Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 9

11/30/2014

InterpretingafederalConstitutionTheHindu

Jobs

Today'sPaper

Archive

ePaper

Indepth

eBooks

Classifieds

Mobile

Apps

Social

SEARCH

Home

News

BLOGS

CARTOON

Opinion Business Sport


COLUMNS

EDITORIAL

S&T

INTERVIEW

Features
LEAD

Entertainment Books

LETTERS

COMMENT

OPENPAGE

GO

Data
READERS'EDITOR

Trending

Videos

VIEWSUNLIMITED

February4,2014

OPINIONLEAD
Updated:February4,201409:36IST

InterpretingafederalConstitution
WatchTamancheyOnlineEnjoyRichaChaddha'smovieinHDwithMavshack.Signupfor
Now!www.mavshack.com
AdsbyGoogle

ARGHYASENGUPTA
ALOKPRASANNAKUMAR

COMMENT(43)PRINTTT
Share

TOPICS
India

44

TherejectionoftheTelanganaBillbytheAndhraPradeshAssembly
mustnotbedismissedashavingnolegalconsequencesasthatwould
rendertheconstitutionalprocessofconsultationentirelynugatory

AndhraPradesh

TheAndhraPradeshReorganisationBill,2013,whichcreatestheStateof
Telangana,hasbeendecisivelyrejectedbytheAndhraPradeshLegislative
AssemblyandCouncil.Thisrejection,togetherwiththerecordingof9,072
politics
amendmentsandexpressionofviewsonitsvariousclausesbyitsMLAs,and1,157
statepolitics
likesuggestionsbyitsMLCs,hasbroughttheprocessofthecreationofnewStates
inIndiaintorenewedfocus.Ashasbeenopinedpreviouslyinthepagesofthis
politics(general)
newspaper,theconstitutionalpositioninthiscontextisstraightforward:Article3
politicalsystems
oftheConstitutionvestsParliamentwiththepowertoformanewState,provided
thattheBillcreatingsuchaStateisintroducedontherecommendationofthe
PresidentandhehasreferredittothelegislatureoftheaffectedStateforexpressingitsviews
thereon.ThiswouldsuggestthattheviewsoftheAndhraPradeshAssemblywillhavenolegaleffect
theformationofTelanganaissolelytheprerogativeofthegovernmentofIndia.Whilethismayindeed
bethepositionofthelawasitstandstoday,theunprecedentednatureoftherejectionoftheBillbythe
AndhraPradeshAssemblyrequiresthelegalinterpretationofArticle3bereconsidered.Such
RECENTARTICLEINLEAD
CLOSE
reconsiderationisalsopromptedbythechangingnatureofIndianfederalism,aptlydemonstratedby
ChaitiBaisstoryandmodernIndia
thecurioussituationofaCongressgovernmentattheStateleveldefyingitscounterpartinpoweratthe
ThedeathsofChaitiBaiandotherwomenafterabotched
Centre.
tubectomyinChhattisgarhareanopportunitytoreflectonthe
problemsIndiafacesinthepursuitofmodernityandglobal
Unprecedentedrejection
status,especiallyinhealthandeducation
Thekeydistinctionbetweenthisinstanceandearlierdisputesraisedinrelationtotheformationofa
newStateliesinthefactthatneverbeforehasanAmendmentBillbeenrejectedbytheStatelegislature
inquestion.BothinBabulalParate(SupremeCourt)andPradeepChaudhary(SupremeCourt,2009)
seminaljudgmentsoftheCourtdealingwiththecreationofBombayandUttaranchalrespectively,the
issuebeforetheCourtwaswhetheritwasopentoParliamenttoamendthefinalBillaftertheState
legislaturehadexpresseditsviewsonanearlier,unamendedversion.Inbothcases,theSupremeCourt,
adoptingaliteralinterpretationofArticle3,heldthattherewasnorequirementthatanamendmenttoa
BillforminganewStatewouldalsohavetobereferredtotheStatelegislatureconcerned.Such
interpretationisarguablycorrecttheprovisotoArticle3simplystatesthattheBillmustbesentto
theStatelegislatureconcernedforexpressingitsviewswithinaspecifiedperiod.Theprovisionissilent
onwhetherlateramendmentshavetobereferred,aswellasontheeffectthattheviewsoftheState
legislatureswillhave.Thusreadliterally,evenawholesalerejectionoftheBillcanbeignoredby
Parliament,sinceArticle3merelygivesStateAssembliesaconsultativeroletheirviewsarenot
bindingonParliamentinanyway.
However,totreattheStatesviewsascarryingmerelyformalvalue,ashasbeenwidelysuggested,would
rendertheconstitutionalprocessofconsultationentirelynugatoryinamatterofnationalimportance.
ThecurrentprovisotoArticle3wasintroducedbytheConstitution(FifthAmendment)Act,1955.
Beforethisamendment,thePresidentcouldonlyintroduceanAmendmentBillinParliamentafter
referringittotheStatelegislaturesconcernedfortheirviews.Thiswasatimeconsumingprocess,
allowingStatestovacillateinresponding,therebyfrustratingtheeffortsofthegovernmentofIndia.
ThisamendmentwasnecessarytolaythegroundworkforthesmoothpassageoftheStates
ReorganisationCommissionReportthatrecommendedaradicalredrawingofStateboundariesand
creationofnewStates.ByadequatelycircumscribingStatepower,itwasfeltthatnosingleStatecould
holduptheprocessofreorganisation.
ButwhatifaStaterejectedtheproposaltocreateanewStateoutright?BoththeprovisotoArticle3as
wellastheRajyaSabhadebatespriortoitspassagearesilentonthisspecificquestion.Thereasonfor

