Union & Its Territories | Polity for UPSC 2024 (Pre & Mains) PDF Download

 Page 1


 
 
Pre plus Mains Lecture 3.1 
Union and its Territories 
Article 1 describes India, that is, Bharat as a ‘Union of States’ rather than a 
‘Federation of States’. The term used is ‘union’ and not federation is because: 
1. Indian Federation is not the result of an agreement among the states like 
the American Federation 
2. The states have no right to secede from the federation 
The territory of India is comprised of the following: 
1. Territories of the states 
2. Union territories 
3. Territories that may be acquired by the Government of India at any time 
Notably, the ‘Territory of India’ is a wider expression than the ‘Union of India’ 
because the latter includes only states while the former includes not only the 
states but also union territories and territories that may be acquired by the 
Government of India at any future time. The names of the States and the 
Unions have been described in the First Schedule. This schedule also holds that 
there are four Categories of State and territories - Part A, Part B, Part C and 
Part D. 
Part A - includes the nine provinces which were under British India 
Part B - princely states consisted of this category 
Part C - centrally administered five states 
Part D - Andaman and Nicobar Islands 
In the seventh amendment of the Constitution in 1956 the distinction between 
the Part A and Part B states was abolished. Subsequently states were 
reorganized on linguistic basis. Being a sovereign state, India can acquire 
foreign territories according to the modes recognised by international law, i.e., 
cession (following treaty, purchase, gift, lease or plebiscite), occupation 
(hitherto unoccupied by a recognised ruler), conquest or subjugation. 
Page 2


 
 
Pre plus Mains Lecture 3.1 
Union and its Territories 
Article 1 describes India, that is, Bharat as a ‘Union of States’ rather than a 
‘Federation of States’. The term used is ‘union’ and not federation is because: 
1. Indian Federation is not the result of an agreement among the states like 
the American Federation 
2. The states have no right to secede from the federation 
The territory of India is comprised of the following: 
1. Territories of the states 
2. Union territories 
3. Territories that may be acquired by the Government of India at any time 
Notably, the ‘Territory of India’ is a wider expression than the ‘Union of India’ 
because the latter includes only states while the former includes not only the 
states but also union territories and territories that may be acquired by the 
Government of India at any future time. The names of the States and the 
Unions have been described in the First Schedule. This schedule also holds that 
there are four Categories of State and territories - Part A, Part B, Part C and 
Part D. 
Part A - includes the nine provinces which were under British India 
Part B - princely states consisted of this category 
Part C - centrally administered five states 
Part D - Andaman and Nicobar Islands 
In the seventh amendment of the Constitution in 1956 the distinction between 
the Part A and Part B states was abolished. Subsequently states were 
reorganized on linguistic basis. Being a sovereign state, India can acquire 
foreign territories according to the modes recognised by international law, i.e., 
cession (following treaty, purchase, gift, lease or plebiscite), occupation 
(hitherto unoccupied by a recognised ruler), conquest or subjugation. 
 
 
Article 2 empowers the Parliament to ‘admit into the Union of India, or 
establish, new states on such terms and conditions as it thinks fit’. Thus, 
Article 2 grants two powers to the Parliament: (a) the power to admit into the 
Union of India new states; For example, the 35
th
 amendment made the 
protectorate of Sikkim (by the 1950 treaty) into an ‘associate state’ in 1975 
which following a referendum became the 22
nd
 state of India; and (b) the 
power to establish new states. Importantly, Article 2 relates to the admission 
or establishment of new states that are not part of the Union of India. 
Article 3 authorises the Parliament to: 
(a) form a new state by separation of territory from any state or by uniting two 
or more states or parts of states or by uniting any territory to a part of any 
state, 
(b) increase the area of any state, 
(c) diminish the area of any state, 
(d) alter the boundaries of any state, and 
(e) alter the name of any state. 
 
Thus, Article 3 relates to the formation of or changes/ internal readjustment 
in the existing states of the Union of India. For example in 1966, Punjab was 
bifurcated to form states of Punjab and Haryana along with the then UT of 
Himachal Pradesh. In 2014, the state of Telangana was formed with the 
bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh.  
Article 3 lays down two conditions in this regard: one, a bill contemplating the 
above changes can be introduced in the Parliament only with the prior 
recommendation of the President; and two, before recommending the bill, the 
President has to refer the same to the state legistature concerned for 
expressing its views within a specified period. However, The President (or 
Parliament) is not bound by the views of the state legislature and it is not 
necessary to make a fresh reference to the state legislature every time an 
amendment to the bill is moved. In case of a union territory, no reference need 
be made to the concerned legislature to ascertain its views and the Parliament 
can itself take any action as it deems fit. 
 
