India is a Union of States. But have you ever wondered:
- Why does the Constitution use the word “Union” instead of “Federation”?
- Can Parliament create a new State?
- Can the name or boundary of a State be changed?
- Does a State Government have the power to stop Parliament from changing its boundaries?
These questions are answered in Part I of the Indian Constitution, Articles 1 to 4, titled The Union and Its Territory.
These provisions explain the constitutional identity of India and Parliament's power to reorganise the country's States and territories.
1. Article 1: Name and Territory of the Union
Article 1 describes India as:
“India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States.”
This short provision contains three important ideas.
A. India, that is Bharat
The Constitution recognises both names: India and Bharat.
Both refer to the same country.
B. India is a Union of States
The Constitution uses the expression Union of States, rather than describing India as a federation formed by an agreement among States.
The States do not have a constitutional right to separate from India.
C. Territory of India
Article 1 distinguishes between the territory of India and the Union of India in the narrower sense of the States.
The territory of India comprises:
- The territories of the States
- The Union Territories specified in the First Schedule
- Such other territories as may be acquired
Simple example: If India acquires a new territory in accordance with applicable constitutional and international law, that territory can form part of India's territory. Its constitutional status would depend on the relevant legal arrangements.
UPSC takeaway: Article 1 defines the name and territorial composition of India.
2. Article 2: Admission or Establishment of New States
Article 2 gives Parliament the power to admit new States into the Union or establish new States, on such terms and conditions as it thinks fit.
What does “admit” mean?
To admit means to allow something to become part of a group.
What does “establish” mean?
To establish means to create or set up something.
Article 2 concerns the admission or establishment of States, including situations that are distinct from reorganising the territory of an existing State under Article 3.
Parliament exercises this power through legislation.
Remember: Article 2 deals with admission or establishment of new States; Article 3 deals with the formation of new States and changes to existing States.
3. Article 3: Formation of New States and Alteration of Existing States
Article 3 is one of the most important provisions in Part I for UPSC Prelims.
It empowers Parliament to:
- Form a new State by separating territory from an existing State.
- Unite two or more States or parts of States.
- Unite any territory to a part of a State.
- Increase the area of any State.
- Diminish the area of any State.
- Alter the boundaries of any State.
- Alter the name of any State.
Simple example
Suppose Parliament considers creating a new State by separating certain districts from an existing State.
Article 3 provides the constitutional framework for Parliament to consider such a reorganisation.
Similarly, Parliament can legislate to change a State's name or boundaries, following the procedure laid down in the Constitution.
Can Parliament change a State's name?
Yes. Article 3 expressly empowers Parliament to alter the name of any State.
Can Parliament create a new State?
Yes. Parliament can form a new State through legislation under Article 3, subject to the constitutional procedure.
4. Procedure Under Article 3
The procedure is particularly important for competitive examinations.
Step 1: Presidential recommendation
A Bill for the purposes specified in Article 3 can be introduced in either House of Parliament only on the recommendation of the President.
Step 2: Reference to the State Legislature
If the proposal affects the area, boundaries, or name of a State, the President refers the Bill to the Legislature of that State for expressing its views.
The President specifies a period within which the State Legislature may express its views. The President may also allow an extension.
Step 3: Parliament considers the Bill
After the prescribed period expires, Parliament may proceed with the Bill.
Crucial distinction: The State Legislature's views are not the same as its consent. The Constitution requires an opportunity for the affected State Legislature to express its views, but Parliament is not constitutionally bound to accept those views.
UPSC Prelims Trap
Does the affected State Legislature have the power to veto a Bill under Article 3?
No. Its views must be sought in the constitutionally prescribed process, but its approval is not a binding requirement.
5. Article 4: Laws Under Articles 2 and 3
Article 4 explains the constitutional treatment of laws made under Articles 2 and 3.
Such laws may include provisions necessary to amend the First Schedule and Fourth Schedule, along with supplementary, incidental, and consequential provisions.
What are the First and Fourth Schedules?
- First Schedule: Lists the States and Union Territories and describes their territorial composition.
- Fourth Schedule: Deals with the allocation of seats in the Rajya Sabha to States and Union Territories.
Article 4 also provides that a law made under Article 2 or Article 3 is not considered a constitutional amendment under Article 368, even if it makes the necessary changes to the First or Fourth Schedule.