MOST
POPULAR

MOST
COMMENTED

ChaitiBaisstoryandmodernIndia
Badenactment,noenforcement

data:text/htmlcharset=utf8,%3Cbr%20class%3D%22Appleinterchangenewline%22%3E%3Ciframe%20id%3D%22twttrHubFrameSecure%22%20allo

1/9

11/30/2014

InterpretingafederalConstitutionTheHindu

suchsilenceisaptlydemonstratedinaspeechbyMPProfessorN.G.RangawhosaidintheHouse,Iam
gladreallynowthatthisBillhascometobeintroducedinsteadoftheCongressPartytrustingitselfto
itscapacitytogetthelocalmajorities,whicharealsoCongressmajorities,toexpresstheviewsofthe
legislatures.(RajyaSabhaDebates,December15,1955).Theprovisowasthusbroughtinatatime
whensuchdisagreementbetweentheCentreandStateswasnotarealpossibility.Neitherdid
Parliamentenvisagenordiditlegislateforsuchasituation.TherejectionoftheTelanganaBillbythe
AndhraPradeshAssemblyisevidenceofadramaticallychangedtime.Forthelegalinterpretationof
Article3toignoresuchchangewouldbeananachronism.Itwouldalsobeinconsonantwiththe
SupremeCourtscharacterisationoftheConstitutionasalivingtreecapableofcontinuousgrowth
withconcomitantlychangingscenarios.

UnderstandingArticle370
EnvisioninganewAfghanistan
Indiasgodmansyndrome
AcaseforSAARCreforms
Asettlementlongoverdue
AcharterfortheCBI
Fleeingthelight
Falsepromiseofnuclearpower

AdsbyGoogle

Bommaicase
SuchreinterpretationofprovisionsoftheConstitutionthathavebearingonitsfederalcharacterhas
precedent.IntermsofthelegalityoftheimpositionofPresidentsRuleinStatesunderArticle356,the
SupremeCourtinS.R.Bommaiv.UnionofIndia(SupremeCourt,1994)overruleditsownprecedentin
thecaseofStateofRajasthanvUnionofIndia(SupremeCourt,1977).Whileholdingthatthepowerof
thePresidenttoimposePresidentsRuleisnotaboveandbeyondjudicialreviewentirely,theCourt
narroweddownthecircumstancesandthemannerinwhichsuchpowerscouldbeexercised.The
premiseofthisshiftinconstitutionaljurisprudencewasthattheprincipleoffederalismwaspartofthe
basicstructureoftheConstitution,andthisprinciplecouldonlybedeviatedfrominexceptionaland
extraordinarycircumstances,i.e.whereconstitutionalrulewasnotpossibleintheState.Indoingso,the
CourtrecognisedthepitfallsofaliteralmindedconstructionoftheConstitutionaswasdonein
theRajasthancase.IntheabsenceofanychecksontheexceptionalpowerofthePresidenttoimpose
PresidentsRuleandgivefederalismagobyinthenameofupholdingtheConstitution,theCourt
recognisedthattheConstitutionitselfcouldbesubverted.
TheSupremeCourtscoursecorrectioninBommaihasadeeperlesson.ThatIndiasconstitutionally
envisagedfederalstructurehasastrongcentralisingtendencyisbeyondquestion.Suchatendencyis
notuniquetoIndia.FederalstatestheworldoverCanada,theUnitedStates,Australiaalldisplay
discerniblecentripetalforcesirrespectiveofdifferencesintheirfederalstructure.Butthedecision
inBommaiandnowtheAndhraPradeshAssemblysrejectionoftheTelanganaBillmarksasignificant
changeinthisdynamic.Itprovidesrecognitiontoamorebalancedunion,withCentreandStatesseen
increasinglyascoordinateentities.AtatimewhentheChiefMinisterofWestBengaltrumpsthe
decisionofthegovernmentofIndiatosignaninternationalaccord,thesoleprerogativeoftheCentral
government,andtheChiefMinisterofTamilNadupreventsSriLankancricketersfromplayingin
ChennaidespitethemhavingvalidvisasfortravelinIndia,suchareworkedunderstandingoffederalism
inIndiaisbothrealisticandpragmatic.
Towardsanewfederalism
Inthefaceofsuchchanges,tomerelyparrotanoriginalistconstitutionalvisionofastrongCentrewhile
interpretinglegalprovisionsistotakeablinkeredview.ThecentralisingtendencyinIndiasfederal
structurewasadoptedatatimewhenitwasnecessarytoweldIndiasdisparateelementstogetherintoa
nation.ThiswasataskforwhichthegovernmentofIndiawasuniquelypositionedandrequireda
supportingconstitutionalarchitecture.Thus,thefederalprovisionsoftheConstitutionwereasmuch
loftyvisionaspoliticalstrategy.Suchstrategynowrequiresacarefulrecalibrationsincesuchatoolfor
nationbuilding,ifusedunthinkingly,willbeseenpurelyascentralhegemony.Suchforcedunitaritywill
bemoreharmfulthanagenuinerecognitionofamoreequalfederalstructurethatisperfectly
consonantwiththeideaofIndia.

