Reorganisation of States in India: An Analytical Overview for UPSC
The topic of Reorganisation of States in India is crucial for UPSC Prelims (Polity & Modern History) and Mains GS Paper 1 & 2. Questions often focus on the States Reorganisation Act 1956, constitutional provisions (Articles 2 & 3), and the principles guiding state formation, especially linguistic states and regional demands.
Introduction
Post-Indian independence in 1947, India faced the monumental task of unifying a vast, diverse, and geographically fragmented territory. The nascent Indian Union comprised 562 princely states and numerous British provinces, each with distinct administrative, linguistic, cultural, and political identities. The challenge was to create a cohesive but flexible federal structure capable of accommodating this diversity.
The demand for the reorganization of states primarily arose from linguistic, cultural, and administrative considerations. The aspiration was to ensure administrative efficiency, preserve cultural identities, and foster national integration. Jawaharlal Nehru envisioned India as a ‘unity in diversity’, advocating for a polity that respects regional identities while maintaining national solidarity. His vision aimed at balancing these dual objectives, leading to a phased but persistent process of state reorganization.
Background Before Reorganisation
At independence, India was a patchwork of political entities—Princely States administered by local Rajas and Maharajas, and British-established provinces such as Bombay, Bengal, Madras, and United Provinces. Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, as the first Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Home Affairs, played a pivotal role in integrating princely states through diplomacy and force, notably integrating over 500 princely entities into the Indian Union.
However, the demographic and socio-cultural heterogeneity posed significant governance challenges. Administrative management was complicated by linguistic and cultural diversity. The lack of a clear framework for state boundaries often led to regional unrest, demands for autonomy, and the rise of regional movements.
Early issues: The use of different languages, distinct social customs, and varied economic focuses made unified administration complex, creating the need for a systematic approach to redefinition of state boundaries based on linguistic and regional identity.
Dhar Commission (1948)
Purpose: To examine the feasibility of reorganizing states on the basis of linguistic considerations.
Key Recommendations: The Dhar Commission opposed the immediate reorganization of states along linguistic lines. It emphasized administrative convenience and recommended a gradual approach, suggesting that linguistic factors alone should not dictate state boundaries but should be considered alongside economic and administrative factors.
Despite its cautious stance, the commission laid the groundwork for future debates, emphasizing that reorganization should not be solely based on language.
JVP Committee (1948-49)
Members: Jawaharlal Nehru, Vallabhbhai Patel, and Pattabhi Sitaramayya.
Recommendation: This committee stressed that any reorganization should prioritize national unity, security, and economic viability over linguistic considerations. It suggested that the core focus should be on creating administratively manageable units that would ensure stability.
This view reflected concerns about regionalism and potential fragmentation if linguistic reorganization was undertaken too hastily.
Andhra Movement and Creation of Andhra State (1953)
Role of Potti Sriramulu: Potti Sriramulu’s fast-unto-death to demand a separate Andhra State catalyzed the movement for linguistic states. His sacrifice intensified sentiments across South India, emphasizing the need for states based on linguistic identity.
Impact: This protest spurred the government to recognize the importance of linguistic considerations, marking the beginning of a broader recognition that language could serve as a basis for state reorganization.
States Reorganisation Commission (SRC) – 1953
Headed by: Justice Fazl Ali, with members K.M. Panikkar and H.N. Kunzru.
Recommendations: The SRC proposed the restructuring of India into 16 states and 3 union territories. It emphasized linguistic homogeneity, cultural unity, and administrative efficiency. It suggested grouping regions with common language and cultural traits while considering geographical contiguity.
Outcome: The recommendations served as the blueprint for the subsequent major reorganization, emphasizing a pragmatic balance between regional identity and administrative viability.
States Reorganisation Act, 1956
Passed: Parliament, effective from November 1, 1956.
Major changes:
-
The Andhra State was merged with Hyderabad State to form Andhra Pradesh.
-
Mysore was renamed and reorganized as Karnataka.
-
The Bombay State was divided into Maharashtra and Gujarat.
-
Kerala was formed by merging Malabar district, Travancore-Cochin, and the taluk of Kasaragod.
-
Union Territories like Delhi, Himachal Pradesh, and Manipur were established.
Impact: This act profoundly reshaped India’s federal structure. It created regions with linguistic and cultural affinity, which reduced regional tensions and fostered a sense of identity, although occasional demand-driven reorganization persisted.
Subsequent Reorganisations
- 1960: Bombay was divided into Maharashtra and Gujarat.
- 1966: Haryana was carved out of Punjab; Chandigarh was declared a Union Territory.
- 1971: Himachal Pradesh became a full state.
- 1972: Manipur, Meghalaya, and Tripura were formed as full states.
- 2000: Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, and Uttarakhand were created to provide more regional autonomy.
- 2014: Telangana was carved out of Andhra Pradesh after a prolonged movement.
These reorganizations reflect India’s continued effort to align state boundaries with linguistic, cultural, and regional identities, often driven by local demands and regional aspirations.
Constitutional Provisions
- Article 2: Deals with admission or establishment of new states.
- Article 3: Allows Parliament to form new states or alter boundaries and names through legislation.
Procedure: The President, on the advice of the Union government, introduces a bill after consultations with state legislatures. The process underscores India’s federal nature, balancing regional aspirations with national sovereignty.
Challenges and Significance
Reorganisation of states involves a delicate balance:
- Linguistic identity vs. National unity: Ensuring regional languages and identities are preserved without causing fragmentation.
- Economic viability: Small states might face challenges such as resource management and administrative costs.
- Political stability: Frequent changes can lead to unrest or separatist tendencies.
Ongoing demands like Vidarbha ( Maharashtra), Gorkhaland (West Bengal), Bodoland (Assam) highlight regional identities’ persistent influence.
Impact on federalism: The reorganization shaped Centre–State relations, emphasizing cooperative federalism with regional sensitivities.
Way Forward
To sustain India’s unity in diversity, a balanced approach is necessary:
- Prioritize development and governance over purely identity-based demands.
- Strengthen cooperative federalism through dialogue and inclusive policymaking.
- Consider demand-driven reorganization only after thorough socio-economic analysis.
This approach will foster stability, development, and regional harmony.
