Introduction
India’s Constitution describes the country as a “Union of States,” indicating a federal structure with a strong Centre. Over the years, India has evolved into a quasi-federal system where the Centre and states collaborate to deliver governance outcomes. This is termed Cooperative Federalism—a model where both levels of government work together harmoniously in policy formulation, implementation, and fiscal management.
However, in recent times, tensions between cooperative federalism and state autonomy have become increasingly visible. States have voiced concerns about central overreach, declining fiscal independence, and reduced say in policy decisions. This conflict has opened up debates on whether India is veering too far from the spirit of federalism.
What is Cooperative Federalism?
Cooperative federalism refers to a governance model in which national and state governments share responsibilities and collaborate on key policy issues. The objective is to strengthen unity, ensure uniform development, and reduce governance friction.
Key Features of Cooperative Federalism:
-
Shared responsibilities: Joint participation in policy areas like health, education, and infrastructure.
-
Intergovernmental institutions: Platforms like NITI Aayog, GST Council, Inter-State Council.
-
Mutual trust: Emphasis on dialogue over directives.
What is State Autonomy?
State autonomy implies the independent functioning of state governments within the boundaries defined by the Constitution. It allows states to:
-
Enact laws in State and Concurrent Lists.
-
Frame welfare policies suited to their demographic needs.
-
Manage finances and law & order in their jurisdiction.
Autonomy is crucial in a diverse country like India where states differ in language, culture, resources, and administrative capacity.
The Inherent Tension Between the Two
Though cooperative federalism and state autonomy are not mutually exclusive, they often come into conflict. The push for national-level uniformity can sometimes dilute the autonomy of states, especially in legislative, fiscal, and administrative areas.
Recent Tensions and Case Studies
1. GST Council Decisions
While the GST regime is a landmark in cooperative federalism, states have often complained about:
-
Delayed compensation payments.
-
Centre’s dominance in decision-making despite the Council being a joint body.
-
Limited fiscal flexibility post-GST, as major tax powers shifted to the Centre.
2. Farm Laws and State Protests (2020–21)
The three central farm laws were passed without adequate consultation with states, though agriculture is primarily a State List subject. This sparked massive protests, especially in Punjab and Haryana, and highlighted the erosion of state legislative competence.
3. Central Deputation of IAS Officers
In 2022, a proposal was floated to amend service rules to allow unilateral deputation of IAS officers by the Centre. Several state governments opposed it, calling it a threat to the federal structure and bureaucratic autonomy.
4. Use of Governor’s Office
States like West Bengal, Kerala, and Tamil Nadu have alleged that Governors are being used to block or delay state legislation, raising concerns of politicization and infringement on elected governments’ autonomy.
5. Financial Transfers and Central Schemes
Most central welfare schemes like Ayushman Bharat, PM Awas Yojana, etc., are centrally designed with little flexibility for states. Additionally, the 14th and 15th Finance Commissions have seen changes in fund allocation that some southern states argue disincentivize development efforts.
Constitutional Provisions and the Balance
The Indian Constitution provides a detailed federal design but with a strong tilt toward centralization.
Key Provisions Favoring the Centre:
-
Article 356 (President’s Rule): Allows Centre to take control of a state.
-
Concurrent List: Centre can override state laws.
-
Article 249 & 252: Enables Centre to legislate in State List under certain conditions.
-
Residuary Powers: Rest with the Centre, unlike in classical federations like the U.S.
Provisions Supporting State Autonomy:
-
Seventh Schedule: Clear distribution of subjects.
-
Article 243–244: Empower local and tribal self-governance.
-
Legislative Assembly control over state subjects.
Impact of the Tension on Governance
1. Eroded Trust
States begin to lose trust in central mechanisms, weakening the spirit of collaboration.
2. Policy Friction
Top-down approaches may fail to meet local needs, leading to poor implementation.
3. Federal Gridlock
Political differences lead to boycotts or non-cooperation, stalling national projects.
4. Political Polarization
Tensions between Centre and opposition-ruled states turn cooperative forums into battlegrounds.
Way Forward: Strengthening Federal Harmony
To resolve this structural tension, India needs a recalibrated approach to federalism, one that ensures both national unity and regional autonomy.
1. Empowering Inter-State Council
Revive and regularize meetings of the Inter-State Council to resolve disputes, foster dialogue, and recommend federal reforms.
2. NITI Aayog as a Two-Way Platform
Rather than being just a think tank, NITI Aayog should function as a platform for policy co-creation with state inputs playing a central role.
3. Fiscal Federalism Reforms
States should be given greater flexibility in fund utilization, and the Finance Commission’s formula should be sensitive to performance, not just population.
4. Transparent Consultations
On subjects from the State and Concurrent Lists, mandatory consultation with states should be institutionalized before passing central laws.
5. Neutrality of Governor’s Office
A re-examination of the Governor’s role is necessary to ensure it serves constitutional rather than political ends.
Conclusion
The debate between cooperative federalism and state autonomy is not about choosing one over the other but about striking a balance. India’s diversity demands strong state autonomy, while national coherence needs cooperation and central direction. Both principles can coexist—if the Centre and States respect the spirit of the Constitution and foster mutual trust and accountability.
What is required is not just structural reform, but also political maturity and institutional integrity. In times of growing centralization, defending federalism becomes a democratic responsibility. A truly cooperative federation is one where every voice is heard, every power is respected, and every citizen is served better through unity in diversity.