TODAY'SPAPER
ePaper
ThisDayThatAge
Crossword
Archive
Obituary

GROUPSITES
TheHindu

BusinessLine

Sportstar

Frontline

TheHinduCentre

TheHinduHub

Images

Classifieds

RoofandFloor

ThisdoesnotinanywaymeanthattheAndhraPradeshAssemblysviewsontheTelanganaBillshould
bethelastwordonthematter.Suchaninferencewouldbeplainlyunconstitutional.However,itis
necessarythattheCentralgovernmentberequiredinlawtoadequatelytakeintoconsiderationthe
reasonswhytheAndhraPradeshAssemblyrejectedtheTelanganaBill.Thisobligationshouldbe
dischargedinwriting,demonstratingaproperapplicationofmindwithaccompanyingreasonsastowhy
eachrecommendationhasbeenacceptedorrejected.Withoutsuchconsideration,theAndhraPradesh
ReorganisationBill,2013,ifpassed,wouldseriouslylacklegitimacyandbeinconsonantwiththe
dynamicfederalspiritoftheConstitution.
(WithinputsfromSakshiAravind)
(ArghyaSenguptaandAlokPrasannaKumarareresearchdirectorandseniorresidentfellow
respectively,atVidhiCentreforLegalPolicy,aNewDelhibasedlegalpolicythinktank.)
Keywords:TelanganaBill,AndhraPradeshbifurcation,AndhraPradesh
Assembly,Seemandhra,Samaikhyandhra,Bommaicase,federalism,AndhraPradeshReorganisation
Bill,KiranKumarReddy

Viewcomments(43)
RELATEDNEWS

Telanganabill:ChandrashekharRaomeetsPM FEBRUARY4,2014
BJPchidesUPAforlaxstatecraftonTelangana FEBRUARY1,2014
Kiranhashisway,A.P.AssemblyrejectsTBill JANUARY30,2014
Telanganabirthpangs FEBRUARY1,2014
TelanganaMinisterswritetoPranabagainstfurtherextension JANUARY30,2014
LeaveTelanganadecisiontothepeople,saysKiran FEBRUARY3,2014
ShindeconfidentofTelanganaBillpassage JANUARY31,2014
MOREIN:Lead|Opinion

data:text/htmlcharset=utf8,%3Cbr%20class%3D%22Appleinterchangenewline%22%3E%3Ciframe%20id%3D%22twttrHubFrameSecure%22%20allo

2/9

11/30/2014

InterpretingafederalConstitutionTheHindu
Share

44

MOREFROMTHEHINDU

FROMAROUNDTHEWEB

Forcefulsexisnotrape:HC

MyanmardeepensIndiatiestoreduceChina
dependency

05Nov2014

NikkeiAsianReview

Boystabbedtodeathinclassroom

WhatcanIdowithatablet?

29Nov2014

Intel

16yearoldgirlabused,givesbirthin
Thiruvananthapuram

PreIslamiccivilisationinMadainSalehin
SaudiArabia

29Oct2014

HappyTrips

Loveinthetimeofbigotry

50Countriesofferingvisaonarrivalfor
Indians

09Nov2014

HappyTrips

ModitocampaigninJammuonFriday

NarendraModioffershumorousapologyto
AustralianMPsinspeech

27Nov2014

SouthChinaMorningPost
what'sthis?

AdsbyGoogle

MaxBupaHealthInsurance

GetHealthCoverageforyourFamily12.5%Discounton2YrPlan.BuyNow

healthcompanion.maxbupa.com
COMMENTS(43)

RECOMMENDED

POSTACOMMENT

ItisrighttosaythatthecentershouldtakeintoaccountastowhytheAPassemblycompletely
rejectedtheAPreorganizationbillinordertomaintainnotjustasmoothtransitionincaseof
transferenceofassetsandpowertoTelanganabutalsotoensurethatitsactsarenottakenasa
meansforgainingpoliticalmileageoutofthewholeissue.Butonemorepointtonotehereis
thatthisconclusiverejectionofthebillshowsthatmaximumnumberofauthorizedpeoplein
thestateassemblyareopposedtotheformationofTelanganaonwhatbasesanissuethatisto
belookedintobycenter.MoreoverthinkingofattainingafederalstructureasthatinUSAisa
longshotfornowuntillsuchissuesaredealtwithrationalityandinclusivity.
from:PiyushSanduja

Postedon:Feb5,2014at13:16IST
IfArticle3isoverrulingthedecissionofastatethenwhatkindoffederalstructurewehave?
Theauthorsoftheconstitutionneverthoughtofacentralgovenmentwhichisagainstthewill
ofmajorityopinion(atleast60%ofAPisagainstdivision).Also,nopoliticalpartyintheAP
assembly(includingprotelenganaparties)isaccepting100%thepresentbill.Thereare
objectionsonGoverner'srole,commoncapital,water,power,etc.Ifdivisionisforbetterment
ofpeoplethenwhatisthebettermentofthisbillwhichisnotsatisfactorytoanyone.Whatis
thefinanicalandsocialimplications?
InthepresentcasethewholeofAPisdividedintoproandagainststatedivision.Inthis
situationthecentralgovernmentshouldbehavemoreresponsiblybutinrealitytheyare
behavingagainstthedemocraticnorms.Insteadofhadlingsuchasensitiveissueinahurrygovt
shouldstudyalltheconsequenciesandbehaveinmoredemocraticmanner.
from:raveendra

Postedon:Feb5,2014at01:08IST
ItistruethatAndhrastaterejectedTelanganabillandnowitsuptocenterthatwilldecide
aboutcorrectdestinationbeforeconsideringanybillasfinalCentershouldbecoolandbe
ponderoustodecideandnothingshoulddowithoutlogicandinhaste.incaseofTelanganabill
itisveryimportanttoseetheunprecedentedrejectionofAndhraassemblyandalsomeasure
theirweightinthesocialarena.
NowitsneedofhourthatcenterwilldecidethattheconcernraisebytheMLAandMLCare
genuineandifyestheyshoulddoaccordingtothemandiftheyareonlydoingthesethingto
gainsomeprofitincomingelectionthentheyshouldbeblatantlyrefused.
from:anoopkumarmishra

