Different Commissions and their Recommendations

1. Sarkaria Commission

The agitation for State autonomy led to the creation of Sarkaria Commission by the Central Government to recommend changes in Centre-State relationship. The Commission submitted its report in 1988. The founding fathers of the Indian Constitution were deeply concerned about ensuring the unity and integrity of the country. They were aware of the forces of disruption and disunity working within the country. These dangers at the time of independence could be handled only by a strong government at the Centre. Therefore, the framers of the Constitution assigned a predominant role to the Centre. At the same time they made provisions for the establishment of a co-operative federalism. The working of the Indian federation during the last five decades clearly shows that the relations between the Centre and the States have not always been cordial. The administrative Reforms Commission and several other Commissions were appointed by the Government of India from time to time to regulate Centre State relations. The Union Government appointed Sarkaria Commission to suggest ways and means to improve Centre-State relations. The clamour for more autonomy led to the constitution of Sarkaria Commission in 1983 which was asked to examine and review existing arrangements between the Centres and the States in all spheres and recommend appropriate changes and measures. An extraordinary situation, the need to defeat the emergency regime of Indira Gandhi, brought them together. With the return of the Congress party under Indira Gandhi’s leadership with secure majority, the movements for state autonomy slowly receded in the background. At the present moment, there is no movement for state autonomy like earlier even though the struggle to get more financial resources for the state continues. In 1990 a visible change came in the correlation of forces active in the Indian politics. Major Recommendations of Sarkaria Commission The Sarkaria Commission finally submitted its report in the year 1988. The Sarkaria Commission’s charter was to examine the relationship and balance of power between state and central governments in the country and suggest changes within the framework of Constitution of India. In spite of the large size of its reports – the Commission recommended, by and large, status quo in the Centre-State relations, especially in the areas, relating to legislative matters, role of Governors and use of Article 356.

ROLE OF GOVERNOR

Issue of Appointment of Governor	Issue of Appointment of Governor
On the issue of appointment of the Governors, it made some important recommendations as given in the following:	As far as possible, the governor should enjoy the term of five years.
The Governor should be eminent in some walk of life and from outside the state. He should be a detached figure without intense political links or should not have taken part in politics in recent past. Besides, he should not be a member of the ruling party.	He should be removed before his tenure only on the grounds as mentioned in the constitu¬tion or if aspersions are cast on his morality, dignity, constitutional propriety, etc.
He should be appointed after effective consultations with the state Chief Minister and Vice President and Speaker of the Lok Sabha should be consulted by the PM before his selection.	In the process of removal, state government may be informed and consulted.

Regarding use of Article 356: The Sarkaria Commission made the following recommendations:

• This article should be used very sparingly and as a matter of last resort. It can be invoked only in the event of political crisis, internal subversion, physical breakdown and non¬compliance with the constitutional directives of the centre.
• Before that, a warning should be issued to the errant state in specific terms and alternate course of action must be explored before invoking it.
• The material fact and grounds on the basis of which this article is invoked should be made an integral part of the Proclamation; it will ensure effective Parliamentary control over the invocation of the President Rule.
• The Governor’s report must be a ‘speaking document’ and it should be given wide publicity.
• So the Sarkaria Commission was an important attempt to streamline the centre-state rela¬tions.
• It has become a reference point for any discussion on centre-state relations and it has been frequently referred to even by the judiciary.
• On its recommendation, the Inter-State council was established in 1990 and it has considered its recommendations.
• However, many of its important recommendations have not been implemented and tensions in federal relations are a recurrent feature.

Relating to Legislative Matters

While it made the general observation that the Constitution is basically sound and there is no need for drastic changes in the basic character of the Constitution, nevertheless it gave following recommendations: (1) Ordinarily, the Union should occupy only that much field of a concurrent subject on which uniformity of Policy and Action is required in the larger interest of the Nation, leaving the rest of the details for State action, within the abroad frame-work of the Policy laid down in the Union Law. (2) Whenever, the Union proposes to undertake Legislation on a subject belonging to the Concurrent List, the States’ views must be ascertained through inter-Governmental Councils. (3) Parliamentary law passed under clauses (1) of Article 252, on request of two or more States should not be perpetual but should be for specific period not exceeding three years. (4) On receipt of a resolution from a State recommending creation or abolition of a Legislative Council, the same will be presented before the Parliament within a reasonable time.

