , India acts as a single powerful body. That’s why provisions of emergency, flexibility in the amendment of the constitution and a strong central government have been made. 

Social Changes during the British Period (1757 - 1947)

 

A colonial economy

1. British rule converted India into a colonial economy.

2. The Indian economy was subordinated to the interest of its mother country, Britain.

3. British rule not only changed the political master at the top but also changed the substructure of the Indian economy like the village self sufficient economy. 

4. Britishers never became an integral part of Indian life. They always remained foreigners and syphoned off huge amounts of money from India.

Artisans and craftsmen were destroyed

1. Because of one way free trade in India after 1813, Indian manufactured goods could not compete with the goods produced on a mass scale by steam operated machines

2. Cotton weaving and spinning industries of India were hard hit.

3. Officers of East India company compelled artisans to sell the goods below the market price and hired their services below the prevailing wages. This led to the abandonment of the hereditary professions by a large number of artisans and craftsmen and they overcrowded into agriculture. 

4. Towns and cities like Dhaka, Surat, Murshidabad, Patna declined. 

5. The population dependent on agriculture increased from 63.7% to 70% between 1901-1941.

Peasants became poorer 

1. Because of the Izaredari system introduced by Lord Clive and Warren Hastings , agricultural lands were sold to the highest bidders. This led to the uprooting of old zamindars because they fell into arrears.  Their lands were confiscated and sold to the highest bidders like merchants and traders or moneylenders. Permanent settlement in Bengal presidency introduced by Lord Cornawalis fixed the land revenue to be paid by the revenue farmers (zamindars) to the British Government in perpetuity. However, revenue farmers could raise the rent to be paid by the peasants. Thus, peasantry were compelled to be at the mercy of zamindars.  In the Ryotwari system in Madras and Bombay presidency, the high revenue demand deprived most of the peasants from their lands and they fell into debt trap. Similar situation was obtained in Agra, Awadh and Punjab where Mahalwari system was introduced. Because of the excessive demands of land revenue by the British Government, most of the lands of peasants were confiscated and were sold to merchants, traders, money lenders or contractors. The condition of peasantry throughout the length and breadth of India deteriorated during the British rule.  

Watch Full Video In Hindi On Youtube By Clicking on the Icon🔻

Rise of Money lenders

1. Because of the land revenue policy of the Britishers and new legal system, a class of money lenders arose in India.

2. These money lenders could seize the lands of peasants. If they fail in arrears.

3. In 1911, the total rural debt was estimated at Rs. 300 crores but by 1937, it amounted to Rs. 1800 crores.

4.  Most of the land in Deccan were captured by money lenders 

5. That’s why during the period of 1857 revolt the target of attack of peasants was always on money lenders. 

Rise of absentee landlordism in rural areas 

1. Because of the land revenue policy of the Britishers, the old zamindari states were utterly ruined and were forced to sell their zamindari rights in Bengal presidency.

2. By 1815, half of the landed property in Bengal had been transferred from old zamindars to new zamindars who lived in town, giving rise to absentee landlordism in India.

3. These landlords became the chief political supporters of the Britishers and opposed the rising national movement.

Rise of Intermediaries 

1. The new landlords found it convenient to sublet their rights to collect rent to other eager people on profitable terms.

2. As the rent of land increased, the number of intermediaries also increased and sometimes it went up as high as 50.

3. The condition of tenants became pitiable because they had to bear the brunt of exorbitant rents. 

Rise of Indian Capitalists

1. Under the impact of the industrial revolution, jute and textile industries were founded by Indians.

2. By 1879, there were 56 textile mills employing 43000 workers.

3. By 1882, there were 20 jute mills. 

4. Sugar mills, woollen textiles, iron steel works, cement, paper, matches, glass industries developed during the 1930s .

5. However, most of the modern Indian industries were  owned or controlled by British capitals.

6. Foreign capital easily overwhelmed Indian capital on many of the Indian Industries.

7. Indian owned industries had a very stunted growth. Focus was more on consumer industries rather than basic industries

8. Although Indian capitalists formed a small part of the Indian population, they represented new technology, a new system of economic organisations, new social relations and an all India outlook.

Rise of modern working class

1. Because of the Industrialisation of India in the second half of the 20th century, a new working class arose in India.

2. By 1905, there were 206 cotton mills employing 1,96,000 workers. Similarly, in jute industries 1,15,000 workers were employed by 1901. The coal mining industry employed nearly 1,00,000 of workers in 1906.  

3. There were 2.3 million workers employed in 1951.

4. The condition of the workers was very pitiable. There were no housing facilities available for them. There was no fixation of work hours. 

5. The British government introduced the first Indian factory act in 1881, fixing nine working hours for children between 7 years to 12 years. 

6. The second factory act 1891, gave a weekly holiday to all workers. Women were not to work more than 11 hours per day and for children it was reduced to 7 hours. 

The policy of divide and rule Growth of communalism in India

1. The unity of Hindu and Muslims during the 1857 revolt scared Britishers. So, they started the policy of divide and rule.

2. First of all they confiscated lands of Muslim zamindars and distributed those lands to Hindu zamindars and peasants. 

3. Educated Hindus were preferred in government jobs. Muslims were neglected.

4. But after 1890, Britishers reversed their policy when they saw that Hindus are demanding Indianization of government jobs, representation in assemblies.

5. Britishers helped in the establishment of Muslim league in 1906 to safeguard the exclusive interest of Muslims.

6. In the 1909 act, Muslims were given separate electorates and thereafter in 1919 act, Christians, Europeans, Sikhs were given separate electorates. 

7. The separate electorate to different communities was meant to destroy the rising Indian nationalism in India.

Hostility to educated Indians

1. The British established three universities at Calcutta, Bombay and Madras.

2. The British appreciated the educated Indians who did not participate in the 1857 revolt. But British officials now became totally against it after 1890 when these educated Indians demanded more and more share in the governance. 

Social reforms

1. The British abolished sati system, permitted widow remarriage, banned infanticide, raised marriageable age of girls. 

2. But after 1857, the Britishers abandoned social reform, fearing that any further social reform may create a reaction of people against the Britishers.

Racial Antagonism 

1. The British always maintained social distance from Indians and openly asserted the doctrine of racial supremacy.

Weakening of caste system and emancipation of women

1. Because of the social reforms by Raja Ram Mohan Rai, Dayanand Saraswati, Self respect movement in South India, rigidity of caste weakened.

2.  Women participated in large numbers in the national movement launched by Gandhi ji.

3. Education among women further strengthened their position in society

Conclusion

1. Every class and every section of Indian society gradually discovered that its interests were suffering in the hands of foreign rulers.

2. Peasants, artisans and craftsmen, educated Indians, the rising Indian capitalists and workers felt that the British rule was not good for them and for India.

3. The exploitative British domination gave rise to Indian nationalism. 

4. Only zamindars, landlords and the princes supported British imperialism. Even a section of them joined the national movement. 

5. The British rule for 200 years in India affected almost all classes of India. The Britishers took away $44 trillion from India in its 200  years rule.

6. Thus, British rule gave rise to new classes of absentee zamindars, moneylenders and princes who were staunch supporters of British Raj. On the other hand, a new capitalist class, industrial workers and educated middle class arose in India. They spread nationalist ideas and were completely opposed to communalism.