Author: indiafreenotes

Public Service Commission (PSC) is a constitutional body established to ensure a fair, transparent, and merit-based recruitment of personnel for the civil services and other government posts in India. The PSC plays a crucial role in maintaining the efficiency and integrity of the public administration by selecting qualified candidates for various posts in the Union and State governments.

The idea of a Public Service Commission originated during British rule to professionalize the civil service and remove nepotism and political interference. After independence, the framers of the Indian Constitution institutionalized this body through Articles 315 to 323 to guarantee its autonomy and impartiality.

Constitutional Provisions:

The Constitution of India provides for the establishment of the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) for the entire country and separate State Public Service Commissions (SPSCs) for each state.

• Article 315 mandates the creation of a Public Service Commission for the Union and for each state.

• The Constitution also allows for a joint Public Service Commission for two or more states.

• Articles 316 to 323 detail the appointment, term, powers, and functions of the PSCs, ensuring their independence.

Composition:

• The Union Public Service Commission consists of a Chairman and other members appointed by the President of India.

• The number of members is not fixed and may vary.

• Members serve a term of six years or until the age of 65, whichever is earlier.

• Similarly, the State Public Service Commissions have a Chairman and members appointed by the Governor of the respective state.

• The appointment process is designed to maintain impartiality and expertise in the commission.

Functions of the Public Service Commission:

• Recruitment and Selection

The primary function is to conduct examinations and interviews for the recruitment of civil servants and government employees. The PSC ensures the recruitment process is competitive, merit-based, and transparent. This applies to posts in various departments and services such as the Indian Administrative Service (IAS), Indian Police Service (IPS), and state civil services.

• Advisory Role

PSC advises the government on matters related to recruitment rules, promotions, transfers, disciplinary actions, and suitability of candidates for appointment. This advisory role helps maintain standards and fairness in personnel management.

• Framing Recruitment Rules

The commission advises the government on framing and revising recruitment rules and service conditions for various posts.

• Disciplinary Cases and Appeals

PSCs are consulted in disciplinary matters affecting civil servants and can advise on penalties, dismissals, and other actions to ensure due process.

• Handling Transfers and Promotions

PSC may also advise on the transfer and promotion policies within services to maintain organizational efficiency.

Powers of the Public Service Commission:

The PSC has several statutory powers to carry out its functions effectively:

• Conduct of Examinations: It can prescribe the method of recruitment, syllabus, and mode of examinations.

• Summoning Information: The commission has the authority to call for information and records from government departments necessary for its functions.

• Report Submission: After conducting examinations and inquiries, the PSC submits reports to the President or Governor, highlighting recommendations and observations.

• Independence and Autonomy: The commission functions independently without external interference, guaranteeing impartial decisions.

Security of Tenure and Independence:

• The Chairman and members of the PSC enjoy security of tenure to maintain their independence.

• They cannot be removed from office except through a process similar to that for Supreme Court judges—only on grounds of misbehavior or incapacity, and by a parliamentary or state legislative inquiry.

• This protection ensures that PSC decisions are free from political influence or pressure.

Role of the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC)

UPSC plays a key role in recruiting officers for the All India Services and Central Services, including prestigious exams like the Civil Services Examination, Engineering Services, Combined Defence Services, and others. It sets the standards for national-level recruitment and ensures the highest level of integrity and meritocracy in public service.

Role of State Public Service Commissions:

Each state has its own PSC responsible for recruiting personnel for state civil services and other state government departments. The State PSCs operate independently but often follow guidelines and standards consistent with the UPSC to maintain uniformity in civil service quality across India.

Importance of the Public Service Commission:

1. Ensures Meritocracy: The PSC safeguards merit-based recruitment and promotion, helping create an efficient and competent bureaucracy.

2. Maintains Impartiality: By acting independently, the PSC reduces nepotism, favoritism, and political interference in government appointments.

3. Promotes Accountability: Its advisory and supervisory roles promote accountability in public service recruitment and management.

4. Enhances Public Trust: Transparent recruitment processes increase public confidence in government institutions.

5. Supports Good Governance: Competent civil servants selected through PSC examinations play a vital role in policy implementation and public administration, thereby contributing to good governance.

Challenges Faced by Public Service Commissions:

Despite their constitutional status, PSCs face several challenges:

• Delays in recruitment processes due to procedural complexities.

• Increasing workload with growing vacancies and expanding government services.