THE ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS COMMISSION (1969) The Administrative Reforms Commission (1969) made 22 recommendations to improve Centre-State relations. It ruled out any constitutional amendment and considered the existing provisions as sufficient to regulate federal tensions. The important recommendations are given out of 22 recommendations in the following:

• Establishment of an Inter-state Council under Article 263 of the constitution
• Delegation of powers to the maximum extent to the states
• Augmenting financial resources of the states through fiscal transfers from the centre
• Appointment of non-partisan persons having long experience in public life and adminis¬tration as Governor of a state.

Other Recommendations

• It made the strong suggestion that Article 370 was not a transitory provision. This appears to have been made specifically in response to “one all-India political party” that demanded the deletion of Article 370 “in the interests of national integration.
• It recommended that the residuary powers of legislation in regard to taxation matters should remain exclusively in the competence of Parliament while the residuary field other than that of taxation should be placed on the concurrent list.
• That the enforcement of Union laws, particularly those relating to the concurrent sphere, is secured through the machinery of the states.
• To ensure uniformity on the basic issues of national policy, with respect to the subject of a proposed legislation, consultations may be carried out with the state governments individually and collectively at the forum of the proposed Inter-Governmental Council. It was not recommended that the consultation be a constitutional obligation.
• Ordinarily, the Union should occupy only that much field of a concurrent subject on which uniformity of policy and action is essential in the larger interest of the nation, leaving the rest and details for state action.
• On administrative relations, Sarkaria made some observation: “Federalism is more a functional arrangement for cooperative action, than a static institutional concept.
• Article 258 (power of the Union to confer powers etc on states in certain cases) provides a tool by the liberal use of which cooperative federalism can be substantially realised in the working of the system.
• A more generous use of this tool should be made than has hitherto been done, for progressive decentralization of powers to the governments of the states.
• The Commission strongly recommended the establishment of permanent Inter-State Council.
• In addition, it desired that both the Centre and the States should have the concern for the development of backward territory or areas.
• If the economic development of these backward regions are undertaken in a planned manner, the separatist tendencies will be automatically controlled.
• Differences between the Union and the States should be resolved by mutual consultation.
• It has taken a favourable view on the demand of the States to provide more financial resources at their disposal.
• In order to improve Centre-State relations in the country, it has suggested economic liberalization and suitable amendments to the Constitution.

2. Rajmannar Commission, 1969

In 1969, the Tamil Nadu government appointed Rajmannar Commission to look into this aspect and it submitted its report in 1971. It demanded readjustment of the VII schedule and residuary power to the states. Its other important recommendations are given in the following:

• Setting of an Inter-State council immediately
• Finance commission to be made a permanent body
• Deletion of Articles 356, 357 and 365 which dealt with the President’s rule
• Abolition of All-India Services (lAS, IPS and IFS)
• Planning Commission to be replaced by a statutory body
• The Central government completely ignored its recommendations.

3. Anandpur Sahib Resolution, 1973

In 1978, the Akali Dal came out with a controversial resolution called the Anandpur Sahib Resolution. It demanded greater autonomy for the States seeking Centre’s authority to be confined to only Defence, Foreign relation, Communications, Railways and Currency. It also demanded residuary powers for the State. In the decade of 1980, as the regional parties became very assertive, they put-forth the demand for State autonomy in an organized manner. Their ‘conclaves’ were held at Vijaywada, Delhi and Srinagar which raised the demand for redefining the Centre-States relations. Here also the Central government did not accept these recommendations. In 1973, the Akali Dal adopted Anandpur Sahib resolution which demanded the restriction of the centre’s jurisdiction to only defence, foreign affairs, communications and currency and vesting of residuary powers in the states. It also called for equal authority and representation of the states at the Centre. In December 1977, the Communist government in West Bengal published a memorandum called the West Bengal memorandum which made the following recommendations:

