GS Paper: Federalism

The newly elected Punjab Legislative Assembly passed a resolution, moved by the Chief Minister himself, on April 1 in a special session seeking the transfer of Chandigarh to Punjab.

With this, the ‘Chandigarh question’ has resurfaced, but this time it occupies the national spotlight.

Establishment of Chandigarh

• Chandigarh is described as a ‘planned city’ emblematic of ‘Nehruvian modernity’.
• It is a greenfield city, which was commissioned by the government in independent India to replace Lahore, which went to Pakistan after Partition, as the capital of Punjab.
• Designed by Le Corbusier in association with Pierre Jeanneret, it is located on the foothills of the Shivalik Himalayas on village land acquired from what was then the Kharar tehsil of Ambala district.
• It was the capital of undivided Punjab from its inauguration in 1953 till 1966.

Bifurcation of Punjab and Common Capital

• Under the Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966 following the Punjabi Suba movement, Haryana was carved out of the Hindi-speaking regions as a separate State.
• The hill regions of Punjab were merged with what was then the Union Territory (UT) of Himachal Pradesh.
• Chandigarh was made a UT and has remained the joint capital of Haryana and Punjab with State assets divided between Punjab and Haryana in a ratio of 60:40.

What is the Chandigarh issue?

• Since 1966, the lack of full rights to its capital has remained a vexed issue in Punjab politics.
• All the governments and most political parties of Punjab have regularly raised the demand for Chandigarh.
• It has featured in all major developments, whether it is the 1973 Anandpur Sahib resolution, Dharam Yudh Morcha (then separatist movement) and the 1985 Rajiv-Longowal Accord.
• Since 1966, the Punjab Assembly has passed at least six such resolutions with the last being in 2014 under the Shiromani Akali Dal-Bharatiya Janata Party (SAD-BJP) government.
• The Centres’ opposition to the latest Assembly resolution is the first time a political party has taken a contrarian stand.

What is different this time?

• The immediate provocation this time has been two recent decisions of the Central government: breaking allies with erstwhile govt and withdrawal of farm laws.
• The Centre also amended the rules governing the functioning of the Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB), constituted under the 1966 Act.
• It changed the eligibility criteria for the two full-time members of the Board which have, though technically open to all Indian officials, by convention gone to officials from Punjab and Haryana.
• These moves are widely interpreted as a continuation of the Centre’s contentious relationship with the other political parties.
• It gives an affront blow to Punjab’s claim over Chandigarh.

What has been the position of the Union government on the city?

• At the time of the 1966 Act, the Union government with Indira Gandhi as Prime Minister indicated that the UT status to Chandigarh was temporary and that it would be transferred to Punjab.
• This decision was formalised in 1970 with Mrs Gandhi promising Haryana funds for building its own capital.
• According to the 1985 Rajiv-Longowal Accord, Chandigarh was to be handed over to Punjab on January 26, 1986 but this never fructified after the assassination of Longowal and the long period of militancy.
• The recent developments could thus indicate a shift in the Central government’s position.

What about Haryana?

• As in Punjab, all parties in Haryana present a common position asserting its claim to the city.
• It has objected to any move which associates Chandigarh solely with Punjab.

Is there a distinctive Chandigarh position?

• Employees and unions of the Chandigarh administration have mostly welcomed the change in service rules since the Central provisions carry more benefits and perks.
• After decades of existence as a UT, Chandigarh has developed a distinctive cultural character.
• Given its geographical location it has the presence of many educational institutions, medical establishments and the Army and Air Force.
• It has developed a unique cosmopolitanism and become a magnet for the youth across the north western region.
• They city residents thus favour the status quo.

Way forward

• While this time the issue has attracted more attention than usual.
• Its Punjab mandate indicates massive expectations from the electorate including better service conditions from government employees but it has inherited a debt-ridden government.
• The new govt will have to balance these contending claims in deciding further action.

 

UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

Assam and Meghalaya partially resolved a 50-year-old dispute along their 884.9 km boundary.

What is the news?

• An agreement was signed between Assam CM and his Meghalaya counterpart in the presence of Home Minister Amit Shah in New Delhi.
• According to the partial boundary deal, Assam will get 18.51 sq. km of the 36.79 sq. km disputed area while Meghalaya will get the remaining 18.28 sq. km.
• The agreement is expected to pave the way for resolving disputes in the boundary and similar areas of difference between Assam and three other NE States.

What is the Assam-Meghalaya Boundary Dispute?