• Political pressures and interference at times, despite safeguards.

• Technological adaptation for modern examination and recruitment methods.

Ongoing reforms aim to strengthen the PSCs by leveraging technology, improving transparency, and ensuring timely recruitment.

The Constitution of India is the supreme law of the land. It provides a flexible yet well-guarded process for amendment under Article 368, ensuring that necessary changes can be made to meet evolving needs. However, this power to amend is not unlimited. Over time, the “Basic Structure Doctrine” has emerged as a vital safeguard to protect the core values of the Constitution from arbitrary or excessive amendments. This doctrine was firmly established by the landmark judgment in the Keshavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) case, which remains a cornerstone of Indian constitutional law.

What is the Basic Structure Doctrine?

Basic Structure Doctrine holds that while Parliament has wide powers to amend the Constitution under Article 368, it cannot alter or destroy the “basic structure” or essential features of the Constitution. This means that certain fundamental principles, such as democracy, secularism, rule of law, and the independence of the judiciary, form the core of the Constitution and are inviolable.

The doctrine is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution but has been evolved by the Supreme Court through judicial interpretation to prevent the abuse of constitutional amendment powers by Parliament.

Background of the Keshavananda Bharati Case

The Keshavananda Bharati case, decided on 24 April 1973, arose during a time when Parliament frequently amended the Constitution, especially to override judicial decisions that struck down land reform laws. This case was initiated by Swami Keshavananda Bharati, the head of a Hindu monastery in Kerala, who challenged the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1969, on the grounds that it violated his fundamental rights under Article 26 (freedom to manage religious affairs).

During the proceedings, the challenge extended to the scope of Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution, particularly in light of previous cases like:

• Shankari Prasad v. Union of India (1951) – upheld Parliament’s power to amend fundamental rights.

• Sajjan Singh v. State of Rajasthan (1965) – reaffirmed the above view.

• Golaknath v. State of Punjab (1967) – held that Parliament cannot amend fundamental rights.

The Keshavananda Bharati case was placed before the largest ever constitutional bench of 13 judges, making it the longest and most significant constitutional case in India’s history.

Judgment of the Supreme Court:

The Supreme Court, in a narrow 7:6 majority, delivered a historic and complex judgment. The Court held that:

• Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution, including fundamental rights.

• However, such amendments must not violate or destroy the basic structure of the Constitution.

This was the first time the concept of “Basic Structure” was articulated and upheld by the Court, marking a constitutional revolution. The judgment clarified that Article 368 does not give Parliament absolute power and that certain features are fundamental and beyond the reach of amendment.

Elements of the Basic Structure (Illustrative List):

The Supreme Court did not define the complete list of what constitutes the “basic structure”, but over the years, through various judgments, it has identified several features. These include:

1. Supremacy of the Constitution

2. Sovereign, democratic, and republican nature of the Indian polity

3. Secular character of the Constitution

4. Separation of powers among the legislature, executive, and judiciary

5. Federal character of the Constitution

6. Unity and integrity of the nation

7. Judicial review

8. Free and fair elections

9. Rule of law

10. Independence of the judiciary

11. Parliamentary system of government

12. Harmony and balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles

This list is not exhaustive and may evolve through further interpretations by the Supreme Court.

Significance of the Keshavananda Bharati Case:

1. Checks and Balances: The judgment imposed a necessary check on Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution, preserving the spirit of the Constitution.

2. Judicial Supremacy: It reaffirmed the role of the judiciary as the guardian of the Constitution, entrusted with ensuring that the fundamental principles are upheld.

3. Democratic Safeguard: The doctrine protects individual rights, democracy, and the rule of law from political excesses or majoritarian impulses.

4. Constitutional Stability: It ensures that the core values remain intact, regardless of political changes or pressures.

5. Future Influence: The doctrine has influenced later rulings, such as Minerva Mills (1980) and Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975), where the Supreme Court struck down constitutional amendments that violated the basic structure.

Criticism of the Basic Structure Doctrine:

Despite its importance, the doctrine has attracted criticism:

• Not Mentioned in the Constitution: Critics argue that the basic structure doctrine is a judicial creation with no textual basis in Article 368.

• Judicial Overreach: Some see it as an example of the judiciary limiting the sovereignty of Parliament.

• Vague and Subjective: The definition of “basic structure” is not precise and may lead to inconsistent interpretations.

However, these criticisms are outweighed by the doctrine’s role in preserving constitutional democracy in India.