• The word ‘union’ in the constitution should be replaced by the word ‘federal’
• The centre’s jurisdiction to be restricted to only defence, foreign affairs, communications and economic coordination
• Deletion of articles 356, 357 and 360
• Rajya Sabha to have equal powers with that of the Lok Sabha
• Abolition of All-India services
• 75 per cent of the revenue raised by the centre should be allocated to the states

NATIONAL COMMISSION TO REVIEW THE WORKING OF THE CONSTITUTION (NCRWC) The National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC) too put forth its suggestions, many of which were a reiteration of Sarkaria Commission recommendations. Some of the novel recommendations are enumerated in the following:

• A statutory body called Inter-State Trade and Commerce Commission should be estab¬lished as given under Article 307.
• The Governor should be appointed by a committee comprising the Prime Minister, Home Minister, Speaker of Lok Sabha and the Chief Minister of the state concerned.
• Management of disasters and emergencies should be included in the Concurrent List of the Seventh Schedule.
• In case of a political breakdown in a state, before invoking Article 356, as far as practicable, the state should be given an opportunity to explain its position and redress the situation.
• The Inter-State Council order of 1990 should clearly specify the matters that should form part of the consultations.

4. Punchi Commission in 2007

The Central government constituted the Punchi Commission in 2007 to examine centre-state relations along with the possibility of giving sweeping powers to the centre for suo motu deploy¬ment of Central forces in states and investigation of crimes affecting national security. It was chaired by the former Chief Justice of India M.M. Punchi. It submitted its recommendation in 2009. Some of its important recommendations are given in the following:

• It called for giving a fixed term of five years to the governors and their removal by the pro¬cess of impeachment (similar to that of the President) by the State Legislature.
• The governor should have the right to sanction prosecution of a minister against the advice of the council of ministers.
• It called for an amendment of Articles 355 and 356 to enable centre to bring specific trouble-torn areas under its rule for a limited period. Hence, it proposed ‘localizing emer¬gency provisions’ under which either a district or parts of a district can be brought under the central rule instead of the whole state. Such an emergency should not be for more than 3 months.
• It proposed that Centre should have power to deploy its forces in case of communal con¬flagration without state’s consent for a short period of a week.

Tin Bigha corridor leased to Bangladesh - [June 26, 1992] This Day in History

26 June 1992

Tin Bigha corridor leased to Bangladesh

---

What happened?

The Tin Bigha corridor, a strip of land in India on the border with Bangladesh was leased to Bangladesh on 26 June 1992 so that it could access the Dahagram–Angarpota Bangladeshi enclaves within Indian Territory. Read more on the subject for the UPSC exam. This is an important aspect of polity and international relations including bilateral relations.

