The Sarkaria Commission: Centre-State Relations Recommendations

The Government wanted to review how the Union and the States worked together in a changed socio-economic scenario. A Ministry of Home Affairs notification dated 9 June 1983 set up the Commission. It was asked to examine and review the working of arrangements between the Union and the States in powers, functions and responsibilities.

1.1 Who sat on it?

Justice R.S. Sarkaria was the Chairman. The two members were Shri B. Sivaraman and Dr S.R. Sen.

1.2 Could it rewrite the Constitution?

No. Its terms of reference told it to have due regard to the scheme and framework of the Constitution. So the Commission advised on better practice. It did not draft a new Constitution.

The Commission studied the subject, collected information and held discussions. It then submitted a 1,600-page report in January 1988. The report has 247 recommendations spread over 19 chapters.

2.1 Where can the full text be read?

The full report is public on the ISC Secretariat site, chapter by chapter. Three chapters matter most for exams. Chapter IV is on the Governor. Chapter VI is on emergency provisions, which covers Article 356. Chapter IX is on the Inter-Governmental Council.

Para 4.6.09 of the report gives four tests for a Governor. This is the paragraph behind a UPSC question.

• He or she should be eminent in some walk of life.
• He or she should be a person from outside the State.
• He or she should be a detached figure, not too intimately connected with the local politics of the State.
• He or she should not have taken too great a part in politics, generally and particularly in the recent past.

The same paragraph adds one more line. People from minority groups should continue to be given a chance, as before.

3.1 Who should the Prime Minister ask first?

Para 4.6.33 says the Prime Minister should consult the Vice-President and the Speaker of the Lok Sabha when choosing a Governor. The talk should be confidential. It would be informal, not a constitutional duty.

3.2 What did it say about the Governor’s term?

A Governor’s term is five years, but the Governor holds office during the pleasure of the President (Article 156). The report found that, of 154 tenures that ended up to October 1986, 104 were shorter than five years. It said the President’s pleasure should not be withdrawn without cause shown. The Governor should get a fair chance to explain.

Article 356 lets the President act when the constitutional machinery fails in a State. The report says the framers hoped it would be used rarely. Yet it had been used not less than 75 times in the 37 years before the report. That count is the report’s own.

4.1 What was the main advice?

Recommendation 6.8.01 (drawn from para 6.7.04) says Article 356 should be used very sparingly, in extreme cases, as a measure of last resort. Every attempt should first be made to solve the crisis at the State level.

4.2 What steps should come before it?

• Use every other remedy open to the Union under Article 355 first (6.8.03).
• Warn the State in specific terms first (6.8.02). Weigh its reply before acting.
• Do not dissolve the State Assembly before the Proclamation is laid before Parliament (6.8.06). Parliament must get a chance to consider it first.
• The Governor’s report should be a “speaking document” (6.8.09). It must give all material facts and grounds.

Chapter IX asked for a permanent Inter-State Council under Article 263. The report called it the Inter-Governmental Council (paras 9.3.05 and 9.10.01). It would handle the duties in clauses (b) and (c) of Article 263, other than socio-economic planning and development.

5.1 What did it need to work?

Para 9.7.02 says the Council needs an independent, permanent secretariat. Without one, the report says, the Council will not be able to establish its credibility.

5.2 Was it accepted?

Yes. The Government accepted the idea and set up the Inter-State Council by a Presidential Order dated 28 May 1990.

The best-known result of the report is the Inter-State Council of 1990. The report is advisory. The ISCS pages give no count of how many recommendations were accepted.

6.1 What did the Punchhi Commission do?

The Government set up a second Commission on Centre-State relations on 27 April 2007. Justice Madan Mohan Punchhi, a former Chief Justice of India, chaired it. It looked at new issues after the Sarkaria Commission had last looked at the subject, over two decades earlier. It made 273 recommendations.

UPSC asked about this Commission in CSP 2019 (General Studies Paper I, Q66). The question asks which body suggested that the Governor should be an eminent outsider, detached from local politics. The answer is the Sarkaria Commission (1983).

UPSC Civil Services (Preliminary) Examination 2019, General Studies Paper I, Series A, Q66.
Which one of the following suggested that the Governor should be an eminent person from outside the State and should be a detached figure without intense political links or should not have taken part in politics in the recent past?
(a) First Administrative Reforms Commission (1966)
(b) Rajamannar Committee (1969)
(c) Sarkaria Commission (1983)
(d) National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (2000)

Read the UPSC question paper (Series A, printed page 31) and the UPSC answer key. The key gives (c), Sarkaria Commission (1983). Para 4.6.09 of its report lists the four tests for a Governor.

7.1 What to remember

• 1983 set up; 1988 report; 247 recommendations.
• Governor: eminent, from outside the State, detached, not recently active in politics.
• Article 356: very sparingly, as a last resort, after a warning to the State.
• Inter-State Council: Presidential Order of 28 May 1990.