Administrative Relations between Centre and State

The Indian Constitution outlines the administrative relations between Centre and State as well as division of power between the central and state governments. Centre-state administrative relations involves a mutual delegation of duties and cooperation on common interest matters, creating a unique system that encourages uniform public services and legislative collaboration. While the Centre has some overarching control, the system balances this with state autonomy to ensure effective functioning of the Indian federation. In this article, you will learn about various Administrative Relations between Centre and State, which are very important topic for GS Paper-2 Polity & Governance of UPSC CSE Exam. To explore more interesting UPSC Polity concepts similar to Administrative Relations between Centre-State, check out other articles and IAS Notes of IASToppers. 

Table of Content

• Introduction
• Division of Executive Powers
• Responsibilities of States and Central Government
• Guidelines from the Central Government to the States
• Mutual Delegation of Functions
• Cooperation Between the Centre and States
• All-India Services
• Public Service Commissions
• Integrated Judicial System
• Relations During Emergencies
• Other Provisions
• Extra-Constitutional Devices
• Conclusion
• FAQs on Administrative Relations between Centre and State

Introduction

• Articles 256 to 263 within the Constitution’s Part XI focus on the administrative relations between Centre and State.
• In addition, other articles also touch upon this topic. 

Division of Executive Powers

• The division of executive authority is based on the distribution of legislative powers, with only a few exceptions. As a result, federal executive power spans across the entirety of India and includes:
  • I) areas in which the Parliament has sole legislative authority (i.e., the topics listed in the Union List); and  
  • II) the enforcement of rights, authority, and jurisdiction granted by any treaty or agreement.
• In similar manner, the state’s executive authority is limited to its geographical boundaries concerning matters where the state legislature possesses sole legislative power (i.e., topics found in the State List).
• Regarding matters where both the Parliament and state legislatures possess legislative power (i.e., topics listed in the Concurrent List), the executive authority lies with the states unless a Constitutional provision or parliamentary law specifically entrusts it to the Central government.
• Consequently, a law related to a concurrent topic, even if enacted by the Parliament, should be implemented by the states unless the Constitution or Parliament stipulates otherwise.

Responsibilities of States and Central Government

• The Constitution has imposed two constraints on the state’s executive powers so that central government can exercise its executive powers without limitations.
• Therefore, each state’s executive authority should be utilized in such a manner that it:
  • Guarantees adherence to laws enacted by the Parliament and any existing law applicable in the state; and
  • Does not hinder or undermine the federal government’s exercise of executive power within the state.
• In both instances, the central government’s executive authority includes the provision of necessary instructions to the state.
• However, the enforcement mechanism for these directives is of a coercive nature.
  • For example, Article 365 states that if any state fails to follow any Central directives, the President is legally empowered to declare that a situation has emerged where the state government cannot function according to the Constitution’s provisions.
  • This suggests that, under such circumstances, the state could be placed under the President’s rule as per Article 356.Top of Form

Key cases related to administrative relations between Centre and State

• Rameshwar Oraon vs. State of Bihar (1995): It highlighted the requirement for the State Government to adhere to the directives issued by the Central Government.
• Karnataka vs. Union of India (1977): It was determined that the Centre has the authority to provide instructions to a State as a legal entity, rather than merely a geographical or territorial unit.
• State of Rajasthan vs. Union of India (1977): Supreme Court affirmed that the Centre’s issuance of directions to the State government under Article 256 is reasonable if the Union Government believes that the State’s exercise of executive power may contradict the enforcement of Central Laws.
• Swaraj Abhiyan vs. Union of India (2017): Supreme Court shed light on this provision, referring to it as a ‘forgotten provision.’ This is due to the infrequent utilization of this provision since the Constitution was enacted.

Guidelines from the Central Government to the States

Beyond the two instances previously mentioned, the Central Government has the authority to provide directives to states concerning the execution of their administrative duties in several areas. These include:

• Construction and upkeep of communication infrastructures, which are designated as nationally or militarily significant;  
• Steps to ensure the safety of railways within the state;
• Offering suitable facilities for primary education in native languages for children from linguistic minorities within the state; and
• Creating and implementing specific programs for the benefit of the Scheduled Tribes in the state.

The punitive measures connected to the Central directives as per Article 365 are also relevant in these scenarios.

Mutual Delegation of Functions

• Central Government cannot pass on its legislative responsibilities to the states, nor can a single state can pass the central government to enact a law on a matter that falls under state jurisdiction.
• However, this strict separation can spark conflicts between the two. To lessen the impact of such inflexibility, the Constitution has provisions for mutual delegation of executive duties.
• The President, upon gaining approval from the state government, can delegate any of the Central Government’s executive duties to that state.
• Similarly, a state’s governor, subject to the approval of the Central Government, can delegate any of the state’s executive duties to the Central Government.
• This mutual delegation could be either conditional or unconditional.
• The Constitution also permits the Central Government to delegate its executive duties to a state without the state’s consent. In this case, the delegation is by Parliament, not the President.
• Consequently, a law enacted by Parliament on a Union List subject can bestow powers and duties on a state, or allow the Central Government to do so, regardless of the state’s consent. However, a state legislature cannot do the same.
• Such mutual delegation can occur either by agreement or legislation.