• Meghalaya, carved out of Assam as an autonomous State in 1970, became a full-fledged State in 1972.
• The creation of the new State was based on the Assam Reorganisation (Meghalaya) Act of 1969, which the Meghalaya government refused to accept.
• This was because the Act followed the recommendations of a 1951 committee to define the boundary of Meghalaya.
• On that panel’s recommendations, areas of the present-day East Jaintia Hills, Ri-Bhoi and West Khasi Hills districts of Meghalaya were transferred to the Karbi Anglong, Kamrup (metro) and Kamrup districts of Assam.
• Meghalaya contested these transfers after statehood, claiming that they belonged to its tribal chieftains.
• Assam said the Meghalaya government could neither provide documents nor archival materials to prove its claim over these areas.
• After claims and counter-claims, the dispute was narrowed down to 12 sectors on the basis of an official claim by Meghalaya in 2011.

Other boundary disputes in North-East

The states of the Northeast were largely carved out of Assam, which has border disputes with several states.

During British rule, Assam included present-day Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh and Meghalaya besides Mizoram, which became separate state one by one. Today, Assam has boundary problems with each of them.

• Nagaland shares a 500-km boundary with Assam.
• In two major incidents of violence in 1979 and 1985, at least 100 persons were killed. The boundary dispute is now in the Supreme Court
• On the Assam-Arunachal Pradesh boundary (over 800 km), clashes were first reported in 1992, according to the same research paper.
• Since then, there have been several accusations of illegal encroachment from both sides, and intermittent clashes. This boundary issue is being heard by the Supreme Court.
• The 884-km Assam-Meghalaya boundary, too, witnesses flare-ups frequently. As per Meghalaya government statements, today there are 12 areas of dispute between the two states.

 How did the two governments go about handling the issue?

• The two States had initially tried resolving the border dispute through negotiations but the first serious attempt was in May 1983 when they formed a joint official committee to address the issue.
• In its report submitted in November 1983, the committee suggested that the Survey of India should re-delineate the boundary with the cooperation of both the States towards settling the dispute.
• There was no follow-up action. As more areas began to be disputed, the two States agreed to the constitution of an independent panel in 1985.
• Headed by Justice Y.V. Chandrachud, the committee submitted its report in 1987.
• Meghalaya rejected the report as it was allegedly pro-Assam.
• In 2019, the Meghalaya government petitioned the Supreme Court to direct the Centre to settle the dispute. The petition was dismissed.

How was the ice broken?

• In January 2021, Home Minister urged all the north-eastern States to resolve their boundary disputes by August 15, 2022, when the country celebrates 75 years of Independence.
• It was felt that the effort could be fast-tracked since the region’s sister-States either had a common ruling party.
• In June 2021, the two States decided to resume talks at the CM level and adopt a “give-and-take” policy to settle the disputes once and for all.
• Of the 12 disputed sectors, six “less complicated” areas — Tarabari, Gizang, Hahim, Boklapara, Khanapara-Pilingkata and Ratacherra — were chosen for resolving in the first phase.
• Both States formed three regional committees, one each for a district affected by the disputed sectors.

What were the principles followed?

• These committees, each headed by a cabinet minister, were given “five principles” for approaching the issue.
• These principles are historical facts of a disputed sector, ethnicity, and administrative convenience, willingness of people and contiguity of land preferably with natural boundaries such as rivers, streams and rocks.
• The committee members conducted surveys of the disputed sectors and held several meetings with the local stakeholders.
• This paved the way for the March 29 closure of the six disputed sectors.

Issues with this settlement

• Officials in Assam said it was better to let go of areas where they did not have any administrative control rather than “live with an irritant forever”.
• However, residents in the other six disputed sectors feel the “give-and-take” template could spell disaster for them.
• The fear is more among non-tribal people who could end up living in a “tribal Meghalaya with no rights”.

 

UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

The Delhi Municipal Corporation (Amendment) Bill, 2022 was tabled in Lok Sabha.

What is the MCD Amendment Bill?

• The Bill seeks to amend The Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957, to effectively undo the earlier 2011 amendment to the Act.
• Under the 2011 Act, the erstwhile Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) was trifurcated into separate North, South, and East Delhi Municipal Corporations.

Key features of the Bill

(1) Unification of Municipal Corporations in Delhi:

• The Bill replaces the three municipal corporations under the Act with one Corporation named the Municipal Corporation of Delhi.