Page 3


 
 
Pre plus Mains Lecture 3.1 
Union and its Territories 
Article 1 describes India, that is, Bharat as a ‘Union of States’ rather than a 
‘Federation of States’. The term used is ‘union’ and not federation is because: 
1. Indian Federation is not the result of an agreement among the states like 
the American Federation 
2. The states have no right to secede from the federation 
The territory of India is comprised of the following: 
1. Territories of the states 
2. Union territories 
3. Territories that may be acquired by the Government of India at any time 
Notably, the ‘Territory of India’ is a wider expression than the ‘Union of India’ 
because the latter includes only states while the former includes not only the 
states but also union territories and territories that may be acquired by the 
Government of India at any future time. The names of the States and the 
Unions have been described in the First Schedule. This schedule also holds that 
there are four Categories of State and territories - Part A, Part B, Part C and 
Part D. 
Part A - includes the nine provinces which were under British India 
Part B - princely states consisted of this category 
Part C - centrally administered five states 
Part D - Andaman and Nicobar Islands 
In the seventh amendment of the Constitution in 1956 the distinction between 
the Part A and Part B states was abolished. Subsequently states were 
reorganized on linguistic basis. Being a sovereign state, India can acquire 
foreign territories according to the modes recognised by international law, i.e., 
cession (following treaty, purchase, gift, lease or plebiscite), occupation 
(hitherto unoccupied by a recognised ruler), conquest or subjugation. 
 
 
Article 2 empowers the Parliament to ‘admit into the Union of India, or 
establish, new states on such terms and conditions as it thinks fit’. Thus, 
Article 2 grants two powers to the Parliament: (a) the power to admit into the 
Union of India new states; For example, the 35
th
 amendment made the 
protectorate of Sikkim (by the 1950 treaty) into an ‘associate state’ in 1975 
which following a referendum became the 22
nd
 state of India; and (b) the 
power to establish new states. Importantly, Article 2 relates to the admission 
or establishment of new states that are not part of the Union of India. 
Article 3 authorises the Parliament to: 
(a) form a new state by separation of territory from any state or by uniting two 
or more states or parts of states or by uniting any territory to a part of any 
state, 
(b) increase the area of any state, 
(c) diminish the area of any state, 
(d) alter the boundaries of any state, and 
(e) alter the name of any state. 
 
Thus, Article 3 relates to the formation of or changes/ internal readjustment 
in the existing states of the Union of India. For example in 1966, Punjab was 
bifurcated to form states of Punjab and Haryana along with the then UT of 
Himachal Pradesh. In 2014, the state of Telangana was formed with the 
bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh.  
Article 3 lays down two conditions in this regard: one, a bill contemplating the 
above changes can be introduced in the Parliament only with the prior 
recommendation of the President; and two, before recommending the bill, the 
President has to refer the same to the state legistature concerned for 
expressing its views within a specified period. However, The President (or 
Parliament) is not bound by the views of the state legislature and it is not 
necessary to make a fresh reference to the state legislature every time an 
amendment to the bill is moved. In case of a union territory, no reference need 
be made to the concerned legislature to ascertain its views and the Parliament 
can itself take any action as it deems fit. 
 
 
 
Article 4 declares that laws made for admission or establishment of new states 
(under Article 2) and formation of new states and alteration of areas, 
boundaries or names of existing states (under Articles 3) are not to be 
considered as amendments of the Constitution under Article 368. 
 
Question of cessation of territory: 
While the Parliament has the power to diminish areas of states internally 
questions to cessation of territory arose during the Berubari Union case, 1960 
through Presidential reference to the Supreme Court (under Article 143). The 
Supreme Court held that the power of Parliament to diminish the area of a 
state (under Article 3) does not cover cession of Indian territory to a foreign 
country. Hence, Indian territory can be ceded to a foreign state only by 
amending the Constitution under Article 368. Consequently, the 9th 
Constitutional Amendment Act (1960) was enacted to transfer the said 
territory to Pakistan. 
 
