Article 238

Article 238 of the Constitution of India was an important transitional provision included in the original Constitution to facilitate the governance of Part B States, which were former princely states integrated into the Indian Union after independence. The article served as a constitutional bridge during the early phase of India’s political consolidation, ensuring administrative uniformity while respecting the distinct historical backgrounds of these newly integrated regions. It was later repealed by the Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act, 1956, following the complete reorganisation of States and the abolition of the distinction between Part A, Part B, and Part C States.

Historical Context

After India achieved independence in 1947, the country consisted of various administrative units inherited from British rule and the princely states that had acceded to the Union. The Constitution of 1950 categorised the States into four groups—Part A, Part B, Part C, and Part D States—each with a different administrative arrangement:

• Part A States: Former Governor’s provinces under British India, such as Bombay, Madras, and Bengal.
• Part B States: Former princely states or groups of princely states governed by a Rajpramukh.
• Part C States: Chief Commissioners’ Provinces and some smaller princely states administered by the Centre.
• Part D States: The Andaman and Nicobar Islands, administered directly by the Union Government.

To provide for the administration of Part B States, which had special constitutional and political arrangements due to their princely origins, Article 238 was inserted into the Constitution.

Text and Purpose of Article 238

The purpose of Article 238 was to extend the provisions of Part VI of the Constitution—dealing with the States—to the Part B States, but with necessary modifications and omissions. This ensured that while Part B States enjoyed similar constitutional arrangements as other States, their unique political structures were respected.
Article 238 thus applied the framework of State governance, including the executive, legislature, and judiciary, to the Part B States with certain adaptations to accommodate their historical status and administrative systems.

Key Provisions and Modifications under Article 238

The article included a number of substitutions, omissions, and amendments to the provisions of Part VI as they applied to Part B States. These modifications were as follows:

1. Substitution of Terms
   • The word “Governor” was replaced by “Rajpramukh” in the relevant provisions of Part VI, except in clause (b) of Article 232.
   • The term “Part A” was substituted by “Part B” wherever applicable, such as in Article 152 (which defines “State” for Part VI).
2. Omissions of Articles
   • Articles 155, 156, and 157, which deal with the appointment, term, and qualifications of Governors, were omitted in their application to Part B States, as these provisions were not relevant to Rajpramukhs.
3. Modification of Article 158
   • In clause (1) of Article 158, the words “be appointed” were replaced by “becomes” to reflect the fact that the Rajpramukh was not appointed by the President but was instead recognised as the constitutional head.
4. Changes in Article 214
   • In clause (2), the word “Province” was substituted with “Indian State”, aligning with the terminology used for Part B States.
5. Substitution in Article 221
   • A new provision was substituted for Article 221 concerning the salaries and allowances of High Court judges in Part B States, ensuring parity with other States while recognising their separate constitutional identity.

These adaptations reflected the semi-autonomous nature of Part B States and their transitional relationship with the Indian Union.

The Rajpramukh: Constitutional Role

Under Article 238 and related provisions, the Rajpramukh was designated as the constitutional head of a Part B State. The Rajpramukh was typically a former princely ruler who had signed the Instrument of Accession and integrated his state into the Indian Union.
The Rajpramukh exercised powers similar to those of a Governor in Part A States, including:

• Heading the State’s executive branch;
• Acting on the advice of the State’s Council of Ministers; and
• Assenting to laws passed by the State Legislature.

However, unlike Governors who were appointed by the President under Article 155, Rajpramukhs held office by virtue of their previous position and the political agreements that accompanied state integration.

Significance of Article 238

During its existence, Article 238 played an essential role in the early years of the Republic by:

• Providing a constitutional framework for governing Part B States;
• Ensuring a smooth administrative transition from princely rule to democratic governance;
• Integrating the princely states into India’s constitutional structure while respecting their unique identities; and
• Facilitating federal consistency by applying most of the provisions of Part VI to these states.

The provision thus balanced political sensitivities with administrative uniformity during the formative years of the Republic.

Repeal of Article 238

Article 238 was repealed by the Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act, 1956, which came into effect on 1 November 1956. This amendment was enacted in conjunction with the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, which abolished the classification of States into Parts A, B, C, and D.
The reorganisation of States was based primarily on linguistic and administrative criteria, leading to the creation of 14 States and 6 Union Territories. The office of the Rajpramukh was abolished, and all States came under a uniform administrative framework headed by Governors appointed by the President.
The repeal of Article 238 thus marked the completion of India’s political integration process, ensuring uniformity in the constitutional status of all States.

Impact of the Repeal

The repeal of Article 238 brought several significant consequences:

• Uniform Governance Structure: All States were brought under the same constitutional and administrative framework.
• Abolition of Rajpramukhs: The distinction between Rajpramukhs and Governors was eliminated, standardising the role of the Governor as the constitutional head of the State.
• End of Transitional Arrangements: The repeal signified the end of the provisional governance mechanisms that had been necessary for integrating princely states.
• Strengthening of Federal Unity: The amendment reinforced India’s federal system by eliminating unequal arrangements among States.

Related Constitutional Developments

The Seventh Amendment not only repealed Article 238 but also introduced several major reforms:

• Reorganisation of States on linguistic and administrative lines;
• Revisions to Articles 152 to 237 to align with the new structure;
• Expansion of the judiciary and legislature to reflect the new State boundaries; and
• Consolidation of administrative powers under a unified constitutional model.

Judicial and Political Relevance

While Article 238 itself has not been the subject of direct litigation, its legacy continues to be relevant in understanding the evolution of India’s federal structure and the process of state integration. The article symbolised the transitional phase between colonial fragmentation and constitutional unity, representing the delicate balancing act between diversity and centralisation in the early years of the Republic.