(2) Powers of the Delhi government:

• The Act as amended in 2011 empowers the Delhi government to decide various matters under the Act.
• These include:

1. Total number of seats of councillors and number of seats reserved for members of the Scheduled Castes,
2. Division of the area of corporations into zones and wards,
3. Delimitation of wards,
4. Matters such as salary and allowances, and leave of absence of the Commissioner,
5. Sanctioning of consolidation of loans by a corporation, and
6. Sanctioning suits for compensation against the Commissioner for loss or waste or misapplication of Municipal Fund or property

• Similarly, the Act mandates that the Commissioner will exercise his powers regarding building regulations under the general superintendence and directions of Delhi government.
• The Bill instead empowers the central government to decide these matters.

(3) Number of councillors:

• The Act provides that the number of seats in the three corporations taken together should not be more than 272.
• The 14^th Schedule to the Act specifies 272 wards across the three Corporations.
• The Bill states that the total number of seats in the new Corporation should not be more than 250.

(4) Removal of Director of Local Bodies:

• The Act provides for a Director of Local Bodies to assist the Delhi government and discharge certain functions which include:

1. Coordinating between Corporations,
2. Framing recruitment Rules for various posts, and
3. Coordinating the collecting and sharing of toll tax collected by the respective Corporations.

• The Bill omits this provision for a Director of Local Bodies.

(5) Special officer to be appointed by the central government:

• The Bill provides that the central government may appoint a Special Officer to exercise powers of the Corporation until the first meeting of the Corporation is held after the commencement of the Bill.

(6) E-governance system for citizens:

• The Bill adds that obligatory functions of the new Corporation will include establishing an e-governance system for citizen services on anytime-anywhere basis for better, accountable, and transparent administration.

(7) Conditions of service for sweepers:

• The Act provides that a sweeper employed for doing house scavenging of a building would be required to give a reasonable cause or a 14 day notice before discontinuing his service.
• The Bill seeks to omit this provision.

Issues with the Amendment Bill

The Bill, when passed, will not return the MCD exactly to its pre-2011 situation.  There are many sections in the Bill that will make the new MCD very different from the older one.

• New delimitation exercise: Reducing the number of seats means a new delimitation exercise will have to be conducted, which experts say will take at least three months, but is more likely to take six months.
• Bureaucratization: Appointing a Special Officer means that until the elections are concluded, the Centre will likely appoint an officer to run the corporation. The Bill also does away with the provision of appointing a Director of Local Bodies by the Delhi government.
• Central hegemony: The other significant change is the replacement of the word “government” with “Central government” in all places. The bill hence seeks to curtail the powers of the elected govt of New Delhi by introducing central hegemony.

 

UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

Tamil Nadu CM has charged that the Governor that he had failed to perform the duty vested in him by the Constitution when it came to deciding on the Bill adopted in the Legislative Assembly against the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET).

What is the issue?

• The Governor had returned the Bill to the Assembly Speaker instead of forwarding it for Presidential assent.

Constitutional Powers of the Governor

• Article 154: The executive power of the state shall be vested in the
  governor and shall be exercised by him either directly or through
  officers subordinate to him in accordance with this Constitution.
• Article 163 (1): There shall be a council of ministers with the chief minister as the head to aid and advise the governor in the exercise of his functions, except in so far as he is required to exercise his functions in his discretion.
• Article 163 (2): If any question arises whether a matter falls within the governor’s discretion or not, the decision of the governor is final and the validity of anything done by him cannot be called in question on the ground that he ought or ought not to have acted in his discretion.
• The governor has constitutional discretion in the following cases:
  a) Reservation of a bill for the consideration of the President (Articles 200 and 201).
  b) Recommendation for the imposition of the President’s Rule in the state (Article 356).
  c) While exercising his functions as the administrator of an adjoining Union territory (in case of an additional charge).
  d) Special responsibility in 5th and 6th schedule areas.
  e) Seeking information from the chief minister with regard to the administrative and legislative matters of the state.
• Also, the governor has situational discretion (i.e., the hidden discretion derived from the exigencies of a prevailing political situation) in the following cases:
  a) Appointment of the chief minister when no party has a clear-cut majority in the state legislative assembly or when the chief minister in office dies suddenly and there is no obvious successor.
  b) Dismissal of the council of ministers when it cannot prove the confidence of the state legislative
  assembly.
  c) Dissolution of the state legislative assembly if the council of ministers has lost its majority.

What are the Legislative Powers of Governor?

Governor summons the sessions of both houses of the state legislature and prorogues them.