Postedon:Feb4,2014at18:46IST
Theformationofastateshouldbeharmonious&advantageoustoall
theregionsoftheerstwhilestate.Also,theformationofnewstates
shouldstartafterconsideringtheresources,infrastructure,
vegetationavailable.Thenewlyformedstatesshouldenjoyallthe
facilitiesthattheyusedtoenjoybeforetheirformation.Peoplemust
understandthatstatesareseenonlyinPOLITICALmaps.Creationofa
newstatewillneithercreatewondersnorpreventingitscreation
deprivesallthegoodithad.Theintentionbehindgivingcentral
supremepowerincreationofstatesisthatthecentralGovtlooks
thingsinnationalperspective&notinregionalperspective.But,

data:text/htmlcharset=utf8,%3Cbr%20class%3D%22Appleinterchangenewline%22%3E%3Ciframe%20id%3D%22twttrHubFrameSecure%22%20allo

3/9

11/30/2014

InterpretingafederalConstitutionTheHindu

whatifthecentralGovtistryingtodosomethingforpoliticalgain?
Supremecourtshouldbeallowedtointerveneifsuchmisuseofpower
happens.
from:rupesh

Postedon:Feb4,2014at18:32IST
Theargumentshereare,thoughappealing,illinformed.Federalism
doesnotmeangettingaresolutionthroughtheassemblybymeansof
brutemajorityandphysicalstrengthandthenclaiminglegitimacy.The
factsinthiscaseneedacloserlook.1)TheresolutionbyMrKiran
KumarReddywaspassedbyVoicevoteandtherewasnodivision.2)The
TelanganaMLAswerephysicallystoppedfromhavinganyaccesstothe
speakerbythesheermajorityofSeeamandhraMLAs.Thisisvery
symptomaticofthewayTelanganapeopleweredeniedaccesstojustice.
Contraytowhattheauthorsargue,Article3ispreciselymeantto
addressthisbrutestrengthofthemajority.Demandsforaseparate
statealmostalwaysarisefromaminorityofthepopulation.Article3
isaimedtopreventtramplingofsuchaspirationsofminoritybyan
unwillingmajoritybysheernumbersinthestateassembly.

from:C.S.C.Sekhar

Postedon:Feb4,2014at18:08IST
DearSir,
Article1oftheConstitution["IndiashallbeaUnionofStates"],readinconjuncturewithArticle
3,makesitclearthattheMakersofourConstitutionwantedIndiatobean"indestructible
UnionofdestructibleStates".Itsfederalfeaturesnotwithstanding,itistheseUnitaryfeatures
andthepoweroftheCentralGovernmenttoreorganisetheunitsoftheUnionthathave
facilitatedtheintegrationofmanystatesintotheIndianUnion.Irrespectiveofthepoliticsof
thetime,itisworthwhiletorememberthattheStatesareadministrativeunitsonly,anddonot
enjoytheConstitutionalstatusoftheStatesoftheUnitedStatesofAmerica.
from:RAGHURAMS

Postedon:Feb4,2014at18:03IST
ThebifurcationofAndhraPradeshaftermorethansixdecadescannotbedonewithouta
referendum,forwhichallthepoliticalpartiesshouldagree.Eventhen,alotofdevelopments
havecomeupfromcontributionsfromallpartsofAndhra.IftheCentreyieldstoTelengana
lobbyists,theAPwillsufferasituationlikeKashmirBorder.That'showTelenganagrouplooks
atpeopleworkinginHyderabadfromotherparts.Takingintoconsiderationallotherfuture
issuesfromotherStates,theCentercouldaddresstheissuesraisedbyT.Leadersbyoffering
morefundsfordevelopment.Thecurewouldbeworsethanprolongedpain.
from:LouisS.Venugopal

Postedon:Feb4,2014at18:02IST
SelfishandCunningpeoplewhowantedtodependlifelongonother
regionsresourceslike(riverswatersandcapitalHyderabad)will
neverunderstandthesignificanceofTelanganastateastilltoday
morethan2000youthstudentsdiedi.e(including1969&after2009)
forthegenuinecauseofTelanganastate.Thecultureandsocietyof
TelanganaregionisentirelydifferentfromSeemaandhraregionand
moreovertheverypurposeofformationofunitedAPin1956was
dilutedbydisrespectingthegentlemen'sagreementbetweenTelangana
andSAregionduetothearrogantnatureofAndhrarulersfor
benefitingtheirregion.WhenMajoritypeopletakingminoritypeople
asgrantedforwhateversoisabigthreattoDemocracyandFederalism
inthecountry.SoIstronglyadvocatethatTelanganastatemustbe
createdforsafeguardingtheinterestsofTelanganaregionanditis
alsoa60yearsolddemandsincethetimeofmerger.Article3was
createdbykeepingtheinterestsofallpeople.
from:Hasan

Postedon:Feb4,2014at17:57IST
WhenSeemandhrawantedaseparatestatewithoutextendinganyclaimonHyderabadin
1972,therewasabsolutelynomurmurfromthosewhodemandedseparateTstatejust3
yearsback.Mrs.indiraGandhievendilutedthemulkirules..stillseparatistsdidnotraiseany
protest.ThisshowshowhollowistheargumentthatTdemandisa60yearaspirationof
people.PoliticianslikeKCR,Nagam,KadiyamandDevender(whentheywereinpower)hada
goodwordaboutthecontributionofSeemandhrapeopleandthebenefitsofunitedstate.the
propagandastartedwiththeclaimofunderdevelopmentofTelanganabutafterSriKrishna
committee,thesloganwaschangedtoselfruleandselfrespectwhichcanbeclaimsofall
regionsofIndia.Changingofgoalpostsareseeneveninthesecomments.When
constitutionalnicetiesarebeingdiscussed,peopleraisequestionsaboutethicalvalidity!Ifat
allthereisaniotaofethicsintheTmovement,itwouldhavejoinedhandswithJaiAndhra
movementof1972
from:Bharadwaja

Postedon:Feb4,2014at17:12IST

data:text/htmlcharset=utf8,%3Cbr%20class%3D%22Appleinterchangenewline%22%3E%3Ciframe%20id%3D%22twttrHubFrameSecure%22%20allo