Background

• There were about 200 Indian and Bangladeshi enclaves in both countries along the border with West Bengal. Enclaves are fragments of a country completely surrounded by another country. India had 102 enclaves in Bangladesh while the latter had 71 enclaves in India.
• The people in the enclaves were totally surrounded by people of a foreign country and didn’t have access to the mainland of their mother country. To make matters even more complicated, both countries had enclaves within enclaves, also called counter-enclaves. India had 3 counter-enclaves and Bangladesh 25. And it didn’t end here. There were counter-counter enclaves. Both nations had one counter-counter enclave each.
• A lot of these enclaves were under the control of the kingdom of Cooch Behar which ruled over the area. This princely state remained independent till 1949 and only then did it merge with the Indian Union. A hasty job by the man who drew up the partition lines, Sir Cyril Radcliffe meant that these enclaves remained a problem after independence.
• In 1958, Jawaharlal Nehru and the Pakistani PM Feroze Khan Noon had an agreement with respect to the disputed region as the region was then East Pakistan.
• After the creation of Bangladesh in 1971, Indira Gandhi and Sheikh Mujibur Rehman signed a pact in 1974 to resolve the enclave problem.
• As per this agreement, Bangladesh retained Dahagram and Angarpota, its two biggest enclaves in India and India retained South Berubari.
• Both the enclaves were within each other’s territory and access to the mainland was a problem for the residents of the enclaves.
• The residents lived in a perpetual state of limbo. With limited development in the regions, access to education and medical facilities is a problem. Some people in the Indian enclaves in Bangladesh sent their children to Bangladeshi schools since they were accessible. However, these children faced the problem of employment in their own mainland since India will not recognise Bangladeshi degrees. They also faced the problem of arranging marriages.
• Another bigger problem was that of crime. A murder taking place in an Indian enclave was largely unnoticed since the authorities did not have access to the region and the Bangladeshi police did not have jurisdiction there either. This had also led to the problem of smugglers and dacoits taking haven in these enclaves, which gave rise to serious crime problems.
• The Tin Bigha corridor was to be handed over to Bangladesh in 1974 itself after the deal between Gandhi and Mujibur Rehman. While Bangladesh handed over South Berubari right away, the Tin Bigha could not be handed over to Bangladesh because it needed a constitutional amendment. This delayed the process and only in 1992 the area was leased to Bangladesh.
• When the area was opened up that year, the people of the enclave were able to move through the corridor and access their mainland for 6 hours per day. In July 1996, it was opened up for 12 hours a day. Despite this, the people were still captives in the sense that timely access to basic facilities was still a problem.
• Finally, on October 19th, 2011, the corridor was opened for 24 hours bringing relief and joy to the people of the Bangladeshi enclaves.
• However, there were protests within India. In 1992, when the corridor was opened up for the first time, there were huge protests from the people residing in the surrounding areas. Two people were also killed. The protesters held that if the strip was leased and the exchange of the Indian enclaves was not done, the perpetual lease would be a deterrent for the full exchange of the enclaves.
• In May 2015, the historic Constitution (119th Amendment) Bill was passed by Parliament which allows the exchange of enclaves by India and Bangladesh. While this meant that there would be a loss of territory for India, the boundaries would not be altered. Also, the long-standing problem of people living in a stateless situation would come to an end.

National Population Register (NPR)

The National Population Register or NPR is a topic that is seen in the news with great frequency these days. It is such kind of topics that come up in the UPSC question papers mostly. So, it is important that IAS aspirants understand and study NPR in detail. It comes under polity and current affairs sections of the IAS exam.

The National Population Register (NPR) is a file of the identities of all Indian populations. The data for the formation of the NPR was gathered in the General Census carried out between April and September 2010. The record is upheld by the Registrar General and Census Commissioner of India. The Indian government is also making a National Register of Indian Citizens, a subsection of the National Population Register.

The aim for NPR is nearly the similar as for Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), which issues Aadhaar cards. It is to increase the implementation of the economic policies and various programs of government.

Question for the Day on the Topic

Consider the following statements

1. The National Population Register (NPR) is upheld by the Registrar General and Census Commissioner of India.
2. The aim for NPR is nearly the similar as for Unique Identification Authority of India

Select the correct ones

1. 1 only
2. 2 only
3. Both 1 and 2
4. Neither 1 nor 2

Answer: C

National Register of Citizens (NRC)

What is National Register of Citizens?

Maintained by the Government of India, the National Register of Citizens (NRC) holds all the important information of the Indian citizens of Assam required for their identification. It was during a parliamentary session on 20th November 2019 when Home Minister Amit Shah declared an extension of NRC to the entire country.

NRC was first introduced after the 1951 Census of India and Assam was the first in updating this NRC for including the names of the persons along with their descendants whose name was successfully registered in the NRC of 1951, or was found in any of the electoral rolls till the midnight of 24th March 1971. The main purpose for the introduction and updating of the NRC in Assam was the identification of the illegal immigrants in Assam who had migrated to Assam from Bangladesh during the 1971 war with Pakistan. This is a sensitive issue in Assam as many complain of mass infiltrations from the eastern border that are eroding the Assamese culture and changing the demographics of the region.