The Constitution of India provides a structured procedure for its amendment under Article 368. This enables the Constitution to adapt to changing needs while preserving its fundamental structure. The amending procedure is neither as flexible as that of the British Constitution nor as rigid as the American one — it is a balanced mix. Amendments are classified into three types based on their procedure: Simple Majority, Special Majority, and Special Majority with Concurrence of Half the States.

Amendments by Simple Majority of Parliament:

Certain constitutional provisions can be amended by a simple majority, which means more than 50% of the members present and voting in each House of Parliament. These amendments are not governed by Article 368 and are considered legislative in nature. They are passed like ordinary bills and do not require ratification by the states or Presidential assent under special procedures.

Examples of amendments by simple majority:

• Formation of new states (Article 3)

• Alteration of boundaries or names of existing states

• Abolition or creation of Legislative Councils in states

• Second Schedule: Salaries and allowances of officials

• Changes in the number of judges in the Supreme Court or High Courts

These amendments are relatively easy to make and are useful for administrative or procedural changes that do not affect the federal structure or fundamental rights.

Amendments by Special Majority of Parliament:

Most constitutional amendments follow the procedure laid down in Article 368(2) and require a special majority of the Parliament. A bill to amend the Constitution must be passed:

• By a majority of the total membership of each House, and

• By a two-thirds majority of the members present and voting.

This ensures a wider consensus before key changes are made. Additionally, the bill must be introduced only in either House of Parliament and must be passed separately by both Houses. There is no provision for a joint sitting in case of a disagreement.

Once passed by the required special majority in both Houses, the bill is presented to the President, who is constitutionally bound to give his assent. After receiving the President’s assent, the amendment becomes part of the Constitution.

Examples of amendments requiring special majority:

• Article 368 amendments (other than those affecting federal structure)

• Amendment of Fundamental Rights (Part III) and Directive Principles of State Policy (Part IV)

• Amendment of Union List, State List, and Concurrent List powers without altering the federal structure

• Creation of new All India Services

This procedure ensures that any significant alteration to the Constitution undergoes careful parliamentary scrutiny and approval.

Amendments by Special Majority with Concurrence of Half of the States:

Some provisions of the Constitution, which directly affect the federal structure, require not just a special majority in Parliament but also the ratification by at least half of the state legislatures. This is to maintain the balance of power between the Centre and the States and protect the federal spirit of the Constitution.

The procedure includes:

• Passing the bill in both Houses of Parliament by a special majority.

• Ratification by at least 50% of the state legislatures through a simple majority.

• The bill is then presented to the President for assent.

There is no time limit prescribed within which states must ratify the bill, nor is there a requirement for the states to act simultaneously.

Provisions requiring this type of amendment:

• Election of the President (Articles 54 and 55)

• Extent of the executive power of the Union and states

• Supreme Court and High Court powers (Articles 131–140, 200–213)

• Distribution of legislative powers between the Union and states (Seventh Schedule)

• Representation of states in Parliament (Article 81, 82, and 170)

• Article 368 itself (procedure for amendment)

This type of amendment ensures that states are active participants in changes that affect their authority and position in the Union.

Safeguards and Limitations:

• Judicial Review:

While Parliament has wide powers to amend the Constitution, the Supreme Court in the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973) held that the basic structure of the Constitution cannot be altered. This doctrine acts as a safeguard against misuse of the amending power.

• No Joint Sitting:

The amendment procedure does not allow for a joint session of Parliament, ensuring that each House independently agrees to the amendment.

• No Referendum:

The Constitution does not require a public referendum for amendments.

• Mandatory Presidential Assent:

Once both Houses have passed an amendment, the President must give assent: — there is no discretionary power to withhold approval.

Examples of Major Amendments:

• 1st Amendment (1951): Curtailing right to freedom of speech and expression, added restrictions.

• 42nd Amendment (1976): Known as the “Mini-Constitution,” made sweeping changes during the Emergency.

• 44th Amendment (1978): Undid many of the changes introduced in the 42nd Amendment.

• 73rd and 74th Amendments (1992): Strengthened local self-government through Panchayats and Municipalities.

• 101st Amendment (2016): Introduced the Goods and Services Tax (GST), requiring state ratification.