• The governor can even dissolve the State Legislative Assembly.
• These powers are formal and the governor’s use of these powers must comply with the advice of the Council of Ministers headed by the Chief Minister.
• He addresses the first session of the state legislature after the general elections in the state.

Appointments to the legislature

• He appoints 1/6^th members of the State Legislative Council in states wherever there is a bicameral legislature.
• He nominates one member in the state legislative assembly from the Anglo-Indian Community if in view; the community is not well represented.
• Governor is empowered under Article 192 to disqualify a member of the State legislature when the election commission recommends that the legislator is no longer complying with provisions of Article 191.

Passing of Bills

• All the bills passed by the state legislatures are sent to the Governor for assent.
• Once a bill is sent to Governor for assent, he can:
  a) Give assent to the bill
  b) Withhold the assent
  c) Return the bill to the legislature for reconsideration if it is not a money bill.
  d) If the bill is re-passed by the legislature with or without amendment, the governor has to give assent to the bill.
  e) Reserve the bill for consideration of the President.

When is the Bill sent to the President?

This is done under the circumstances when a bill:

1. Violates the constitution or against directive principles of state policy (DPSP)
2. Conflict with union powers
3. Against the larger interest of the country and people
4. May endanger the position of the high court in the state.

Ordinance making power

• When the state legislature is not in session and the governor considers it necessary to have a law, then the governor can promulgate ordinances.
• These ordinances are submitted to the state legislature at its next session.
• They remain valid for no more than six weeks from the date the state legislature is reconvened unless approved by it earlier.

Others

• As per Articles 165 and 177, Governor can ask the Advocate General to attend the proceedings of both houses of the state legislature and report to them any unlawful functioning if any.

Concerns with the role of governor

• Misuse of discretionary powers: States allege that this provision has often been misused by the governor who acts on the behest of the union government which is opposed to the basic scheme of the Indian Constitution.
• Appointment by centre: This often leads to the appointment of persons aligning with the party’s ideology to the post of Governor and he/she remains faithful to the Union government of the day rather than acting on the advice of the State Executive.
• Arbitrary removal: Even after Supreme Court Judgement in B.P. Singhal v. Union of India calling for a fixed tenure for Governors to encourage neutrality and fairness in the discharge of their duties, it is not being implemented on the ground.

 

UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

The ‘Mekedatu march’ has been launched for the implementation of a project to build a reservoir on the Cauvery at Mekedatu near the Tamil Nadu border.

What is the Mekedatu Project?

• Mekedatu, meaning goat’s leap, is a deep gorge situated at the confluence of the rivers Cauvery and Arkavathi, about 100 km from Bengaluru, at the Kanakapura taluk in Karnataka’s Ramanagara district.
• In 2013, then Karnataka announced the construction of a multi-purpose balancing reservoir project.
• The project aimed to alleviate the drinking water problems of the Bengaluru and Ramanagara districts.
• It was also expected to generate hydroelectricity to meet the power needs of the state.

Issues with the project

• Soon after the project was announced TN has objected over granting of permission or environmental clearance.
• Explaining the potential for damage to the lower riparian state of TN, it said that the project was in violation of the final award of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal.
• It stated that the project will affect the natural flow of the river Cauvery considerably and will severely affect the irrigation in TN.

What do the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal and the Supreme Court say?

• The Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal, in its final order on February 2007, made allocations to all the riparian States — Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu, apart from the Union Territory of Puducherry.
• It also stipulated “tentative monthly deliveries during a normal year” to be made available by Karnataka to Tamil Nadu.
• Aggrieved over the final order for different reasons, the States had appealed to the Supreme Court.
• In February 2018, the court, in its judgment, revised the water allocation and increased the share of Karnataka by 14.75 thousand million cubic feet (tmc ft) at the cost of Tamil Nadu.
• The enhanced quantum comprised 4.75 tmc ft for meeting drinking water and domestic requirements of Bengaluru and surrounding areas.

What is Karnataka planning?

• Encouraged by the Supreme Court verdict, Karnataka, which sees the order as an endorsement of its stand, has set out to pursue the Mekedatu project.
• Originally proposed as a hydropower project, the revised Mekedatu dam project has more than one purpose to serve.
• A hydropower plant of nearly 400 MW has also been proposed.
• The Karnataka government has argued that the proposed reservoir will regulate the flow to Tamil Nadu on a monthly basis, as stipulated by the Tribunal and the Supreme Court.
• This is why Karnataka has contended that the project will not affect the interests of Tamil Nadu farmers.

 

UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)