Region and the nation: India's approach to diversity

Detail

1. The 1980s: a decade of regional assertion

• Regional aspiration means a group in one region demanding more power, recognition or protection for its people, language or culture.
• In the 1980s, groups in many regions demanded autonomy (the right to run more of their own affairs). Some of these demands went outside the Indian Union.
• The common pattern:
• Groups took up armed assertion (armed protest and militancy).
• The government replied with repression (tough police and army action).

• Electoral processes collapsed. Elections were delayed, boycotted or rigged, or not held at all.

• How most cases ended: through negotiated accords, which are settlements signed between the Union government and the movement's leaders within the Constitution.

• Assam: Assam Accord (1985).
• Punjab: Rajiv Gandhi–Longowal Accord (1985).
• Mizoram: Mizo Accord (1986).
• Kashmir stayed unresolved.

2. India's approach: unity with diversity

• The Indian approach: the nation will not take away the culture of any region or language group.
• Unity with diversity means that people can keep their own language, religion and customs and still belong fully to one nation.
• The European contrast: many European nation-states saw cultural diversity as a threat to the nation. They pushed one language and one culture on everyone.
• Democracy and regional identity:
• In a democracy, parties can openly mobilise (organise people) around regional identity.
• This makes regional aspirations stronger.

• It also brings regional issues into policy-making, so they are handled by talks and votes and not by force.

• The tension runs both ways:

• National unity can overshadow the needs of a region.

• Regional concern can make people blind to the needs of the nation.

• NCERT's question: is regionalism less dangerous than communalism? NCERT shows this with an Uttarakhand poster in seven languages: a regional cause put to the whole nation in many tongues.

3. Regionalism: the concept

• Regionalism means a region standing up politically for its own identity, culture or interests.
• Its range is wide:
• the mildest form is a demand for more autonomy or a separate state within India;

• the most extreme form is secession (breaking away to form a separate country).

• Communalism is different. It means mobilising people by religion against other religious groups.

• The legal tool for meeting regional demands is Article 3. Under it, Parliament can by law:
• form a new state;
• increase or reduce the area of a state;
• change its boundaries;

• change its name. [7]

• Article 3 procedure:

Step	What happens	Requirement
1	The President recommends the Bill	No Bill can be introduced in either House without the President's recommendation [7]
2	The President refers the Bill to the affected state legislature	Only if the Bill affects that state's area, boundaries or name [7]
3	The state legislature gives its views	Within the time the President fixes, which the President can extend [7]
4	Parliament passes the law	Ordinary law-making; Parliament does not have to follow the state's views

• In clauses (a)–(e) of Article 3, "State" includes Union territories. In the proviso (the condition at the end), it does not. [7]

4. Areas of tension since 1947

• Partition, the princely states and reorganisation of states were the first test of nation-building. This is covered in the nation-building chapter.
• Jammu and Kashmir: special status, a dispute with Pakistan and, from 1989, an insurgency.
• Nagaland and Mizoram: secessionist movements in the North-East.
• Dravidian groups in the South briefly toyed with the idea of a separate Dravida country.
• Agitations for linguistic states (states drawn on the basis of the main language spoken): Andhra, Karnataka, Maharashtra and Gujarat.

• The States Reorganisation Act, 1956 (enacted 31 August 1956) redrew state boundaries across India. [5]

• Anti-Hindi protests in Tamil Nadu. These were a reply to pro-Hindi agitations in the north.

• Punjabi Suba movement (a demand for a Punjabi-speaking state):
• It led to the creation of Punjab and Haryana in 1966.

• The legal basis was the Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966, enacted on 18 September 1966. [6]

• New states in 2000: Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand and Jharkhand.

• Telangana (2014; beyond NCERT):
• It was created by the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014 (Act No. 6 of 2014). [4]

• Hyderabad became the common capital of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh for up to ten years. [4]

• India's main method: it met diversity by redrawing internal boundaries, not by suppressing identities.

• What this did not settle:
• Kashmir and Nagaland were not settled by this first phase.
• New challenges came up later in Punjab, Assam and Mizoram (1980s).

5. Why do the challenges come from border states?

NCERT's student asks this question. There are three reasons:

• Distance: these states are far from Delhi. People there feel neglected.
• Ethnic kin across the border: people of the same ethnic group (Naga, Mizo, Punjabi, Kashmiri) live on both sides of the international border.
• External support: hostile neighbours can give arms, training or shelter. This turns local grievances into insurgencies.

