Basics
- Context:
- SC hearing Zahoor Ahmed Bhat v. UT of J&K.
- Plea: non-restoration of statehood violates citizens’ rights + federalism (basic structure).
- SC stance:
- Separation of powers → some decisions belong to govt., not judiciary.
- But federal design of Constitution requires statehood restoration.
Relevance : GS 2(Polity and Constitution – Federalism, Statehood)
Constitutional Provisions on State Creation
- Article 1: India = Union of States, not a federation of states.
- Processes of State creation:
- Admission: political unit joins India (e.g., J&K in 1947 through Instrument of Accession).
- Establishment: acquisition under international law (e.g., Goa 1961, Sikkim 1975).
- Formation (Art. 3): reorganisation of existing states → increase, decrease, alter boundaries/names.
- Limits of Art. 3:
- Parliament can diminish a state’s area but cannot convert it into a Union Territory permanently.
- Making J&K a UT is exceptional, not meant to be permanent.
Federal Design of India
- Union vs Federation:
- Word Union chosen deliberately → strong Centre, inseparable unity.
- Yet federalism built into Basic Structure → equitable distribution of powers/resources.
- Balance of power:
- Unitary tilt → Centre strong enough to preserve unity & integrity.
- Federal features → state participation & representation (Rajya Sabha permanent under Art. 83(1)).
- Basic Structure Doctrine (Kesavananda Bharati, 1973):
- Federalism = unamendable feature of the Constitution.
- Arbitrary dilution (e.g., indefinite UT status for J&K) undermines basic structure.
J&K Case Study
- 2019: J&K Reorganisation Act split J&K into UT of J&K + UT of Ladakh.
- Dec 2023 SC verdict:
- Upheld abrogation of Articles 370 & 35A.
- Directed restoration of statehood to J&K + assembly elections.
- Oct 2024: Elections to 90-member Assembly held, but statehood still withheld.
- Criticism:
- Without statehood, federal balance tilted in favour of Union.
- LG holds overriding power, reducing elected govt. authority → weakens democracy.
Constitutional Context
- Why statehood matters:
- Ensures representation of people at Union level.
- Strengthens federal bargain: Centre strong but States empowered.
- Prevents constitutional inconsistency: a UT with an assembly ≠ true federal design.
- Implications of delay:
- Creates trust deficit between Union & people of J&K.
- Weakens cooperative federalism.
- Sets precedent for excessive centralisation.
- Constitutional principle:
- Restoring J&K’s statehood is not just political, but a constitutional necessity to uphold federalism.
What Next?
- Union Government: obligated (per SC) to restore J&K’s statehood.
- Timeline: Centre may justify delay citing ground realities/security concerns, but indefinite postponement undermines federal design.
- Broader lesson:
- Federalism = cornerstone of Basic Structure.
- States cannot be downgraded permanently to UTs without damaging India’s constitutional identity.