Cooperation Between the Centre and States

The Constitution has included the following clauses for collaboration between the Center and state governments:

• Parliament can resolve any disagreement or grievance concerning the usage, allocation, and management of any inter-state river and river valley.
• Under Article 263, the President has the power to form an Inter-State Council to scrutinize and deliberate on matters of mutual interest between the federal and regional governments. Such a council was inaugurated in 1990.
• Across the entire territory of India, complete trust and recognition should be given to public actions, documents, and judicial proceedings of the central and each state government.
• Parliament can designate a suitable authority to fulfil the constitutional stipulations relating to the inter-regional freedom of commerce, trade, and interaction. However, such an authority has yet to be appointed.

All-India Services

• Similar to other federal system, India has separate public services, named Central Services and State Services, respective to the centre and state jurisdictions.
• Alongside these services, there are also pan-Indian services: the Indian Administrative Service (IAS), Indian Police Service (IPS), and Indian Forest Service (IFS).
  • In 1947, the Indian Civil Service (ICS) was superseded by the IAS, and the Indian Police (IP) was replaced by the IPS.
  • In 1966, IFS was established as the third pan-Indian service.
• These services operate under a shared control structure, with the ultimate authority resting with the central government and immediate oversight provided by the state governments.
• As per Article 312 of the Constitution, the Parliament can establish new pan-Indian services in response to a resolution passed by the Rajya Sabha.
• Despite being divided among different states, each of these three services constitutes a single entity, offering uniform rights, status, and pay scales across the nation.

Though these pan-Indian services infringe on the principle of federalism by curtailing state autonomy, they are justified on three grounds:

• They aid in upholding high administrative standards at both the federal and state levels;
• They assist in ensuring a uniform administrative system across the country; and
• They enable liaison, cooperation, and collaborative action on common interest matters between the federal and state governments.

Public Service Commissions

Dynamics between the national and state levels in the Public Service Commissions are as follows:

• The State Public Service Commission’s leadership (Chairman and members), while chosen by the state’s governor, can only be dismissed by the President.
• The Parliament has the authority to form a Join State Public Service Commission (JSPSC) for multiple states, provided the individual state legislatures request it. The President is responsible for selecting the CSPSC’s Chairman and members
• The Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) can fulfil a state’s requirements upon the state governor’s request and with the President’s consent.
• The UPSC aid states (when called upon by two or more states) in devising and implementing joint recruitment programs for services that demand unique qualifications from applicants.

Integrated Judicial System

• Despite India’s dual political system, there is no double administration of justice.
• Instead, the Constitution has set up a unified judiciary system, led by the Supreme Court, followed by the state high courts.
• This system upholds both national and state laws, thereby mitigating discrepancies in judicial procedures.
• The President, in consultation with the Chief Justice of India and the state’s governor, appoints the judges of a state high court.
• The Parliament can establish a shared high court for several states.
  • For instance, Maharashtra and Goa or Punjab and Haryana share a high court.

Relations During Emergencies

• The central government assumes authority to issue executive directives on any subject to a state during a national emergency, as stipulated under Article 352. This places state governments under the full authority of the Centre, without suspending them.
• Upon enforcement of the President’s Rule in a state as per Article 356, the president is empowered to adopt the roles of the state government and powers designated to the Governor or any other state executive.
• As per Article 360, during a financial emergency, the Centre has the authority to instruct states to follow financial prudence norms, and issue other necessary directives, including reducing the pay of state employees.

Other Provisions

The Constitution provides the following supplementary provisions allowing the Centre to exert control over state administration:

• Article 355 imposes dual obligations on the Centre:
  • to safeguard every state from external aggression and internal unrest; and
  • to ensure each state government operates as per the Constitution’s provisions.
• The state’s governor is appointed by the president and serves at the President’s discretion. Besides being the Constitutional head of the state, the governor acts as the Centre’s representative within the state, periodically reporting on the state’s administrative affairs.
• The state election commissioner, though appointed by the state’s governor, can only be dismissed by the President.

Extra-Constitutional Devices

• There exist bodies outside the constitutional framework designed to foster collaboration between the central government and state authorities.
• Among the advisory entities not rooted in the constitution are:
  • NITI Ayog,
  • National Integration Council,
  • Central Council of Health and Family Welfare,
  • Central Council of Local Government,
  • Zonal Councils,
  • North-Eastern Council,
  • Central Council of Indian Medicine,
  • Central Council of Homoeopathy,
  • Transport Development Council, and
  • University Grants Commission etc.

Crucial conferences convened either yearly or as required aim to encourage consultations between the federal and state authorities on a variety of issues. These include:

• Governors’ assembly, chaired by the President
• Premieres’ gathering, led by the prime minister
• Conference of chief secretaries, under the guidance of the cabinet secretary
• Conference of inspector-general of police
• Chief justices’ assembly, under the leadership of the chief justice of India
• Meeting of vice-chancellors
• Home ministers’ assembly, chaired by the Central home minister
• Conference of law ministers, directed by the Central law minister.

Conclusion

The administrative relations between the Centre and states in India, underpinned by the constitutional provisions and supplemented by extra-constitutional devices, foster a dynamic and cooperative system. This system allows for the seamless integration of executive responsibilities, mutual delegation of functions, and uniform public services, while also providing mechanisms for effective collaboration. Although there are some centralized aspects, this approach maintains a careful distribution of power, ensuring the effective operation of the Indian federation.

Ref: Source-1

FAQs (Frequently Asked Questions)