6. A typology of regional demands

A typology is a way of sorting things into types. There are four kinds of regional demand:

Type	What is demanded	Examples
Statehood or autonomy within the Union	A separate state, or self-rule inside an existing state	Jharkhand, Bodoland, Gorkhaland
Cultural-linguistic assertion	Respect for a language or culture; resistance to imposed language	Tamil Nadu (anti-Hindi)
Secession	A separate country outside India	Naga, Mizo, Khalistan, Kashmir insurgency
"Sons of the soil"	Jobs and benefits only for locals; hostility to "outsiders"	Assam movement; "Mumbai for Mumbaikars"; domicile job quotas

• Sons of the soil means a movement that claims a region's jobs, land and facilities belong only to its original residents. It treats migrants from other states as outsiders.
• Constitutional limit on residence-based job rules:
• Article 16(3): only Parliament can make a law that requires residence within a state or UT for certain government jobs there. [8]

• A state legislature cannot do this on its own. [8]

• Case study: the Haryana State Employment of Local Candidates Act, 2020

• What it required: private employers had to keep 75% of new jobs paying up to ₹50,000 a month for local candidates, meaning people domiciled in Haryana. [2]
• Who it covered: companies, partnerships, trusts and other employers with 10 or more workers. Government bodies were left out. [2]
• How long it would last: 10 years. [2]
• The exemption route: an employer could ask for an exemption if not enough skilled locals were available. An officer of Deputy Commissioner rank or above would decide. [2]
• Constitutional doubts:
  • It may violate Article 19(1)(g), the right to practise any profession or carry on any business. [2]
  • The Supreme Court has held that residence alone cannot be a ground for job reservation. [2]
  • The 50% ceiling on reservation set by the Supreme Court would be broken. [2]

• Court history:

  • The Punjab and Haryana High Court stayed the Act, which put it on hold. [3]
  • The Supreme Court set aside that stay. [3]
  • The High Court later struck down the Act in 2023 (NCERT-era example; check the current status of the appeal in the Supreme Court).

• Exercise Q1 asks you to match kinds of aspiration to states.

• Exercise Q8 asks you to argue that not all regional movements are separatist:
• most demands were for statehood, autonomy or cultural respect within the Union;
• many were settled by accords or new states.

Prelims Hooks

• Article 3: Parliament can form new states, alter boundaries or rename states by ordinary law. The Bill needs the President's recommendation. [7]
• Trap: the views of the state legislature under Article 3 are not binding on Parliament. Parliament must only wait until the period fixed by the President has expired. [7]
• Article 16(3): only Parliament, not a state legislature, can prescribe a residence requirement for government jobs in a state or UT. [8]
• Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966 → Punjab and Haryana. States Reorganisation Act, 1956 → linguistic reorganisation. [5][6]
• Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014 (Act No. 6 of 2014) → Telangana. Hyderabad became the common capital for up to 10 years. [4]
• 2000 trio: Chhattisgarh (from Madhya Pradesh), Uttarakhand (from Uttar Pradesh), Jharkhand (from Bihar).
• Accords of the 1980s: Punjab and Assam (1985), Mizoram (1986). Kashmir: no accord.
• Haryana local jobs law (2020): 75% quota, jobs up to ₹50,000 a month, employers with 10 or more workers, 10-year life. [2]
• "Sons of the soil" examples: the Assam movement and "Mumbai for Mumbaikars". These are not secessionist.

Mains Points

• Accommodation over suppression: India redrew boundaries under Article 3 and signed accords within the Constitution (1956, 1966, 2000, 2014). This turned many separatist pressures into demands for statehood. It supports the claim that regionalism is mostly not anti-national. (GS-I/II)
• The democratic double edge: parties that mobilise on regional identity make regional feeling stronger. They also pull that feeling into elections and policy-making. When electoral processes collapse, as in Punjab, Assam and Kashmir in the 1980s, regional grievance turns into armed revolt.
• Sons of the soil versus a common market and free movement: domicile quotas like Haryana's 2020 Act come up against Articles 16(3) and 19(1)(g) and the 50% ceiling. They also hurt internal migrants. Better options are skilling and incentives for local hiring. [2][8]
• Border-state vulnerability: distance from Delhi, ethnic kin across the border and external support call for both development and security responses. Trust-building through elections and autonomy, such as Sixth Schedule-type arrangements, is needed alongside these.