Local Self Government refers to the governance of local areas by elected representatives who are responsible for managing the affairs of the community. It operates at the grassroots level and is essential to a democratic political system, allowing citizens to participate directly in the decision-making process that affects their daily lives. In India, the system of local self-government is constitutionally recognized through the 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments of 1992, which established the Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) for rural areas and Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) like Municipalities for urban regions. These institutions are empowered to plan and implement developmental programs, maintain public amenities, and manage local resources.

The primary aim of local self-government is to promote decentralization, participatory governance, accountability, and transparency. It ensures that governance is brought closer to the people, enhancing administrative efficiency and social justice. Local bodies address key issues such as sanitation, water supply, housing, rural development, and urban planning. They also ensure the inclusion of marginalized groups through reservations for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and women. With regular elections, financial grants, and autonomy, local self-governments act as vehicles of democratic empowerment and grassroots development. This structure strengthens democracy by making governance more responsive, inclusive, and need-based, ultimately contributing to national integration and sustainable growth.

Urban Government

Urban Government refers to the system of local self-governance in cities and towns, aimed at managing the administration, development, and public services of urban areas. It operates through Urban Local Bodies (ULBs), which include Municipal Corporations, Municipal Councils, and Nagar Panchayats, depending on the population and size of the area. The concept of Urban Government in India gained constitutional recognition with the 74th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1992, which provided a framework for democratic decentralization in urban areas. It ensures that governance and planning are carried out by elected representatives who are closer to the local population and better understand the unique needs of urban communities.

Urban governments are responsible for a wide range of functions such as urban planning, water supply, waste management, sanitation, street lighting, housing, health, education, transport, and environmental protection. These bodies play a vital role in delivering civic services, managing urban infrastructure, and implementing central and state-sponsored schemes like the Smart Cities Mission, AMRUT, and PMAY-Urban. They generate revenue through property tax, user charges, grants, and loans. Urban governments also provide platforms for public participation, ensure inclusivity through reservations for SCs, STs, and women, and enhance administrative efficiency by localizing decision-making. Thus, urban governments act as essential pillars of democratic governance and sustainable urban development in India.

73^rd and 74^th Constitutional amendments, Contemporary Challenges

• Incomplete Devolution of Powers

While the 73rd (Panchayati Raj) and 74th (Urban Local Bodies) Amendments mandated a three-tier governance system, many states have not fully transferred the 29 subjects listed in the 11th and 12th Schedules. Key areas like agriculture, health, and education remain under state control, weakening local governance.

• Financial Dependence on States

Local bodies rely heavily on state grants due to limited taxation powers and inefficient collection of local revenues (property taxes, user charges). Many states delay funds or impose restrictive conditions, crippling grassroots development initiatives.

• Bureaucratic Resistance & Political Interference

State-appointed officials often override elected representatives in decision-making. Frequent dissolution of elected bodies, delayed elections, and undue interference by MLAs/MPs undermine autonomy.

• Weak Accountability & Corruption

Lack of transparency in fund utilization and contractor-led projects enable embezzlement. Social audits and RTI mechanisms remain underused due to political pressure and lack of awareness.

• Marginalization of Reserved Categories

Despite quotas for SCs/STs and women, proxy governance (by dominant castes or male relatives) persists. Genuine participation of marginalized groups remains a challenge.

• Urban-Rural Disparities

The 74th Amendment’s implementation lags behind the 73rd, with municipal bodies facing greater politicization and funding shortages. Rapid urbanization outpaces institutional capacity.

• Digital Divide & Capacity Gaps

E-governance initiatives fail due to low digital literacy among representatives. Training programs are sporadic, leaving leaders ill-equipped for planning and budgeting.

Democratic decentralization refers to the process of transferring authority, responsibility, and resources from the central or state government to lower levels of government, such as Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) in rural areas and Municipalities in urban areas. It enables local self-governance by empowering elected representatives at the grassroots level to participate in planning and decision-making processes. The primary aim of democratic decentralization is to bring governance closer to the people, ensuring more transparency, accountability, and responsiveness to local needs. In India, the 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments of 1992 institutionalized democratic decentralization by granting constitutional status to PRIs and Urban Local Bodies.

These amendments introduced regular elections, reservation for marginalized groups, and the creation of State Finance Commissions and District Planning Committees. Democratic decentralization not only strengthens democracy but also ensures participatory development, where people directly influence decisions affecting their lives. It fosters inclusive growth by allowing local solutions to local problems and promoting social justice and community empowerment. However, its success depends on adequate funds, functionaries, and autonomy being provided to local bodies. Ultimately, democratic decentralization enhances the quality of governance by making it more citizen-centric, efficient, and equitable.