Similarly, the 100th Constitutional Amendment Act (2015) was enacted to give 
effect to the acquiring of certain territories by India and transfer of certain 
other territories to Bangladesh in pursuance of the agreement and its protocol 
entered into between the Governments of India and Bangladesh. India 
transferred 111 enclaves to Bangladesh, while Bangladesh transferred 51 
enclaves to India. In addition, the deal also involved the transfer of adverse 
possessions and the demarcation of a 6.1-km undemarcated border stretch. 
For these three purposes, the amendment modified the provisions relating to 
the territories of four states (Assam, West Bengal, Meghalaya and Tripura) in 
the First Schedule of the Constitution. 
Page 4


 
 
Pre plus Mains Lecture 3.1 
Union and its Territories 
Article 1 describes India, that is, Bharat as a ‘Union of States’ rather than a 
‘Federation of States’. The term used is ‘union’ and not federation is because: 
1. Indian Federation is not the result of an agreement among the states like 
the American Federation 
2. The states have no right to secede from the federation 
The territory of India is comprised of the following: 
1. Territories of the states 
2. Union territories 
3. Territories that may be acquired by the Government of India at any time 
Notably, the ‘Territory of India’ is a wider expression than the ‘Union of India’ 
because the latter includes only states while the former includes not only the 
states but also union territories and territories that may be acquired by the 
Government of India at any future time. The names of the States and the 
Unions have been described in the First Schedule. This schedule also holds that 
there are four Categories of State and territories - Part A, Part B, Part C and 
Part D. 
Part A - includes the nine provinces which were under British India 
Part B - princely states consisted of this category 
Part C - centrally administered five states 
Part D - Andaman and Nicobar Islands 
In the seventh amendment of the Constitution in 1956 the distinction between 
the Part A and Part B states was abolished. Subsequently states were 
reorganized on linguistic basis. Being a sovereign state, India can acquire 
foreign territories according to the modes recognised by international law, i.e., 
cession (following treaty, purchase, gift, lease or plebiscite), occupation 
(hitherto unoccupied by a recognised ruler), conquest or subjugation. 
 
 
Article 2 empowers the Parliament to ‘admit into the Union of India, or 
establish, new states on such terms and conditions as it thinks fit’. Thus, 
Article 2 grants two powers to the Parliament: (a) the power to admit into the 
Union of India new states; For example, the 35
th
 amendment made the 
protectorate of Sikkim (by the 1950 treaty) into an ‘associate state’ in 1975 
which following a referendum became the 22
nd
 state of India; and (b) the 
power to establish new states. Importantly, Article 2 relates to the admission 
or establishment of new states that are not part of the Union of India. 
Article 3 authorises the Parliament to: 
(a) form a new state by separation of territory from any state or by uniting two 
or more states or parts of states or by uniting any territory to a part of any 
state, 
(b) increase the area of any state, 
(c) diminish the area of any state, 
(d) alter the boundaries of any state, and 
(e) alter the name of any state. 
 
Thus, Article 3 relates to the formation of or changes/ internal readjustment 
in the existing states of the Union of India. For example in 1966, Punjab was 
bifurcated to form states of Punjab and Haryana along with the then UT of 
Himachal Pradesh. In 2014, the state of Telangana was formed with the 
bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh.  
Article 3 lays down two conditions in this regard: one, a bill contemplating the 
above changes can be introduced in the Parliament only with the prior 
recommendation of the President; and two, before recommending the bill, the 
President has to refer the same to the state legistature concerned for 
expressing its views within a specified period. However, The President (or 
Parliament) is not bound by the views of the state legislature and it is not 
necessary to make a fresh reference to the state legislature every time an 
amendment to the bill is moved. In case of a union territory, no reference need 
be made to the concerned legislature to ascertain its views and the Parliament 
can itself take any action as it deems fit. 
 
 
 
Article 4 declares that laws made for admission or establishment of new states 
(under Article 2) and formation of new states and alteration of areas, 
boundaries or names of existing states (under Articles 3) are not to be 
considered as amendments of the Constitution under Article 368. 
 
Question of cessation of territory: 
While the Parliament has the power to diminish areas of states internally 
questions to cessation of territory arose during the Berubari Union case, 1960 
through Presidential reference to the Supreme Court (under Article 143). The 
Supreme Court held that the power of Parliament to diminish the area of a 
state (under Article 3) does not cover cession of Indian territory to a foreign 
country. Hence, Indian territory can be ceded to a foreign state only by 
amending the Constitution under Article 368. Consequently, the 9th 
Constitutional Amendment Act (1960) was enacted to transfer the said 
territory to Pakistan. 
 