4/9

11/30/2014

InterpretingafederalConstitutionTheHindu

Iamenlightenedbythearticle.Peoplehadnoobjectionwhenanimportantitemlike
bifurcationofastatewasbroughtasatableiteminthecabinetmeeting.Theconcernsofthe
residuarystatewerenotaddressed.Itwasneverdiscussedwiththetwoparties.Andthe
peoplewerenotpreparedforit.Itcameasaboltfromtheblue.
from:DrMSReddy
Postedon:Feb4,2014at16:55IST
NoneedtoworryabouttheformationofthestateofTelangana.Asper
Article3thestatewillbecreated.
from:NRamaRao

Postedon:Feb4,2014at16:51IST
AllthehypecreatedagainstdemergerofTelanganaregionfromAndhra
PradeshiscreatedbySeemaAndhrapoliticiansforsafeguardingtheir
politicalpowerinSeemaAndhrain2014elections.
from:kvenkataramam

Postedon:Feb4,2014at16:23IST
Youwilldefeattheverypurposeoftheconstitutionalprovisionsand
itsspiritwhenyouusetechnicalitiestoserveryourowninterest.
RejectionofbillforcreationofTelanganaisonesuchexample.The
solepurposeofthepeoplewhorejectedthebillistheassumed
gullibilityoftheconstituencytheyserveandthepoliticalbenefit
theycanreapbydoingso.Theyneitherhavethecapabilitynorthe
visiontofindasolutiontoTelanganaproblem.Iftheyweretohave
thoseskillsandacumenandthelargehearttheycouldhaveresolved
theissueintheyearsthattheyhadfromthetimeitwasfirst
announcedin2009andcentralgovtwouldhavebeenhappynotto
interfereatall.Rejectionofthebillhereislikeadjournmentsin
courtswhichisusedtodefeatthespiritoflaw.Yestechnicallyyou
havearightbutethicallyyouarewrong.Federalism/democracywill
getaboostwhenminoritiesbelievethatthesystemcandeliver
justiceandnotcrushthemformajority.
from:Srinivas

Postedon:Feb4,2014at15:43IST
Whynotofficially(constitutionally)declaretelaganaasacolonyofAndhraregionthenatleast
itwillshowtherealityofwhatisgoingoninthepractice.Howlongtelangananeedstobeinthe
slaveryalsoshouldbedeterminedbyAPAssemblyandPaliamentwhentheycannotallow
telanganatorulethemselves.
from:ravi

Postedon:Feb4,2014at15:32IST
WhenpoweristrulydecentralizedatPanchayatlevel,suchdemandsfor
creatingnewStatesmayloseforce.
WhatishappeningissomeStateleadershaveexploitedthesystemtoget
maximumpersonaladvantage,denyingtoothers.Hugediscretionenjoyedin
allocatingresourcessuchaslandhavecontributedtothepresent
situation.
from:BhanumurtiK

Postedon:Feb4,2014at15:30IST
IFanybodypresumesthatassemblyrejectingthebillhastoget
attractionfromotherquartersofthecountryismeaninglessand
preposterousattemptasinthepastUPassemblypasstheresolutionin
favourofdividingUPstateinto4parts.Isthatimplementedby
Centre?theanswerisbigNO,whybecause,theCentreisonlysupreme
fordecidingtocreatenewstatesoraltertheboundariesofthe
existingstatewithadjacentstate.Uttarakhandstateadded2
districtsfromUPduringthediscussioninParliamentwhilepassing
theUPreorganisationbillwhichhasnosupportofstatelegislatures
instateassemblyoranydiscussiontookplaceinthisregardinstate
assembly.Oneshouldclearlycomprehendthatnewstatescreationis
thesolerightofCentralgovt.orPresidentofIndia.Onesuchstate
istheTelanganastate,whichiscreatedbyCentralgovt.andassembly
rejectingorapprovingTBillhasnolegalimpactonthepassageofT
Billinparliament.
from:Hasan

Postedon:Feb4,2014at14:46IST
Brilliantarticle.HopethatIndianfederalismisnotmadeapreyto
Votebankpolitics
from:heamnth

Postedon:Feb4,2014at14:33IST
IamoftheopinionthepurposekeepingstatereorganizationunderCentralGovernmentunder
Article3intheConstitutionisonlytoprotecttheboundariesoftheCountryintact.Failing
whichsomeoftheStateleadersmaypassaresolutionstatingthattheyintendthemergethe
statewithsomeothercountry.StatesReorganizationisprerogativeofCentralonlyforall
purpose.

data:text/htmlcharset=utf8,%3Cbr%20class%3D%22Appleinterchangenewline%22%3E%3Ciframe%20id%3D%22twttrHubFrameSecure%22%20allo

5/9

11/30/2014

InterpretingafederalConstitutionTheHindu

InthecaseAPAssemblyvoiceVoteisabsolutelytrash.suchanimportantresolutionhaving
passedwithintwominutesshowsthecommitmentbylegislatorsofthestate.Inourlifetimeit
isnotpossibletogetpassedsuchanimportantresolutionwithmajorityofthepeoplevotingin
favourofTelangana.ThereasonsisSeemandhramembersareinmajorityinthehouse.
WhereasTelanganamembersareinminority.
from:baradangi

Postedon:Feb4,2014at14:25IST
TheunilateraldecisionofCMtodefeattheTBillhasnosignificance
orlegalimpactontherejectionofAPreorganisationBillasany
resolutionforwardedbyCMtospeakershouldbebackbystatecabinet
approval.Newstatesarecreatedforflexibilityandondemandorone
regionfeelsthattheirdevelopmentfundistotallymisusedbyother
regions.TelanganastateisgoingtobebornbyArticle3provision,
whichreststhesupremepowerstoonlyPresidentorParliament.
MoreoverUnderArticle3strictlyspeaking,Votingisforbiddenin
stateassemblyforanycausealbeititisapprovedbyoneparticular
regionfortheirselfishgainstorulethepeoplefromminority
region.IamsurethatTelanganastateisgoingtoberealitybythis
monthi.e17thfebruary
from:Hasan