This is a frequently tested constitutional distinction.
6. Article 2 vs Article 3 vs Article 4
| Article | Main subject | Key idea |
|---|---|---|
| Article 2 | Admission or establishment of new States | Bringing in or establishing States |
| Article 3 | Formation of new States and alteration of existing States | Reorganisation of States |
| Article 4 | Supplemental provisions for laws under Articles 2 and 3 | Schedule changes and related matters without using Article 368 |
Memory trick:
- Article 2 = Admit or establish
- Article 3 = Form or alter
- Article 4 = Implement related changes
7. Important Constitutional Case: Berubari Union
The Berubari Union case is relevant to understanding the limits of Article 3.
In the In re Berubari Union (1960) advisory opinion, the Supreme Court considered the constitutional procedure for ceding Indian territory to another country.
The Court distinguished the transfer of Indian territory to a foreign country from the internal reorganisation of States under Article 3.
The case is commonly studied for the principle that ceding Indian territory to a foreign country requires a constitutional amendment under Article 368, rather than being accomplished merely through Article 3.
UPSC takeaway: Internal reorganisation of States and cession of Indian territory to a foreign country are constitutionally distinct matters.
8. Quick Revision Notes
- Article 1: India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States.
- Article 1 identifies the territory of India.
- Article 2: Parliament may admit or establish new States.
- Article 3: Parliament may form new States or alter the area, boundaries, or names of existing States.
- Article 3 Bill requires the President's recommendation before introduction.
- The affected State Legislature is asked to express its views.
- State Legislature's consent is not mandatory.
- Article 4 deals with consequential changes under Articles 2 and 3.
- Laws under Articles 2 and 3 are not Article 368 amendments merely because they amend the First or Fourth Schedule.
- Cession of Indian territory to a foreign country is distinct from internal State reorganisation.
9. UPSC Prelims Practice Questions
Question 1
India is described in Article 1 of the Constitution as:
A. A Federation of States
B. A Union of States
C. A Confederation of States
D. A League of States
Answer: B. A Union of States
Explanation: Article 1 expressly describes India as a Union of States.
Question 2
Which Article empowers Parliament to alter the boundaries of an existing State?
A. Article 1
B. Article 2
C. Article 3
D. Article 4
Answer: C. Article 3
Explanation: Article 3 empowers Parliament to form new States and alter the area, boundaries, or names of existing States.
Question 3
The views of the affected State Legislature under Article 3 are:
A. Binding on Parliament
B. Equivalent to a veto
C. Required to be sought, but not binding on Parliament
D. Not required under any circumstances
Answer: C. Required to be sought, but not binding on Parliament
Explanation: The Constitution requires the State Legislature to be given an opportunity to express its views, but Parliament is not bound by those views.
Question 4
A law made under Article 3 that amends the First Schedule is:
A. Always an amendment under Article 368
B. Not deemed an amendment under Article 368 merely for that reason
C. Invalid without approval of every State
D. Required to be passed by a referendum
Answer: B. Not deemed an amendment under Article 368 merely for that reason
Explanation: Article 4 expressly provides this constitutional treatment.
Question 5
Which case is associated with the constitutional procedure for ceding Indian territory to a foreign country?
A. Kesavananda Bharati
B. In re Berubari Union
C. Golaknath
D. Minerva Mills
Answer: B. In re Berubari Union
Explanation: The Berubari Union advisory opinion is an important authority on cession of Indian territory and the constitutional amendment procedure.
10. UPSC Mains Practice Question
Question: Explain the powers of Parliament under Articles 2 and 3 of the Indian Constitution. Is the consent of the affected State Legislature necessary for the reorganisation of a State?
Answer-writing framework
- Introduce Articles 2 and 3.
- Explain Parliament's power to admit, establish, and reorganise States.
- Describe the procedure for an Article 3 Bill.
- Distinguish State Legislature's views from its consent.
- Briefly explain Article 4 and its relationship with Article 368.
Conclusion
Articles 1 to 4 establish the constitutional framework for India's territorial identity and the reorganisation of States.
For UPSC, the most important distinction is between the power of Parliament and the role of the affected State Legislature. Parliament has the constitutional authority to reorganise States, while the State Legislature is given an opportunity to express its views through the prescribed process.
Understanding this distinction will help you solve both direct factual questions and conceptual questions on Indian federalism.