Scope of Democratic Decentralization:

• Political Empowerment

Democratic decentralization enables political empowerment at the grassroots level by giving people the right to elect their local representatives. Through Panchayati Raj and Municipal institutions, citizens can participate directly in governance and decision-making. It fosters leadership among marginalized sections by ensuring reservations for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and women. This political inclusion deepens democracy, builds accountability, and promotes citizen awareness of rights and responsibilities. It also strengthens the democratic fabric by allowing people to influence policies and governance outcomes affecting their everyday lives and communities.

• Administrative Efficiency

Decentralization brings governance closer to the people, improving administrative efficiency. Local governments are better positioned to understand and respond to community-specific needs, enabling quicker and context-based decision-making. They can plan and execute development schemes, manage local infrastructure, and address basic services such as water, sanitation, and education more effectively. By reducing bureaucratic layers, democratic decentralization promotes responsiveness and transparency. It also allows for better monitoring and community feedback, ensuring efficient utilization of resources and improved public service delivery, which are essential for inclusive and sustainable development.

• Economic Development

Democratic decentralization supports balanced economic development by empowering local bodies to plan and implement area-specific projects. Panchayats and municipalities can mobilize local resources, promote self-employment schemes, and ensure the effective delivery of government welfare programs. With financial autonomy and planning powers, local institutions can encourage micro-level entrepreneurship, agriculture development, and rural industrialization. This localized approach helps bridge regional disparities and uplifts backward regions. Economic empowerment at the grassroots leads to job creation, improved livelihoods, and increased public participation in economic planning and execution, ultimately fostering equitable growth.

• Social Justice and Inclusion

Democratic decentralization enhances social justice by ensuring representation and participation of marginalized groups in governance. Constitutional provisions mandate reservations for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and women in local bodies, promoting inclusive decision-making. Local governance institutions address social issues like poverty, discrimination, and illiteracy more effectively due to their close proximity to the affected population. They implement welfare schemes targeting disadvantaged communities and ensure equitable access to resources and services. This fosters a sense of belonging, reduces inequalities, and empowers weaker sections to assert their rights within a democratic framework.

Challenges of Democratic Decentralization:

• Inadequate Financial Autonomy

Local governments (Panchayats/Municipalities) often lack sufficient funds, relying heavily on state and central grants. The 73rd and 74th Amendments mandate Finance Commissions for fund allocation, but delays and insufficient devolution persist. Many local bodies struggle to generate independent revenue, limiting their ability to implement development projects effectively.

• Political Interference & Bureaucratic Hurdles

State governments frequently delay elections, supersede elected bodies, or impose bureaucratic administrators, undermining grassroots democracy. Officials often resist delegating powers, maintaining centralized control over key functions like staffing and budgeting, weakening local governance.

• Weak Capacity & Training

Many elected representatives lack administrative skills and awareness of their roles. Training programs exist but are inconsistent, leading to poor planning, inefficient resource use, and dependency on higher authorities for decision-making.

• Social Inequalities & Elite Capture

Dominant castes and local elites often control Panchayats, marginalizing SCs/STs, women, and weaker sections. Despite reservations, proxy leadership (by male relatives of women representatives) and discrimination hinder inclusive governance.

• Lack of People’s Participation

Low voter turnout in local elections and minimal engagement in Gram Sabhas reflect apathy. Citizens often perceive local bodies as corrupt or ineffective, reducing accountability and participatory democracy.

• Fragmented Planning & Coordination issues

Parallel structures like MPs/MLAs’ funds and centrally sponsored schemes bypass local bodies, creating duplication. Poor coordination between tiers of government leads to inefficient service delivery and unfinished projects.

• Corruption & Mismanagement

Embezzlement of funds, nepotism in contracts, and lack of transparency erode trust. Social audits and RTI remain underutilized, allowing malpractice to persist unchecked.

Key Reforms Needed:

• Strengthen fiscal federalism with direct funding.

• Mandate timely elections and punish undue interference.

• Enhance training and digital governance tools.

• Enforce social audit mechanisms rigorously.