Postedon:Feb4,2014at13:57IST
TheissueofAPstatereorganizationwillbesomehowdealtandforgotten,buttheprecedence
setwillmakeorbreaknewgroundforresolutionoffuturecentervsstate(s)disputes.Hope
Ambedkar'sintentreflectsinhowweinterpretourconstitutiontoday.
from:haranathp

Postedon:Feb4,2014at13:52IST
ThoughIagreewithyourpointofprovidingpowerstoStateAssembliesto
stopcentral'sHegemony.ButlookingformIndia'sprospectivewherethe
localgovernmentisruledbystubbornpoliticianslikeAkhileshYadav,
Mayavati,RajThakareandmanymorewhoconspicuouslylackprudencein
theirjudgementmoreoverhavesuchanarrowviewintheirrulethatI
doubttoincreasepowersatthelocallevelwillbeaperspicaciousstep.
from:NishithAnand

Postedon:Feb4,2014at13:40IST
CentralisingtendencyoffederalcharacteristicofIndian
ConstitutionwascalloftimeduringthoseperiodasIndianwasnewly
independentcountryandmostoftheprincelystateswerefree
independent.Atthisscenarioourconstitutionmakeradopted
centralisingtendencyinIndiasfederalstructuretoweldIndias
disparateelementstogetherintoanation.
Butnowafter67yearofindependencewhenIndiaisastrong
democraticcountryofworld,itstimetoreinterpretationofFederal
Constitutionspeciallyincaseswheresentimentofnativepeople
involesuchasstatereorganisationbills.
from:AjayKumarYadav

Postedon:Feb4,2014at13:27IST
Anexcellentpieceofwriting,asIview,thatunderscorestheneedto
revisitthecurrentinterpretationoftheprovisoofArt3ofthe
Indianconstitutiontoenablethestateshaveamoregenuinesayin
issuesaffectingthemwhichwillindeedbeagiantleapinrealizing
ingreatertermstheconstitutionallyenvisaged'federalism'.
Asuitableinterpretation,orreinterpretation,ofconstitutional
provisionswithchangingorchangedtimesinextremelynecessaryto
implement'inessence'the'fundamentallaw'ofthecountry........
andwemustnotabstainfromthat..........
from:UJJWAL

Postedon:Feb4,2014at13:25IST
TheultimategoalofanyLawistosavethe"Dharma".WhentheDharmais
defeatedaKrishnawillborntoeducatetheArjunatodrivehimandto
savetheDharma.AttimesnoLawswillpreventthewinningofDharma.
"DharmoRakshathiRakshithaha"
from:Srinivas

Postedon:Feb4,2014at13:08IST
"TheAndhraPradeshReorganisationBill,2013,whichcreatestheStateof
Telangana,hasbeendecisivelyrejectedbytheAndhraPradeshLegislative
AssemblyandCouncil"thisveryfirstsentanceistotallywrongandsoasrestofthe
article.Canyouimagine(pl.seethetapesofassembly)intwominutesthat
"Rejection"happened.Voicevote!!Theyrejecteditaftermorethan50days,what
joke.Ifthisisdemocracy,Isthisseriousonewhichdeservessuchanarticle.

data:text/htmlcharset=utf8,%3Cbr%20class%3D%22Appleinterchangenewline%22%3E%3Ciframe%20id%3D%22twttrHubFrameSecure%22%20allo

6/9

11/30/2014

InterpretingafederalConstitutionTheHindu

Insteadofquestionsuchresolutionanditsapproriatness,writingsucharticles
showsthecompletelackofgroundreality.EntireTelanganaMLAsopposedit,
entireTelanganaministersopposeditsintroduction,entireTelanganasociety
thoughtitisonemoreattempttooppressthem,Todayifthereisreferrundumin
Telangana,morethan98%of40millionpeoplesupport.Ifthisbillisnotgoingto
Parliament,thatisthegreatestinsulttotheconstitution,article3andtoallour
collectivewisdom.
from:B.Gujja

Postedon:Feb4,2014at12:56IST
Articlewellwritten!!!IfStateassembly'sviewisanemptyexercisewhatsthepointin
conductingsuchanexercise?
Itsimportanttonotethatthatweasanationhasmaturedenoughtostaytogetheranditshigh
timetorevisitandease
thefederalcredentialsoftheconstitution.
Assomearguetherewasneveramajorityandminorityissueinstatereorganisation.Allthe
statescarvedoutinthe
recentpast(Uttarakhand,Jharkhand,chattisgarh)wereminorityregionsandstateassembly's
haspassedaresolution
infavouroftheircreation.Itsimportantthatthedifferencesofseemandhraandtelangaga
shouldbereconciledbefore
carvinganewstate.
from:Madhav

Postedon:Feb4,2014at12:25IST
TocallIndiaafederalstateappearstobeafallacy.Itis
essentiallyunitarystatewithcertainfederalcharacteristics.But
thefederalcharacteristicsappeartobemoreinformthansubstance.
TheCentralGovernmentcandivideormergethestateswithoutthe
approvalofstatelegislaturewithoutevenamendingtheConstitution.
ApartfromthattheCentrecanevenpartwithterritoriestoforeign
governmentsasdemonstratedinthecaseofTinBheegaandKatchativu.
Besides,pursestringsarealsocontrolledbythecentreasmajor
revenuestreamsarewiththem.
from:RamakrishnanK

