The creation of a 'mega port' category under the Indian Ports Act, 2025 blurs the traditional major / non-major port divide. Examine its implications for port-led development and cooperative federalism.

The Seventh Schedule divides ports into two groups. Major ports are in the Union List (Entry 27) and non-major ports are in the Concurrent List (Entry 31). Section 73 of the Indian Ports Act, 2025 adds a third label based on size. In September 2026, MoPSW used it to notify Deendayal, JNPA, Paradip and the privately run Mundra port as "mega ports" [1]. The label could matter a great deal, but for now it carries no real powers.

How the divide is blurred

• The three major ports were notified under Section 73(2). Mundra, a non-major port run by APSEZ, was notified under Section 73(3). One label now covers ports with different owners and under different governments [1].
• However, each mega port keeps its major or non-major status. The Act sets up no separate rules for mega ports, and PRS calls the category's purpose "unclear" [2][3].

Implications for port-led development

• Positives:
• The label depends on size, not ownership. A private port sits alongside public ones, so they can compete on equal terms [1].

• The Centre can use it to give these ports priority in the national perspective plan, on which the MSDC advises, and under Sagarmala [3].

• Concerns:

• No benefits come with the tag, such as funds, tariff freedom or faster clearances. It may stay symbolic [2].
• The criteria have not been made public, so other ports cannot measure themselves against them [1].
• If public money for connectivity goes to Mundra, it may look like a subsidy to a single private operator.

Implications for cooperative federalism

• Positive: The criteria were notified on 30 July 2026 after consulting State governments, which sets a good precedent [1].
• Concerns:
• States are consulted only when the criteria are set. The Centre alone decides which ports are notified [2].
• Mundra's State Maritime Board licenses the port and fixes its tariffs, but the port now also carries a label given by the Centre. This creates two layers of control [3][1].
• The MSDC is chaired by the Union Minister and only gives advice, so the forum meant to settle disputes leans towards the Centre [3].

Way forward

• Publish the criteria and state what benefits mega-port status brings.
• Link the label to planning decisions through the MSDC, not through one-sided notifications.
• Set the same conditions for public and private ports.

Overall, the mega-port label bridges the constitutional major/non-major divide by size, but for now it has no powers attached. It can support port-led growth under Sagarmala if three things happen: the criteria are transparent, benefits do not depend on ownership, and coastal States get a real say through the MSDC. That would also respect the Seventh Schedule's division of powers and cooperative federalism.