Critically assess the Centre-State coordination challenges in identifying, detaining and deporting illegal immigrants.

Under the Seventh Schedule, citizenship, aliens and expulsion are Union subjects (List I, Entries 17 and 19), while police and public order belong to the States (List II). This means the Centre writes immigration law but has to rely on State machinery to enforce it. The High-Level Committee on Demographic Change (HLCDC) was set up to design a "permanent mechanism" for identifying, detaining and deporting illegal immigrants [1], and this gap is now its main problem.

Coordination challenges

• Identification and data: States told the HLCDC they do not record most of the data it wants by religion. School enrolment, electoral rolls and records of religious structures do not note religion. Only birth registration and deportation records do [2].
• Papers vs. citizenship: Testing voters for "prior-generation birth certificates" may flag poor citizens who lack records rather than foreigners [2].
• The Centre depends on States: The committee itself has to visit States and UTs to get details from the ground [3].
• Detention: The Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025 merges four laws, including the Foreigners Act, 1946 [4]. However, holding centres, police and escorts are all run by the States. MHA sent States its Model Detention Centre Manual in January 2019 only after a Supreme Court order [5].
• Deportation: Sending people back depends on the Centre's diplomacy, but States carry the cost when the home country delays. As of November 2019, Assam held 988 persons in six detention centres [5].
• Political divergence: Border States have different priorities, so their cooperation is selective and uneven.

The other side

• A single central law [4] and a panel that includes the Census Commissioner [1] could bring uniform procedures and combined data.
• Infiltration into border districts is a real security concern. The HLCDC's consultations with States reflect cooperative federalism [3].
• However, collecting data mainly for enforcement risks profiling by religion, which raises issues under Article 15 and the privacy right in Puttaswamy.

Way forward

• Use aggregated Census data rather than new religion-wise surveys, and protect any personal data under the DPDP Act, 2023.
• Agree on a common operating procedure through the Inter-State Council, with the Centre funding holding centres.
• Set time limits on detention and sign bilateral agreements with home countries on taking back their nationals.

Identification, detention and deportation break down wherever Union law meets State capacity. A shared operating procedure, with Centre-funded holding centres and privacy safeguards on data, can secure the borders while protecting citizens' rights. That would also respect the constitutional promise of equality and cooperative federalism.