Postedon:Feb4,2014at12:14IST
ArgumentthattherejectionofBillbyboththehouseisinconsequential
andCenterwillstillproceedaheadwithbifurcationofAPshows'the
povertyofmind'ofUPAleaders.Isitnotakintosayingthatina
murdertrialtheexaminationofwitnessesfromthesideofbothdefence
andprosecutionareonlyforaproceduralrequirements/formalitiesand
courtcanpronounceawardofcapitalpunishmentasapredetermined
judgmentforashorttermpoliticalgain?
from:RaoCVC

Postedon:Feb4,2014at12:05IST
TheConstituioncameintobeingwhentheIndiannationalcongresswasinpower.The
powerequationshavenowundergoneaHimalayanchange.Wearenowincoalitionpolitics
andnooneisinapositiontoforecastthepolarizationofpolitucalforcesatanypointof
time.Continuationofthefederalstructureisdefinitelyintheinterestsofthecountry,andfor
That,thepoliticalpartieswillhavetodevelopaNATIONALPERSPECTIVEtostrengthen
Thenation.InUSSR,thefederalstructurevanishedafterGorbachev'speriod,andwefind
ThecontinuanceofthefederalstructureinUSA,inspiteofthedifferingapproachesofthe
DemocratsandtheRepublicansinthatcountry.Allthepoliticalparties,willhavetobe
cautiousatthistimeinIndianhistory.Thetelenganaissuewillhelpallpoliticalpartiesto
adopttherightapproachtostrengthenthebiggestdemocracyintheworld.
from:CpChandradas

Postedon:Feb4,2014at12:01IST
Article3initspresentformisbeingmisinterpretedbyseparatistagitators.Article(3)isnot
givingscopefor"lobbying"incarvingoutseparatestates.Indianstatesshouldnotbeformed
by"lobbyingwiththirdparty",whichisnotaffectedbythedecision.Astheauthorsrightlysaid,
immediatelyafterindependence,Indianeededthestrongcenter.Butnotafterbecominga
matureddemocracy.Theissueshouldbesettledinstateassembly.Eitheryouconvincethe
majorityoracceptthemajority.Thereisnootherwayaround.Atthesametimetheminority
rightsneedstobeprotected,leavingthepolicydecisiontothemajorityopinion.Otherwise
therewillbeanarchyinthenation.
from:Sarath

Postedon:Feb4,2014at11:52IST
StateReorganizationisacomplicatedissueeversincetheformation
ofIndianunion.Therewillbeargumentsforandagainstthe
reorganization.Thereorganizationthroughresolutioncanberejected
oracceptedbythestatelegislaturewithamajorityofonevoteor
evenmightthroughthecastingvoteofthespeaker.Howeverthiscannot
betreatedasaconsensualopinionofthelegislature.Theopinionof
thestatelegislaturewithtwothirdmajorityneedonlybeboundedto
theparliamentnecessarily.

data:text/htmlcharset=utf8,%3Cbr%20class%3D%22Appleinterchangenewline%22%3E%3Ciframe%20id%3D%22twttrHubFrameSecure%22%20allo

7/9

11/30/2014

InterpretingafederalConstitutionTheHindu

Againthestatereorganizationbillintroducedinbothhousesneed
onlyadoptedwithsimplemajorityeventhoughthisissueisofextreme
importance.Itwillbefairifthestatereorganizationbill(allthe
clausesinthebill)givenasimportantasanamendmenttothe
constitutionsothattheuniongovernmentwillbeforcedtohavea
widerconsultations.Againbeforetheadoptionofsuchanimportant
billstandingcommittedreferralshouldbecompulsory.
from:Finto

Postedon:Feb4,2014at11:37IST
@aravind,IfdivisionwassoughtwewouldhaveknownwhetherMLAslikeJaggareddyand
JP(bothfromTelangana)votedfororagainstthebill.
Anothercommentontheextenttowhichthenontelanganapoliticianswenttostopthebill
needsomeexplanation.Infactthegamehasbeenstartedbytherulingparty..theshameless
depthtowhichitreachedtosomehowbringtheTbillwasunprecedented..soisthethechorus
oftheTpoliticiansinsupportingthehighlypartisanbillwhileignoringconstitutionallyvalid
pointers...theTpoliticiansweresointoxicatedwiththeseparatism,theywerereadyto
surrenderthesovereigntyofassemblytotheparliamentunconditionally..theyweresayingthat
incaseofdivisionofstates,parliamentissupreme..wouldtheybeonthesame
argumentifasimilarlyhurriedbilltomakeHyderabadaseparatestate/UT,ispushedthrough
withoutbotheringaboutconstitutionalnicetiesortotaketheviewsofallthestakeholders?
from:Bharadwaja

Postedon:Feb4,2014at11:22IST
Changingscenariofromsinglepartydominancetomultipartyovertheyearsisrightly
demonstratedinthisarticle.Onestrangethingisthoughinbothcentreandstatecongressis
ruling,billhasbeenrejectedbytheStateAssembly.
from:SrinivasB

Postedon:Feb4,2014at11:19IST
Theauthorshaveputforthaveryvalidpoint.Issueshavetobedecidedaccordingtothe
circumstancespeculiarandparticulartoit.However,thequestiondoesremainastoWHOwill
ultimatelydecidethefateofthelegislation?WHOwilldecidehowaregionandthepeoplethere
shouldbeadministered?Theobviousansweris"thepeople,"butwhowill"thepeople"be?The
peopleoftheregionitself,orthepeopleoftheentirestateproposedtobebifurcated?
Moreover,HOWwillthewillofthepeoplebeascertained?ByaHousedominatedby
representativesopposingthemove?Orbysomeothermechanism?Thatisthequestion.
from:AnandBhisey

Postedon:Feb4,2014at10:59IST
TheCongresspartydidnotdoitshomeworkbeforemakingthedecision
ofbifurcation.Itshouldnotrushtobifurcateasitisbeingdone
now.
from:JayachndPallekonda