Similarly, the 100th Constitutional Amendment Act (2015) was enacted to give 
effect to the acquiring of certain territories by India and transfer of certain 
other territories to Bangladesh in pursuance of the agreement and its protocol 
entered into between the Governments of India and Bangladesh. India 
transferred 111 enclaves to Bangladesh, while Bangladesh transferred 51 
enclaves to India. In addition, the deal also involved the transfer of adverse 
possessions and the demarcation of a 6.1-km undemarcated border stretch. 
For these three purposes, the amendment modified the provisions relating to 
the territories of four states (Assam, West Bengal, Meghalaya and Tripura) in 
the First Schedule of the Constitution. 
 
 
 
 
However, the Supreme Court in (Maganbhai Ishwarbhai Patel case) 1969 
ruled that, settlement of a boundary dispute between India and another 
country does not require a constitutional amendment. It can be done by 
executive action as it does not involve cession of Indian territory to a foreign 
country. Similarly, in case of maritime dispute with Bangladesh the award of 
the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) was accepted to the long standing 
issue without any amendment.  
 
The tribunal verdict is binding on all parties and there is no option for appeal. 
However, according to the rules of procedures, if any party needs any 
interpretation of the verdict, it can make a request to the court within 30 days 
of receiving the verdict and the interpretation would be made available within 
45 days. Bangladesh went in for arbitration over the delimitation of maritime 
boundary under the United Nations Convention on Law of Sea (UNCLOS) on 
October 8 2009. The argument focussed on issues including the location of the 
land boundary terminus, delimitation of the territorial sea, exclusive economic 
zone, and the continental shelf within and beyond 200 nautical miles. The PCA 
awarded Bangladesh an area of 19,467 sq km, four-fifth of the total area of 
25,602 sq km disputed maritime boundary in the Bay of Bengal with India in 
2014.  
Page 5


 
 
Pre plus Mains Lecture 3.1 
Union and its Territories 
Article 1 describes India, that is, Bharat as a ‘Union of States’ rather than a 
‘Federation of States’. The term used is ‘union’ and not federation is because: 
1. Indian Federation is not the result of an agreement among the states like 
the American Federation 
2. The states have no right to secede from the federation 
The territory of India is comprised of the following: 
1. Territories of the states 
2. Union territories 
3. Territories that may be acquired by the Government of India at any time 
Notably, the ‘Territory of India’ is a wider expression than the ‘Union of India’ 
because the latter includes only states while the former includes not only the 
states but also union territories and territories that may be acquired by the 
Government of India at any future time. The names of the States and the 
Unions have been described in the First Schedule. This schedule also holds that 
there are four Categories of State and territories - Part A, Part B, Part C and 
Part D. 
Part A - includes the nine provinces which were under British India 
Part B - princely states consisted of this category 
Part C - centrally administered five states 
Part D - Andaman and Nicobar Islands 
In the seventh amendment of the Constitution in 1956 the distinction between 
the Part A and Part B states was abolished. Subsequently states were 
reorganized on linguistic basis. Being a sovereign state, India can acquire 
foreign territories according to the modes recognised by international law, i.e., 
cession (following treaty, purchase, gift, lease or plebiscite), occupation 
(hitherto unoccupied by a recognised ruler), conquest or subjugation. 
 
 
Article 2 empowers the Parliament to ‘admit into the Union of India, or 
establish, new states on such terms and conditions as it thinks fit’. Thus, 
Article 2 grants two powers to the Parliament: (a) the power to admit into the 
Union of India new states; For example, the 35
th
 amendment made the 
protectorate of Sikkim (by the 1950 treaty) into an ‘associate state’ in 1975 
which following a referendum became the 22
nd
 state of India; and (b) the 
power to establish new states. Importantly, Article 2 relates to the admission 
or establishment of new states that are not part of the Union of India. 
Article 3 authorises the Parliament to: 
(a) form a new state by separation of territory from any state or by uniting two 
or more states or parts of states or by uniting any territory to a part of any 
state, 
(b) increase the area of any state, 
(c) diminish the area of any state, 
(d) alter the boundaries of any state, and 
(e) alter the name of any state. 
 
