Sarkaria Commission
The Sarkaria Commission was a commission established by the Government of India in 1983 to examine the relationship and balance of power between the Union and the states within the federal structure. Chaired by Justice Ranjit Singh Sarkaria, a retired judge of the Supreme Court of India, the commission submitted its final report in 1988. It provided extensive recommendations on issues concerning Centre–State relations, including legislative, administrative, and financial aspects, making it one of the most comprehensive studies of Indian federalism.
Background and Objectives
The Indian Constitution establishes a quasi-federal structure with a strong Centre. Over time, tensions arose between the Union and states due to perceived centralisation of power, political differences, and demands for greater autonomy. The rise of regional parties in the 1980s intensified these demands, highlighting the need to reassess the federal balance.
Against this backdrop, the Sarkaria Commission was tasked with:
- Examining the working of existing arrangements between the Union and states.
- Suggesting changes to improve efficiency and cooperation.
- Ensuring that federal principles were respected without compromising national unity and integrity.
The commission’s mandate covered legislative, administrative, financial, and emergency provisions of the Constitution.
Composition
The Sarkaria Commission was chaired by Justice Ranjit Singh Sarkaria, with B. Sivaraman, a former Cabinet Secretary, and Dr S.R. Sen, a former Secretary to the Government of India, as members. Its expertise combined judicial, administrative, and policy perspectives, enabling a detailed review of constitutional and practical aspects of federal governance.
Key Recommendations
The Sarkaria Commission made over 250 recommendations, of which the most significant include:
- Legislative Relations:
- Article 356 (President’s Rule) should be used sparingly and as a last resort. The Governor’s report must be based on objective material, and judicial review should remain available.
- Residuary powers should continue to rest with the Union to ensure national integrity.
- States should be consulted before Parliament legislates on matters in the Concurrent List affecting them directly.
- Administrative Relations:
- Governors should be eminent persons from outside the state, politically detached, and not involved in state politics.
- The role of the Inter-State Council under Article 263 should be strengthened as a forum for Centre–State consultation.
- The Union should limit its interference in subjects constitutionally assigned to states.
- Financial Relations:
- The Planning Commission and Finance Commission should work in coordination, with clear roles to avoid overlap.
- Greater flexibility should be given to states in the use of central grants-in-aid.
- States should have a more significant share in centrally collected taxes.
- Emergency Provisions:
- Use of Article 356 should be justified with concrete evidence of constitutional breakdown.
- Governors should not misuse their office to destabilise elected state governments.
- Other Recommendations:
- The All India Services should be maintained to preserve national standards.
- River water disputes should be resolved promptly through tribunals.
- Mechanisms for inter-state cooperation should be institutionalised.
Implementation and Impact
Although not all recommendations were implemented, the Sarkaria Commission significantly influenced the discourse on Indian federalism. Key outcomes include:
- The Punchhi Commission (2007) was later established to review Centre–State relations further, building upon Sarkaria’s work.
- The Supreme Court, in cases such as S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994), upheld many of the Sarkaria Commission’s views, especially on restricting misuse of Article 356.
- The Inter-State Council was activated in 1990 as per the recommendations.
- Financial devolution has gradually improved through successive Finance Commissions, though demands for greater state autonomy persist.
Advantages and Disadvantages
Advantages:
- Provided a detailed blueprint for improving federal relations.
- Strengthened constitutional mechanisms like the Inter-State Council.
- Recommended safeguards against misuse of emergency provisions.
- Promoted cooperative federalism by emphasising consultation between Union and states.
Disadvantages:
- Many recommendations remain unimplemented due to political resistance.
- Did not fully address issues of fiscal autonomy for states.
- Retained strong central powers, reflecting concerns about national unity, which some states viewed as inadequate recognition of federal principles.
Legacy
The Sarkaria Commission remains a landmark study on Centre–State relations in India. Its emphasis on cooperative federalism continues to guide policy and judicial interpretation. While not all its recommendations were adopted, its report serves as a reference point for debates on federal balance, state autonomy, and constitutional governance.
| Related | |
|---|---|