Postedon:Feb4,2014at09:20IST
Fromtheconstitutionaldebates,clearlyArticle3wassodraftedtoprotectaminoritythatisat
adisadvantageversusamajority.Thiswasneededfordoingjusticetotheminority.Whatwas
notaddressed,however,wasthereversesituationofa"minority"actuallyhavinganadvantage
overthemajority,which,ispreciselywhatwehaveinthepresentTelanganaseparationissue.
Despiteclaimsforseparatestatehoodonthebasisofculturalidentityandperceived
victimization,Telanganaactuallybenefitedfromdevelopmenttoagreaterdegreecomparedto
Seemandhraandtogetherwithcontroloverheadwatersoftherivers,naturalresources,and
Hyderabad,itwillbewalkingawaywiththecrownjewelsforSeemandhrathisisamatterof
losingabilitytomeetfundamentalneeds.AliteralinterpretationofArticle3wouldtrample
indiscriminatelyontherightsofthemajorityinthissituation,whichwecanbesurecouldnot
havebeentheintentionoftheframersoftheconstitution.
from:AbluZarat

Postedon:Feb4,2014at08:57IST
Veryvalidpointsandtimely.
from:RamakrishnaGarimella

Postedon:Feb4,2014at08:21IST
Excellentarticle.TheHindushouldbecommendedfortheexcellenceofitslegalanalysis.My
interpretationofthearticleisthatwhilethefederalisminherentintheIndianConstitution
vestedalotofpowerinthecentre,therealityisthatoverthepast60yearsthisisbeingdiluted.
ThefoundersoftheAmerican(andAustralianwhichislargelybasedonUSConstitution)
distributedthepoweramongstthevariousentitiesandensuredthattheCentreremainedweak.
HowevertheConstitutionensuredthattheCentreretainedsomepowersexclusivelytoitself
andthestateshavelargelyabidedbythat.Theinstanceyoumentioned(TNgovtrefusingvisas)
ismorelikeamutinybytheTNGovtandshouldnotbetakenasaprecedent.Ifthisstateof
affairsisallowedtocontinue,balkanisationmaywellbeaposibilityintheyearstocome.
from:BalaVaradarajan

Postedon:Feb4,2014at06:48IST
ItakethisopportunitytosaluteTHEHINDUintimelypublishingthisarticlewithbalanced
analysisofconstitutionalprovisionsinrespectofStatesreorganisationunderArticle3of
constitutionandAndhraPradeshassembly'srejectionofthebilltobeplacedinparliament
andreferredbypresidentofIndiaforitsviews.Thelearnedlawmakerswouldapplytheir

data:text/htmlcharset=utf8,%3Cbr%20class%3D%22Appleinterchangenewline%22%3E%3Ciframe%20id%3D%22twttrHubFrameSecure%22%20allo

8/9

11/30/2014

InterpretingafederalConstitutionTheHindu

mindinevaluatingtheprovisionsofthebillandrepurcussionsassociatedinpassingthe
same,whileupholdingthefederalstructureofthecountryandkeepitunitedforever.Itis
boundeddutyofallthelawmakerstoprovidedueconsiderationtotheviewsexpressedby
theircounterpartsinstatelegislatures.Nostateshouldbereorganisedwithoutanalysing
therealneedofitandifitisinevitabletheinterestofstakeholderstobeconsideredwithout
anyshorttermpoliticalconsiderations.
from:PSNRAO

Postedon:Feb4,2014at06:37IST
Goodanalysis
from:Venkat

Postedon:Feb4,2014at05:52IST
Themostessentialingredientofdemocraticprocessliesinacceptance
ofthemajorityviewbyone&all.StateAssembliesmustn'tbedenied
oftheirrightstotakedecisionsrelatingtotheirStates.
from:asimchakrabarti

Postedon:Feb4,2014at05:47IST
Itappearsthatthewholearticleisbasedontheassumptionthatthe
RejectionofthebillbyStateAssemblywithMajoritymemberswhoare
fromNonTelanganaRegionasbeingUnprecedented.But,raterwhat
wouldhavemadetherejectionunprecedentedwasifatleastonemember
fromTelanganaregionhasvotedfortherejectionoftheBill,ithe
absenceofwhich,therejectionofthisbillisonlyontheexpected
lineofthestancetakenbythenonTelanganaleadersfromthe
beginningalthoughforthemostpartintheparttheyhaveagreedfor
thedivisioninthePast.
WhatisunprecedentedhereisthefactthattowhatextenttheNon
Telanganapoliticianswenttoensurethebilldoesnotpass.Itshould
benotedthatthebillwasnotrejectedthedayitwasintroducedthe
housebutratherwasdonewithmaliciousintentonlyattheendof
discussionsformorethan30days.Itshouldalsobenotedthatthe
extensionperiodwasrequestedfromthepresidenttodiscuss.
from:Aravind

Postedon:Feb4,2014at05:18IST
MostsensiblearticleIhaveseenonthistopicthusfar.
from:KVRao

Postedon:Feb4,2014at03:51IST

TheHindu:Home|News|Opinion|Business|Sport|S&T|Features|Entertainment|Books|InSchool|Data|Trending|Videos|Shopping|
TheSite:|AboutUs|TermsofUse|PrivacyPolicy|Contacts|Archive|Subscription|RSSFeeds|SiteMap
GroupSites:TheHindu||BusinessLine|Sportstar|Frontline|TheHinduCentre|TheHinduHub|RoofandFloor|
Publications|eBooks|Images|Classifieds|
Commentsto:web.thehindu@thehindu.co.inCopyright2014,TheHindu

data:text/htmlcharset=utf8,%3Cbr%20class%3D%22Appleinterchangenewline%22%3E%3Ciframe%20id%3D%22twttrHubFrameSecure%22%20allo

9/9