Author: Shivani Louhan

Introduction 

The Constitution of India establishes a federal framework that seeks to equilibrate the authority between the Union (Central Government) and the individual States. The character of Indian federalism is particularly noteworthy due to its quasi-federal attributes, wherein the Central Government retains considerable powers, particularly during exigent circumstances, while simultaneously honoring the autonomy of the States. The architecture of Centre-State dynamics is paramount for comprehending the allocation of powers, privileges, and responsibilities within the Indian milieu. This manuscript investigates the apportionment of powers between the Centre and the States as delineated in the Indian Constitution, with a particular emphasis on how these stipulations influence the federal architecture of India. It scrutinizes the persistent difficulties in sustaining an equilibrium between central governance and state independence, underscoring the essential function of constitutional instruments in promoting collaboration and mediating disputes. Through a comprehensive analysis of both the structural framework and practical ramifications, the manuscript accentuates the necessity for recalibrating Centre-State interactions to facilitate a more effective and equitable federal system. 

Legislative Authority and Distribution of Powers 

The allocation of powers delineated between the Centre and the States within the Constitution represents a pivotal characteristic of Indian federalism, as articulated in Article 246. The Constitution categorizes legislative subjects into three distinct classifications: 

1. This compilation encompasses subjects upon which only the Centre possesses the authority to legislate. These subjects are generally of national significance, including defense, foreign affairs, and atomic energy. The Union List guarantees that vital domains affecting the entire nation are governed by the central government’s jurisdiction.  

2. The State List comprises matters upon which only the States are vested with legislative power. These pertain to local and regional concerns, such as law enforcement, public health, and agriculture. The underlying principle is that states ought to retain the autonomy necessary to oversee affairs that are pertinent to their unique requirements and governance. 

3. The Concurrent List encompasses subjects upon which both the Union and the States are empowered to legislate. In instances of discord between laws enacted by the Centre and the States regarding the same subject, the legislation promulgated by the Centre takes precedence. This list includes matters such as education, criminal law, and marriage and divorce. The Concurrent List encapsulates areas where both tiers of government may need to engage, although the Union government maintains superior authority in the event of a conflict.  

Centre-State Conflict 

The persistent and often contentious conflicts that arise between the Central government and the various State governments continue unabated, despite the clear and systematic delineation of powers as outlined in the Constitution of India. These tensions frequently emerge over a variety of significant issues, including but not limited to linguistic diversity, fiscal autonomy, and the equitable allocation of resources, all of which are critically important for maintaining a balanced federal structure that respects both central authority and regional identities. For example, initiatives aimed at promoting Hindi as the national language have encountered considerable resistance from States where Hindi is not the predominant language, thereby illuminating the intricate regional sensitivities that characterize India’s linguistic landscape. Furthermore, conflicts surrounding fiscal control and the just distribution of resources exacerbate perceptions among various States of being economically marginalized in relation to financial matters that are essential to their sustainable development and overall progress. Water-sharing disputes, which are particularly emblematic of the broader challenges associated with managing inter-State resources, highlight the urgent need for robust constitutional mechanisms that can facilitate effective dispute resolution in this complex context. To tackle these multifaceted issues, the Sarkaria Commission Report, published in 1988, put forward the significant recommendation  for the establishment of an Inter-Governmental Council, which would serve as a dedicated platform for the Central and State governments to collaboratively resolve disputes and engage in cooperative efforts on matters of mutual concern and importance. This recommendation was intended to promote constructive dialogue and foster a spirit of cooperation between the two tiers of government, thereby preventing conflicts from escalating into more serious confrontations. In a similar vein, the Punchhi Commission Report, released in 2007, underscored the critical importance of cooperative federalism, advocating for an increase in the autonomy granted to States in various domains including governance and resource management. It proposed that while the Central government should retain its primacy in issues of national significance, there should be an allowance for States to exercise greater flexibility in effectively managing local affairs and addressing their unique challenges. The legal system, with a primary focus on the Supreme Court of India, has been vital in addressing disagreements between the Centre and the States, as it has regularly been called to review the constitutional legitimacy of measures implemented by the Central administration, thereby guaranteeing that the Constitution’s guidelines are respected and a fair equilibrium is sustained between the Centre’s demand for an effective government and the critical need to protect the States’ autonomy. In a number of landmark judicial decisions, including the notable cases of State of West Bengal v. Union of India (1963) and R. C. Poudyal v. Union of India (1994), the Supreme Court has engaged in a nuanced interpretation of the Constitution to elucidate the division of powers, thereby effectively settling disputes between the Centre and the States while simultaneously upholding the foundational principles of federalism that underpin the governance structure of the nation.  