The topic of NRC is important for the IAS exam, being a part of polity and governance segments of the UPSC syllabus.

NRC in Assam

The objective behind the NRC update is the identification of the illegal migrants who migrated from Bangladesh after 24th March 1971 to Assam. It also aims at determining whether the citizens applying for their names in the NRC are the genuine citizens of Assam or not. One of the basic criteria for identification was that the names of the family members of the applicant should be present in the NRC prepared in 1951 or in the electoral rolls up till March 24, 1971.

A person also can present the following documents as proof of his/her citizenship:

• Birth certificate
• LIC policy
• Refugee registration certificate
• Land and tenancy records
• Citizenship certificate, passport, government-issued licence or certificate
• Bank/post office accounts and permanent residential certificate
• Government employment certificate, educational certificate and court records.

Since the year 1950, due to the migrations taking place into Assam, there has been a fear of losing their cultural identity and the demography of the state in the minds of the original inhabitants. During the late seventies, the university students in Assam along with the All Assam Students’ Union started a movement called the Assam Agitation which demanded the detection and deportation of illegal migrants in Assam. The agitation was aggressive and brought the whole state to a standstill.

Assam Accord, 1985

During the year 1985, the Assam Accord was signed between the All Assam Students Union (AASU), the All Assam Gana Sangram Parishad and the then Central Government led by Rajiv Gandhi to bring stability in the state. The provisions of the Assam Accord were:

• Any foreigner will be given full citizenship including the right to vote if he/she had come to Assam between 1951 and 1961
• The foreigners who had migrated to Assam between 1961 and 1971 will be given all the rights of citizenship except the right to vote, which would be denied for a period of ten years and those who entered Assam after the year 1971 would be deported.

Many difficulties arose during the implementation of the Assam Accord as it led to massive law problems. Even many people were killed during a mob attack that took place in Barpeta at the office of the Deputy Commissioner.

A petition was filed in the Supreme Court in 2009 by an NGO called Assam Public Works demanding the identification and deportation of illegal Bangladeshis in Assam. They also demanded the deletion of their names from the voter’s list.

In 2013, an order was passed by the Supreme Court for completion of the NRC update by December 31st, 2017. Currently, the Supreme Court is responsible for monitoring the entire process of NRC updation. The NRC is updated on the basis of the Citizenship Act, 1955 and The Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003.

Controversies of the National Register of Citizens (NRC)

With the introduction of final NRC on 31st August 2019 at 10 a.m. for the completion of the 1951 NRC update, a lot of controversies were created and even some law-makers openly came out for criticizing this document. As per the reports, an M.L.A of Assam belonging to the political party All India United Democratic Front (AIUDF) was found out of the NRC. On this regard, he expressed that there are thousands of genuine Indians, especially the Bengali Hindus are left out of the final NRC list whereas the illegal foreigners made an entry to the final list. Even re-verification of this draft list was rejected by the Supreme Court.

Eligibility Criteria for NRC

A person should fulfill the following criteria to be eligible for the NRC:

• Any persons whose names appeared in the NRC of 1972 or in any of the Electoral Rolls till the date of 24th March 1971 (midnight) as well as their descendants.
• Persons who had registered themselves as per the rules of the Central Government with the Foreigners Registration Regional Officer (FRRO) and are not considered illegal migrants or foreigners by any authority.
• Any person who had migrated to Assam on or after 1st January 1966 but before 25th March 1971.
• People who are original inhabitants of Assam and their children and descendants who are citizens of India provided their citizenship is ascertained beyond a reasonable doubt by the registering authority.
• Persons who can provide any one of the documents issued up to midnight of 24 March 1971 as mentioned in the list of documents admissible for citizenship.

Funds of central government

Types of Central Government Funds - Indian Polity

Types of funds of the Central Government are important topics in the Indian polity and governance sections of the UPSC syllabus. In this article, you can read all about the various types of funds available with the Central Government.

Funds of Government of India

The Indian government’s funds are kept in three parts, which are listed below:

1. Consolidated Fund of India
2. Contingency Fund of India
3. Public Accounts of India

All three are described below briefly.

