Reviewing the relationship: Sarkaria, Punchhi and the coordination bodies

Detail

Why reviews were needed

• Centre-State relations are the sharing of law-making, executive and financial power between the Union and the states (Parts XI and XII, Seventh Schedule).
• By the early 1980s, many states had complaints:
• Art. 356 (President's rule, where the Union takes over a state's government when the state's constitutional machinery fails) was used often.
• Governors were seen as agents of the ruling party at the Centre.

• Concurrent List laws were made without asking the states.

• The Union's answer was to appoint commissions to study the relationship and to set up coordination bodies. These are forums where the Centre and the states meet and settle problems by talking.

Sarkaria Commission (1983–88)

• Sarkaria Commission: the first Commission on Centre-State Relations. It was set up in 1983 under Justice R.S. Sarkaria, a retired Supreme Court judge.
• It submitted its report in 1987–88 with 247 recommendations [3].
• Basic stand: it did not want a major structural change or a weaker Centre. It wanted the existing system to work fairly, with more consultation.
• Main recommendations:
• A permanent Inter-State Council under Art. 263.
• Art. 356 only as a last resort, after every other way to fix the problem has failed.
• Governors:
  • The Governor should be a non-partisan person (not active in party politics) from outside the state.
  • The Governor should be chosen after consulting the Chief Minister.
  • The Governor should normally complete the five-year term. Removal before then should happen only for compelling reasons, and the Governor should get a chance to explain [11].
• Reservation of bills (the Governor sending a state bill to the President under Art. 200/201) should be used sparingly.
• The Union should consult the states before making laws on Concurrent List subjects.
• The zonal councils should be revived.
• The all-India services (IAS, IPS, IFoS) should be kept, because they bind the Union and the states together.

• Governors' legal duties: state legislatures should not give the Governor statutory powers that the Constitution did not foresee, such as extra roles under state laws [12].

• Implementation: by November 2001, the Inter-State Council had taken a view on 230 of the 247 recommendations [3]:

• 108 had been implemented;
• 87 were being implemented;

• 35 had been rejected.

• NCERT (Class 11, Ch 7) cites the Sarkaria advice on non-partisan Governors as one way to reduce Centre-State friction.

NCRWC (2002)

• NCRWC (National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution) was chaired by Justice M.N. Venkatachaliah and reported in 2002.
• It again asked for restraint in using Art. 356.
• On Governors, it said a Governor should normally be allowed to finish the full term. The Chief Minister should be consulted before a Governor is removed early [11].

Punchhi Commission (2007–10)

• Punchhi Commission: the second Commission on Centre-State Relations.
• It was set up on 27 April 2007 under Justice M.M. Punchhi, a retired Chief Justice of India.
• It reported on 31 March 2010.

• It made 273 recommendations in seven volumes [2].

• The seven volumes [2]:

• Vol. I: History of Centre-State relations;
• Vol. II: Constitutional governance and management of Centre-State relations;
• Vol. III: Centre-State financial relations and planning;
• Vol. IV: Local self-governments and decentralised governance;
• Vol. V: Internal security, criminal justice and Centre-State cooperation;
• Vol. VI: Environment, natural resources and infrastructure;

• Vol. VII: Socio-economic development, public policy and good governance.

• Key recommendations:

• A fixed five-year term for Governors.
• A Governor could be removed only by a resolution of the state legislature. This means deleting the words "during the pleasure of the President" from Art. 156 [11].
• Governors should not be university chancellors. The office could get drawn into controversy, so the Governor's role should be limited to what the Constitution provides [12].
• "Localised emergency" under Arts. 355–356: the Union could take over a district or part of a state instead of the whole state.
• Central forces could be deployed for short periods without the state's consent, for example during communal violence.

• A more active Inter-State Council.

• Follow-up: the Standing Committee of the Inter-State Council, chaired by the Union Home Minister, studied all 273 recommendations [2]:

• 11th meeting (9 April 2017): it considered the 67 recommendations of Vol. II;
• 12th meeting (25 November 2017): it considered the 118 recommendations of Vols. III, IV and V;
• its views were then sent to the Inter-State Council for a decision.

Governors: who can remove them, and the reform proposals

Point	Constitution (Art. 156)	Sarkaria (1988)	NCRWC (2002)	Punchhi (2010)
Tenure	5 years, but holds office "during the pleasure of the President"	Should normally complete 5 years	Should normally complete term	Fixed 5 years
Removal	President, on the Union Cabinet's advice	Only for compelling reasons; the Governor gets a chance to explain	Consult the CM first	Only by a resolution of the state legislature

• B.P. Singhal v. Union of India (2010) [11]:
• The Union can remove a Governor without giving reasons.
• The removal must not be arbitrary, capricious or unreasonable. It needs rare and exceptional reasons.
• Losing the Centre's confidence, or disagreeing with its policies, is not enough.

• Courts can review a removal (judicial review).

• None of the commission proposals on removal has been made law. Art. 156 is unchanged [11].

• Chancellor issue in the states [12]:
• West Bengal (2022): a bill named the Chief Minister, instead of the Governor, as chancellor of 31 state universities.
• Tamil Nadu (April 2022): bills moved the power to appoint vice-chancellors to the state government.
• Maharashtra (2021): an amendment limited the Governor's choice of vice-chancellor.

