Inter-State Council is a meeting point that has withered away. It must be rebuilt

Why in the News

A delimitation Bill (a law redrawing constituencies and seat shares among States) settled in Parliament alone would bypass the States, which have no standing forum to shape it. The Inter-State Council (ISC), the Constitution’s own platform for such consultation, has lain dormant for years.

What is the Inter-State Council?

1. What it is: Article 263 lets the President set up a council to investigate and discuss subjects of common Union-State interest. It works like a standing round table for the Centre and the States.
2. Why it was created: The framers built a federal structure with a strong centralising impulse, meaning power leans towards the Union, so they provided a forum to coordinate Union and State policy.
3. Late start: The Council lay dormant for over four decades after Independence. It was constituted only in 1990, on the advice of the Sarkaria Commission, a panel on Centre-State relations.
4. “Missing link”: The Sarkaria Commission called the dormant Council the “missing link” in India’s federal balance, the intended arena for negotiation and conflict resolution.
5. The takeaway: India already has a constitutional forum for Centre-State bargaining; the gap lies in its use.

What went wrong with the Council?

1. Home Ministry appendage: The Council became a minor department of the Ministry of Home Affairs, so it followed that Ministry’s priorities and could not set a neutral agenda.
2. Skipped meetings: Successive governments ignored its obligation to meet regularly, so gaps of several years became the norm. It has met only 11 times, the last in 2016.
3. Preference for informal deals: Governments chose unilateral central policymaking or informal negotiation. So the Council never gained a say over decisions on States’ rights, revenues or delimitation.

Why does a dormant Council matter now?

1. Seat-share stakes: The government is rumoured to want a delimitation Bill that locks in a two-thirds majority for States where the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is strong. Under Article 82, Parliament readjusts seats by law, without the States.
2. Problems that cross jurisdictions: Tax reform, ecology, public health and internal security cut across jurisdictions, so they need joint decisions.
3. Erosion of trust: Policies made without consulting Chief Ministers erode trust, especially with opposition-ruled States, and provoke political friction and administrative resistance.

What would a rebuilt Council change?

1. Consultation before policy: An empowered Council would let State views shape national policies before they are made, linking central law-making with State execution.
2. Partnership over confrontation: Regular dialogue would replace cycles of confrontation with a cooperative partnership.
3. No new law needed: “Cooperative federalism” has remained “a platitude without a platform”, an idea praised but given no forum to work through. The Council already exists in the Constitution, so the Union can revive it without legislation.

Challenges

1. Advisory only: The Council’s recommendations bind neither the Union nor the States, so even a revived body can be ignored.
2. Narrow agenda: Its agenda has not covered emerging inter-State disputes and wider governance questions.
3. Bargaining federalism: Rival ruling parties at the Centre and in the States bargain as opponents, so joint forums turn into arenas of conflict. Eg. West Bengal’s boycott of NITI Aayog meetings.

Way Forward

1. Independent secretariat: Recast the secretariat as an independent statutory authority of civil servants and technical experts. Eg. Canada’s Intergovernmental Conference Secretariat.
2. Fixed calendar: Convene the Prime Minister, key Union Ministers and Chief Ministers on a set schedule, as the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC) proposed.
3. Pre-legislative consultation: Route Bills on Concurrent List subjects and constitutional change through the Council before Parliament takes them up.
4. Wider mandate: Use the Council to negotiate reforms, assess national schemes locally and mediate inter-State resource disputes.

Conclusion

The Inter-State Council exists in the Constitution but not in the working of Indian federalism, so decisions with lasting effects on the States are taken without them. Whether the Union convenes the Council before its next major decision affecting the States will show whether cooperative federalism has a working platform.

What is Cooperative Federalism?

1. About: Cooperative federalism is a model in which the Union, State and local governments tackle common problems together through shared responsibility.
2. Judicial basis: In State of Rajasthan v. Union of India (1977), the Supreme Court held that Indian federalism is predominantly cooperative, requiring constant interaction between the Centre and the States.
3. Working example: The Goods and Services Tax (GST) Council shows joint decision-making in practice, with the Union and the States deciding tax matters together.

Matching Previous Year Question

“[2015, GS2, 12 marks] The concept of cooperative federalism has been increasingly emphasized in recent years. Highlight the drawbacks in the existing structure and the extent to which cooperative federalism would answer the shortcomings.”