Consolidated Fund of India

• • This is the most important of all accounts of the government.
  • This fund is filled by:
    • Direct and indirect taxes
    • Loans taken by the Indian government
    • Returning of loans/interests of loans to the government by anyone/agency that has taken it
  • The government meets all its expenditure from this fund.

• The government needs parliamentary approval to withdraw money from this fund.

• The provision for this fund is given in Article 266(1) of the Constitution of India.
• Each state can have its own Consolidated Fund of the state with similar provisions.
• The Comptroller and Auditor General of India audits these funds and reports to the relevant legislatures on their management.

Contingency Fund of India

• Provision for this fund is made in Article 267(1) of the Constitution of India.
• Its corpus is Rs. 500 crores.
• The Secretary, Finance Ministry holds this fund on behalf of the President of India.
• This fund is used to meet unexpected or unforeseen expenditure.
• Each state can have its own contingency fund.

Public Accounts of India

• This is constituted under Article 266(2) of the Constitution.
• All other public money (other than those covered under the Consolidated Fund of India) received by or on behalf of the Indian Government are credited to this account/fund.
• This is made up of:
  • Bank savings account of the various ministries/departments 
  • National small savings fund, defense fund
  • National Investment Fund (money earned from disinvestment)
  • National Calamity & Contingency Fund (NCCF) (for Disaster Management)
  • Provident fund, Postal insurance, etc.
  • Similar funds
• The government does not need permission to take advances from this account.
• Each state can have its own similar accounts.

The following table summarises the three funds:

Fund	Consolidated Fund	Contingency Fund	Public Accounts
Income	Taxes and non-tax revenue	Fixed corpus of Rs. 500 crore	Public money other than those under consolidated fund
Expenditure	All expenditure	Unforeseen expenditure	Public money other than those under consolidated fund
Parliamentary Authorisation	Required prior to expenditure	Required after the expenditure	Not required
Articles of Constitution	266(1)	267(1)	266(2)

Types of Expenditures

Charged Expenditures

• Non-votable charges are called charged expenditures.
• No voting takes place for this amount which is spent from the Consolidated Fund of India. Parliamentary approval is not needed.
• These are paid whether or not the budget is passed.
• Emoluments, allowances and expenditure of the President and his office, salary and allowances of chairman, Deputy chairman of Rajya Sabha, Speaker, Supreme Court judges, CAG and Deputy Speaker of the Lok Sabha come under this expenditure.
• Another example of charged expenditure is debt charges of the government.
• These are not voted because these payments are deemed guaranteed by the state.
• Even though voting does not take place, discussion on these can take place in both the Houses.

Voted/Votable Expenditures

• This is the actual budget.
• The expenditures in the budget are actually in the form of Demand for Grants.
• The demands for grants are presented to the Lok Sabha along with the Annual Financial Statement. Generally, one Demand for Grant is presented for each Ministry or Department.

Supplementary Grants

• Supplementary grants are granted when the sum approved by the Parliament via the appropriation act for a certain service for the current financial year is found to be inadequate.

Additional Grants

• These are granted when a need has emerged for the duration of the present financial year for additional expenditure for certain new service, not considered in the budget for that year.

Excess Grants

• Excess Grant is granted when cash spent on any provision in a financial year exceeds the amount granted for that service in the budget.

UPSC Questions related to Types of Funds of Govt. of India

Who controls government money in India?

The Ministry of Finance is the apex controlling authority.

Who holds Consolidated Fund of India?

The Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs holds the Fund on behalf of the President of India.

Who gets salary from Consolidated Fund of India?

Salary and Allowances of the President, Speaker / Deputy Speaker of Lok Sabha, Chairman/ Deputy Chairman of Rajya Sabha, Salaries and Allowances of Supreme Court judges, Pensions of Supreme Court as well as High Court Judges, Salaries and Allowances of CAG, Lok Pal.

Who prepares the budget in India?

The Ministry of Finance prepares the budget.