Mechanisms for Centre-State Cooperation 

The Indian Constitution embeds a range of institutional mechanisms meticulously crafted to facilitate collaboration, coordination, and mutual understanding between the Central Government and the States, thereby ensuring the seamless operation of India’s quasi-federal system. These mechanisms are indispensable for upholding an equitable balance of authority between the two tiers of government, addressing governance challenges, and fostering a cohesive federal structure that accommodates India’s vast diversity. Under Article 263 of the Constitution, the President is empowered to establish an Inter-State Council, a vital institution designed to promote cooperative federalism by serving as a deliberative platform for resolving disputes and enhancing dialogue between the Centre and the States. This council plays an instrumental role in fostering effective communication across governmental entities, enabling discussions on critical national issues, ranging from economic policies to social welfare initiatives. By providing a forum for constructive engagement, the Inter-State Council seeks to maintain harmonious Centre-State relations, mitigate conflicts through negotiation, and cultivate a shared understanding of governance priorities. However, its advisory nature limits its authority, as it lacks the power to enforce binding resolutions, which sometimes constrains its effectiveness in resolving contentious issues. Another cornerstone of India’s federal architecture is the Finance Commission, constituted under Article 280, which is tasked with the critical responsibility of recommending the equitable distribution of financial resources, including tax revenues and grants, between the Union and the States. This institution ensures fiscal fairness by addressing the vertical and horizontal imbalances inherent in a federal system, enabling States to maintain financial autonomy while supporting the Centre’s national obligations. The Finance Commission’s recommendations are pivotal in promoting fiscal stability, empowering States to fund essential services such as healthcare, education, and infrastructure, and fostering a balanced economic relationship that underpins the federal framework. Additionally, Zonal Councils, established to enhance inter-State cooperation within specific geographical regions, provide a collaborative platform for States to address shared regional challenges, including economic development, internal security, and socio-cultural integration. These councils facilitate dialogue on pressing issues, encourage collective problem-solving, and aim to reduce regional disparities by promoting coordinated action among neighboring States. Through these deliberations, Zonal Councils contribute to regional harmony and mutual progress, ensuring that States work synergistically to achieve common objectives. Collectively, these constitutional mechanisms embody the framers’ vision of a robust federal system that thrives on dialogue, equity, and cooperative governance. By enabling the Centre and States to navigate India’s multifaceted  challenges collaboratively, these institutions reinforce the principles of federalism, ensuring that both levels of government fulfill their constitutional mandates while respecting each other’s distinct roles and responsibilities in the nation’s governance. 

Centre-State Relations in India: Challenges and Tensions 

Centre-State relations in India have historically been defined by a delicate equilibrium between fostering national cohesion and accommodating regional autonomy, a dynamic that underscores the complexities of the country’s quasi-federal constitutional framework. Despite the Constitution’s delineation of a federal structure, its practical application encounters persistent obstacles across multiple domains, including fiscal decentralization, legislative autonomy for States, and equitable resource distribution, each contributing to ongoing tensions between the Central Government and State authorities. Fiscal decentralization, which pertains to the allocation of financial resources between the Centre and States, remains a deeply contentious issue, as the Union Government exercises significant control over revenue generation and disbursement. This centralized fiscal dominance often undermines States’ financial independence, constraining their capacity to address localized priorities such as infrastructure development, healthcare, and education, thereby intensifying Centre-State friction. The structural imbalance in fiscal powers, exemplified by disputes over tax devolution and Goods and Services Tax (GST) compensation, highlights the challenges States face in achieving fiscal self- sufficiency, further straining the federal compact. Concurrently, political and regional movements advocating for enhanced State autonomy introduce additional layers of complexity to India’s federal landscape. Various States have persistently demanded greater authority to govern their internal affairs, particularly in critical areas such as law enforcement, local administration, and educational policy, reflecting a broader aspiration for self-governance. Notable examples include the successful campaign for Telangana’s statehood in 2014, which emerged from decades of regional advocacy for distinct identity and governance, and the ongoing agitation for Gorkhaland in West Bengal, which underscores persistent regional disparities and the quest for localized control. These movements often clash with the Centre’s prioritization of national unity and centralized policymaking, necessitating intricate negotiations to reconcile divergent interests. The management of natural resources further exacerbates Centre-State discord, with inter-State disputes over shared resources frequently escalating into significant political and social conflicts. 

The Cauvery Water Dispute, involving Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, serves as a prominent illustration of how competing claims over water resources can fuel protracted confrontations, with the Centre’s interventions often perceived as inadequate or partial, deepening mistrust among the affected States. Similarly, the mechanism of River Disputes Tribunals, established to adjudicate inter-State water conflicts, has faced substantial criticism for its protracted processes and inability to deliver timely resolutions, thereby aggravating tensions and undermining confidence in federal dispute-resolution frameworks. These multifaceted challenges—spanning fiscal imbalances, demands for legislative autonomy, and contentious resource allocation—continually test the resilience of India’s federal structure as envisioned by the Constitution. While the federal system is designed to promote national unity, the political realities of regional aspirations, socio-economic disparities, and resource-sharing disputes generate persistent friction, necessitating sustained dialogue, institutional reforms, and nuanced governance strategies to harmonize the interests of the Centre and States in India’s diverse and dynamic federal polity. 

Conclusion 

India’s Constitution outlines a quasi-federal framework, dividing powers between the Centre and States via the Union, State, and Concurrent Lists. Yet, its implementation often sparks tensions over centralization, fiscal autonomy, and resource allocation. The Centre’s dominance in areas like finance, defense, and emergencies frequently limits State autonomy, fueling disputes. These challenges highlight the need for cooperative federalism, where collaborative governance addresses national and regional priorities. The Inter-State Council, under Article 263, is pivotal in fostering dialogue and resolving conflicts. Sustaining India’s federal system requires ongoing efforts to balance central authority with State autonomy through strengthened cooperative mechanisms. This equilibrium is crucial for effective governance and preserving India’s regional diversity while upholding the democratic principles embedded in the Constitution.