Inter-State Council (Art. 263)

• Inter-State Council (ISC): a body the President may set up under Art. 263 if it serves the public interest. It has three duties:
• (a) inquire into and advise on disputes between states;
• (b) study subjects of common interest to the Union and the states, or to some states;

• (c) recommend better coordination of policy and action.

• How it was set up: following Sarkaria, it was created by a Presidential Order (notification) dated 28 May 1990, with the Prime Minister as chair [3].

• Members:
• the Prime Minister (chair);
• Chief Ministers of all states and of UTs with legislative assemblies;
• Administrators of UTs without assemblies;

• six Union Cabinet ministers, including the Home Minister, nominated by the PM.

• Standing Committee (from 1996): chaired by the Union Home Minister. It prepares matters for the full Council, as it did with the Punchhi report [2].

• Nature: it is only advisory. Its advice does not bind anyone, and it is not a court.
• How often it meets: rarely. It has met 11 times. The 11th meeting, on 16 July 2016, came after a gap of about 10 years [4].

Zonal Councils

• Zonal Councils: statutory bodies (created by an Act of Parliament, not by the Constitution) that only give advice.
• Five councils were set up in 1957 under ss. 15–22 (Part III) of the States Reorganisation Act 1956 [5].

• The five councils are Northern, Central, Eastern, Western and Southern.

• Members [5]:

• The Union Home Minister chairs all five councils.
• The Chief Ministers of the states in the zone and the Administrators/Lieutenant Governors of its UTs are members.

• One Chief Minister is vice-chair. This post rotates every year.

• Issues they handle: border disputes, linguistic minorities, inter-state transport, internal security and other shared regional problems.

• Revival after 2014:
• Only 5 meetings of the councils were held in the 7 years before 2014 [7].

• From 2014 to December 2023, 55 meetings were held. Of these, 26 were Zonal Council meetings and 29 were Standing Committee meetings [6].

• The north-eastern states are covered by the North Eastern Council, not by these five councils.

North Eastern Council (NEC)

• North Eastern Council: a statutory body set up under the North-Eastern Council Act 1971 (Act No. 84 of 1971) [8]. It began work in 1972 at Shillong.
• NEC (Amendment) Act 2002 (No. 68 of 2002) [8][9]:
• The NEC stopped being only an advisory body and became the regional planning body for the North-East.

• Sikkim was added as the eighth member state. For Sikkim, the NEC draws up specific projects and schemes and reviews how they are carried out.

• 2018 repositioning: the Union Cabinet made the Union Home Minister the ex-officio chairman of the NEC [10]. The Minister of DoNER (Development of North Eastern Region) is vice-chair.

Prelims Hooks

• Sarkaria Commission: set up in 1983, reported in 1988, made 247 recommendations. Punchhi Commission: set up in 2007, reported in 2010, made 273 recommendations in 7 volumes.
• Inter-State Council: created under Art. 263 by a Presidential Order of 28 May 1990. It is not a body named in the Constitution with a fixed form, and it is not statutory. It is only advisory.
• Chairs: the ISC is chaired by the Prime Minister. The ISC Standing Committee, all five Zonal Councils and the NEC (since 2018) are chaired by the Union Home Minister.
• Zonal Councils are statutory, created under the States Reorganisation Act 1956 (ss. 15–22). They are not constitutional bodies. The vice-chair is a Chief Minister and the post rotates every year.
• NEC: created under the NEC Act 1971. The 2002 amendment made it a regional planning body and added Sikkim as the 8th member.
• "Localised emergency" for a district or part of a state was proposed by the Punchhi Commission, not Sarkaria.
• Proposal to remove a Governor only by a state legislature resolution: this is Punchhi. Proposal for a Governor from outside the state, chosen after consulting the CM: this is Sarkaria.
• B.P. Singhal (2010): a Governor can be removed at the President's pleasure (Art. 156), but not arbitrarily, and the removal can be judicially reviewed.
• ISC meetings: 11 in all. The last was on 16 July 2016, after a gap of about 10 years.

Mains Points

• Commissions as "fix the practice, not the structure": Sarkaria and Punchhi both kept a strong Centre. Their focus was consultation (on Concurrent List laws and on choosing Governors) and restraint (Art. 356 as a last resort). This shows that Indian federalism is reformed by conventions more than by amendments. Weakness: few of the key Governor reforms have been made law, so B.P. Singhal (2010) is the only legal check.
• Office of the Governor: use the commission proposals as answer points:
• fixed tenure;
• removal by the state legislature;
• no chancellor role;
• consultation with the CM.

Link them to recent disputes over Governors as university chancellors (West Bengal and Tamil Nadu, 2022).

• Cooperative federalism needs working forums:
• The ISC has met only 11 times since 1990 and its advice does not bind anyone.
• Zonal Councils met far more often after 2014.

• Reform: fixed annual ISC meetings, a permanent secretariat with research capacity, and a duty to follow up on its advice.

• Security vs. autonomy trade-off: Punchhi's "localised emergency" and short-term central deployment without consent could stop Art. 356 being used on a whole state. Critics say it also lets the Centre enter "public order" and "police" (State List, entries 1–2) without asking the state.