Analyse the interplay between the Centre and the State in declaring 'disturbed areas', with reference to Manipur.

Under Section 3 of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958, a 'disturbed area' may be declared either by the Governor of the State or by the Central Government [1]. This concurrent authority makes every declaration a negotiated federal act rather than a unilateral one — a point Manipur's recent record illustrates sharply.

Powers are shared, accountability is not

• Section 3 vests the notifying power in the State's Governor and the Centre; but Section 6 vests sanction for prosecuting armed forces personnel solely in the Central Government [1].
• The State thus controls the ground-level law-and-order assessment, while the Centre controls the forces deployed and their legal protection [1].

State-led rollback (2022–23)

• Manipur's Home Department issues its own Section 3 notifications, and citing an improved security situation it progressively withdrew coverage from valley police stations from April 2022 [4].
• The Centre endorsed and extended this calibration, further reducing disturbed areas in Nagaland, Assam and Manipur from 1 April 2023 [2].

Centre-led reassertion (2024–26)

• After ethnic violence from 3 May 2023, the rollback was partly reversed and valley police stations were renotified in November 2024.
• President's Rule (Feb 2025–Feb 2026) collapsed the distinction altogether: the Governor's Section 3 power was exercised under Union authority.
• Today the whole State stays notified except 13 police stations in five valley districts [3].

The structural asymmetry

• Six-monthly renewals need no parliamentary approval, unlike a proclamation under Article 356; a State's dissent carries persuasive, not legal, force.
• Yet notifications are now drawn police-station-wise, showing the Centre does respond to State assessments [3].

The interplay is therefore cooperative during de-escalation and Centre-dominated during escalation. A statutory duty to record reasons, consult the State, and table renewal notifications in Parliament — alongside the Jeevan Reddy Committee's proposal to relocate these powers into a general law [5] — would align the disturbed-area regime with cooperative federalism and Article 21 safeguards.