Thus, Article 3 relates to the formation of or changes/ internal readjustment 
in the existing states of the Union of India. For example in 1966, Punjab was 
bifurcated to form states of Punjab and Haryana along with the then UT of 
Himachal Pradesh. In 2014, the state of Telangana was formed with the 
bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh.  
Article 3 lays down two conditions in this regard: one, a bill contemplating the 
above changes can be introduced in the Parliament only with the prior 
recommendation of the President; and two, before recommending the bill, the 
President has to refer the same to the state legistature concerned for 
expressing its views within a specified period. However, The President (or 
Parliament) is not bound by the views of the state legislature and it is not 
necessary to make a fresh reference to the state legislature every time an 
amendment to the bill is moved. In case of a union territory, no reference need 
be made to the concerned legislature to ascertain its views and the Parliament 
can itself take any action as it deems fit. 
 
 
 
Article 4 declares that laws made for admission or establishment of new states 
(under Article 2) and formation of new states and alteration of areas, 
boundaries or names of existing states (under Articles 3) are not to be 
considered as amendments of the Constitution under Article 368. 
 
Question of cessation of territory: 
While the Parliament has the power to diminish areas of states internally 
questions to cessation of territory arose during the Berubari Union case, 1960 
through Presidential reference to the Supreme Court (under Article 143). The 
Supreme Court held that the power of Parliament to diminish the area of a 
state (under Article 3) does not cover cession of Indian territory to a foreign 
country. Hence, Indian territory can be ceded to a foreign state only by 
amending the Constitution under Article 368. Consequently, the 9th 
Constitutional Amendment Act (1960) was enacted to transfer the said 
territory to Pakistan. 
 
Similarly, the 100th Constitutional Amendment Act (2015) was enacted to give 
effect to the acquiring of certain territories by India and transfer of certain 
other territories to Bangladesh in pursuance of the agreement and its protocol 
entered into between the Governments of India and Bangladesh. India 
transferred 111 enclaves to Bangladesh, while Bangladesh transferred 51 
enclaves to India. In addition, the deal also involved the transfer of adverse 
possessions and the demarcation of a 6.1-km undemarcated border stretch. 
For these three purposes, the amendment modified the provisions relating to 
the territories of four states (Assam, West Bengal, Meghalaya and Tripura) in 
the First Schedule of the Constitution. 
 
 
 
 
However, the Supreme Court in (Maganbhai Ishwarbhai Patel case) 1969 
ruled that, settlement of a boundary dispute between India and another 
country does not require a constitutional amendment. It can be done by 
executive action as it does not involve cession of Indian territory to a foreign 
country. Similarly, in case of maritime dispute with Bangladesh the award of 
the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) was accepted to the long standing 
issue without any amendment.  
 
The tribunal verdict is binding on all parties and there is no option for appeal. 
However, according to the rules of procedures, if any party needs any 
interpretation of the verdict, it can make a request to the court within 30 days 
of receiving the verdict and the interpretation would be made available within 
45 days. Bangladesh went in for arbitration over the delimitation of maritime 
boundary under the United Nations Convention on Law of Sea (UNCLOS) on 
October 8 2009. The argument focussed on issues including the location of the 
land boundary terminus, delimitation of the territorial sea, exclusive economic 
zone, and the continental shelf within and beyond 200 nautical miles. The PCA 
awarded Bangladesh an area of 19,467 sq km, four-fifth of the total area of 
25,602 sq km disputed maritime boundary in the Bay of Bengal with India in 
2014.  
 
 
 
This becomes important in the context of integration of Princely states. The 
Indian Independence Act (1947) created two independent and separate 
dominions of India and Pakistan and gave three options to the princely states 
viz., joining India, joining Pakistan or remaining independent. Of the 552 
princely states situated within the geographical boundaries of India, 549 joined 
India and the remaining 3 (Hyderabad, Junagarh and Kashmir) refused to join 
India. However, in course of time, they were also integrated with India—
Hyderabad by means of police action, Junagarh by means of referendum and 
Kashmir by the Instrument of Accession. The above position would make it 
clear that whereas no territory of Jammu and Kashmir, being an integral part of 
India, can ever be ceded to a foreign nation, the Sino-Indian border problem 
would be a different issue altogether, given that it is to be seen in the light of 
"settlement of boundary dispute" and thus "giveand take" would be in order. 
Dhar Commission: 
There was a rising demand from different regions, particularly South India, for 
reorganisation of states on linguistic basis. Accordingly, in June 1948, the 
Government of India appointed the Linguistic Provinces Commission under the 
chairmanship of S K Dhar to examine the feasibility of this. The commission 
submitted its report in December 1948 and recommended the reorganization 
of States on the basis of following criteria instead of language : 
1. Geographical contiguity