DAW 12th February 2026, Mains Answer Writting 2027

DAW 12th February 2026, Mains Answer Writting 2027

Question

What are the constitutional provisions governing the creation of new states in India? Should India revisit the principles of the SRC in the 21st century? Justify your answer.

(15 marks 250 words).

Model Answer

Approach:

  • Introduction (2–3 lines)

  • Briefly introduce India’s constitutional framework for state reorganisation and mention the role of the States Reorganisation Commission.

  • Body

  • Explain the constitutional provisions related to the creation and reorganisation of states.

  • Critically examine the relevance of the States Reorganisation Commission (SRC) principles in the present-day context.

  • Suggest a balanced, rule-based framework as the way forward.

  • Conclusion

  • Summarise the need for a balanced, criteria-based approach that preserves national unity while addressing governance challenges.

Introduction India’s Constitution provides a flexible federal framework that allows the reorganisation of states to meet changing administrative and developmental needs while preserving national unity. Since Independence, the States Reorganisation Commission (SRC) has shaped state boundaries, primarily on linguistic lines. However, in the contemporary context of governance challenges and regional aspirations, it has become pertinent to examine both the constitutional provisions for creating new states and the continued relevance of SRC principles. Body Constitutional Provisions Governing the Creation of New States The Indian Constitution provides Parliament with wide and flexible powers to reorganise states, reflecting the vision of an indestructible Union with destructible states. Key Provisions

  • Article 1 declares India as a “Union of States”, implying that states are not sovereign entities with guaranteed territorial integrity.

  • Articles 2 and 3 empower Parliament to:

  • Admit or establish new states.

  • Form new states by separation or merger.

  • Alter the area, boundaries, or names of existing states.

  • Presidential Recommendation:

  • A reorganisation Bill can be introduced only with the prior recommendation of the President.

  • Consultation with State Legislature:

  • The affected state legislature must be asked to express its views within a specified time.

  • As clarified by the Supreme Court in Babulal Parate v. State of Bombay (1960), these views are consultative and not binding.

  • Ordinary Legislative Process:

  • Reorganisation laws require only a simple majority, not a constitutional amendment under Article 368.

  • Judicial Safeguard:

  • In R.C. Poudyal v. Union of India, the Supreme Court held that Parliament’s power under Article 3 is wide but not immune from basic structure review, particularly federalism and constitutional morality.

  • This framework was consciously designed by the Constituent Assembly to allow territorial flexibility for governance and national integration.

Should India Revisit the Principles of the States Reorganisation Commission (SRC) in the 21st Century? The SRC reorganised states primarily on linguistic lines to ensure cultural cohesion, administrative convenience, and national unity in a newly independent nation. While this approach stabilised the republic, India’s governance challenges have evolved significantly. Arguments for Revisiting SRC Principles

  • Administrative Scale Has Become a Governance Constraint

  • States such as Uttar Pradesh (240+ million), Maharashtra, and Bihar (≈130 million each) are larger than most European countries.

  • Such mega-states are administratively unwieldy, creating vast geographic and bureaucratic distances between citizens and decision-makers.

  • Governance benefits often fail to reach peripheral regions due to scale-induced inefficiencies.

  • Shift from Linguistic to Developmental Logic

  • Recent state formations such as Uttarakhand, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand (2000) and Telangana (2014) were driven by:

  • Regional neglect

  • Developmental disparities

  • Administrative inefficiency

  • These were not linguistic demands, indicating that SRC’s original criteria are no longer sufficient.

  • Demand for Responsive and Decentralised Governance

  • Smaller states enable closer interaction between administrators and citizens.

  • There is better implementation of welfare schemes, law and order, and public service delivery.

  • Popular demands for states like Vidarbha or Gorkhaland reflect governance deficits rather than identity politics alone.

  • Risks of Ad-hoc and Populist Reorganisation

  • Legal scholarship warns that piecemeal, politically reactive state creation risks:

  • Encouraging competitive regionalism

  • Ignoring equally deserving regions

  • Creating fiscal-dependent states

  • Continuous reorganisation without objective criteria may strain federal stability and national cohesion.

  • Ad-hoc, politically reactive state creation (such as Telangana) should be replaced with a permanent, evidence-based mechanism.

  • Need for Objective and Permanent Institutional Mechanism

  • There is a need for a permanent standing commission to objectively examine demands for the creation of new states.

  • Such a body would assess proposals on criteria including economic and financial viability, administrative efficiency, developmental outcomes, and their impact on national unity and federal balance.

  • This approach would ensure a transparent, consistent, and evidence-based process, replacing ad-hoc political decision-making in state reorganisation.

Why SRC Principles Should Not Be Abandoned Entirely

  • Safeguarding National Unity

  • The SRC deliberately rejected religion and ethnicity as bases for state formation.

  • This approach helped prevent political fragmentation and remains vital for maintaining India’s unity amid diversity.

  • Preventing Excessive Fragmentation

  • Unrestrained creation of states may encourage competitive regionalism and identity-based demands.

  • Frequent reorganisation risks weakening the coherence of the Union.

  • E.g., Following the creation of Telangana, renewed demands emerged for Vidarbha, Bundelkhand, and Gorkhaland, illustrating the domino effect of ad-hoc reorganisation.

  • Fiscal Federalism and Resource Constraints

  • Creation of new states increases administrative and governance costs.

  • Smaller or economically weak states may become structurally dependent on central transfers, straining fiscal federalism.

  • E.g., Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh, despite statehood, continue to depend significantly on central transfers for revenue support.

  • Administrative and Economic Viability

  • Not all demands for statehood are supported by adequate revenue base, infrastructure, or administrative capacity.

  • SRC’s emphasis on viability remains relevant to prevent the creation of non-functional units.

  • Limits of Statehood as a Governance Solution

  • Statehood alone does not guarantee improved governance.

  • Administrative efficiency depends more on institutional capacity and political will than territorial size.

Way Forward

  • Retaining Core SRC Principles

  • India should retain the SRC’s foundational emphasis on national unity, administrative coherence, and economic viability.

  • These principles act as safeguards against fragmentation and unsustainable state formation.

  • Expanding Criteria for State Reorganisation

  • Statehood demands should also be assessed on additional parameters such as economic and fiscal sustainability, governance efficiency, service delivery outcomes, regional development disparities, and geographic manageability.

  • Democratic aspirations of the people and the impact on federal balance should form part of the evaluation.

  • Institutionalising the Process

  • The establishment of a permanent State Reorganisation Commission would enable a transparent, consistent, and evidence-based approach to evaluating demands as suggested by Shashi Tharoor.

  • Such a mechanism would replace politically reactive decisions with long-term administrative planning.

  • Moving Towards Rule-Based Federalism

  • A structured framework would ensure predictability, strengthen cooperative federalism, and balance regional aspirations with national interests.

  • This would strengthen cooperative federalism and ensure long-term administrative stability.

Conclusion:

The Constitution deliberately empowers Parliament to reshape India’s internal boundaries, recognising that governance structures must evolve with time. While the SRC provided a foundational framework for linguistic integration, 21st-century challenges demand a broader, development-oriented, and institutionally grounded approach. Revisiting but not discarding the SRC principles is essential to strengthen federalism, improve governance, and uphold national unity.