Co-operative federalism is a concept where the Central and State Governments in a federal structure work together in a harmonious and coordinated manner to achieve common national goals. Unlike competitive federalism, which emphasizes autonomy and rivalry, co-operative federalism promotes collaboration, consultation, and joint decision-making between the Union and the states. In India, co-operative federalism is reflected in institutions like the Inter-State Council, NITI Aayog, and Finance Commission, which facilitate dialogue, consensus-building, and distribution of resources. It encourages states to participate in national policymaking while addressing regional needs. This model becomes especially important in areas like healthcare, education, poverty alleviation, disaster management, and infrastructure development, where joint efforts are essential for success.

Co-operative federalism also ensures that diverse interests of various states are considered in framing central policies, thus strengthening the spirit of unity in diversity. The Goods and Services Tax (GST) is a prime example of co-operative federalism in action, where both levels of government came together to create a unified tax structure. In essence, co-operative federalism fosters a sense of partnership between the Centre and states, enhancing democratic governance, national integration, and effective delivery of public services across the country.

Challenges of Co-operative Federalism:

• Central Dominance

One major challenge to co-operative federalism is the dominance of the Central Government in legislative, administrative, and financial matters. The Constitution provides the Centre with more powers, especially during emergencies. States often feel they are treated as subordinate units rather than equal partners. Excessive use of central agencies and interference in state subjects weakens the spirit of cooperation. This central dominance hampers healthy Centre-State relations, especially when different political parties rule at the Centre and in the states, leading to distrust and tension.

• Political Differences

Divergent political ideologies between the Centre and states often disrupt the co-operative spirit. When opposition parties rule certain states, there can be reluctance or non-cooperation in implementing centrally sponsored schemes. Mutual accusations and lack of coordination become common, especially on sensitive issues like law and order, resource sharing, or policy execution. This political rivalry weakens institutional cooperation and creates a conflict-oriented federal environment. Instead of collaboration, states may engage in blame games or resist central initiatives, delaying development and negatively affecting public welfare.

• Financial Inequality

Unequal distribution of financial resources is a persistent obstacle to co-operative federalism. The Centre controls major tax revenues and allocates funds to states through Finance Commissions and centrally sponsored schemes. Many states feel deprived or unfairly treated, particularly when funds are allocated based on population or political considerations. This dependency reduces states’ autonomy and bargaining power. States with poor financial health struggle to implement developmental programs independently, making them heavily reliant on central assistance, which sometimes comes with restrictive conditions or delayed disbursements.

• Weak Institutional Mechanisms

India’s mechanisms for co-operative federalism, such as the Inter-State Council and Zonal Councils, are often underutilized or function irregularly. These bodies are meant to encourage dialogue, resolve disputes, and facilitate cooperation between the Centre and states. However, infrequent meetings, lack of binding decisions, and inadequate follow-up weaken their effectiveness. Similarly, NITI Aayog, despite being a platform for collaborative planning, is perceived by some states as centrally driven. A lack of robust and regular interaction reduces trust and prevents institutionalized co-operation across tiers of government.

• Inter-State Disputes

Disputes between states over water sharing, boundaries, resource allocation, or regional development also pose a serious challenge to co-operative federalism. For example, water-sharing conflicts like the Cauvery or Krishna river disputes often lead to legal and political confrontations. These conflicts strain relations not only between the states involved but also between the Centre and states, as the Centre must act as a neutral arbitrator. When states perceive bias in the Centre’s decisions, it erodes trust and discourages the spirit of mutual cooperation and unity.

• Inconsistent Implementation of Policies

A key challenge is the inconsistent and uneven implementation of national policies and schemes across states. Variations in administrative capacity, political will, and regional priorities often lead to delays or diluted execution of programs such as Ayushman Bharat, PMAY, or NEP 2020. This inconsistency reduces the overall impact of centrally sponsored schemes and frustrates efforts for uniform development. It also reflects a lack of true partnership, where states are treated as implementers rather than stakeholders in policy design and adaptation based on local needs.

State Council of Ministers is a body of ministers headed by the Chief Minister, responsible for aiding and advising the Governor in the administration of the state. It includes Cabinet Ministers, Ministers of State, and Deputy Ministers. The Council is collectively responsible to the State Legislative Assembly. While the Governor is the nominal executive, real executive powers lie with the Council, which formulates policies, implements laws, and manages state governance. The Chief Minister allocates portfolios and coordinates its functioning. The Council ensures that the state is run efficiently and in accordance with the Constitution of India.

Powers and Functions  of State Council of Ministry:

• Executive Powers

The State Council of Ministers exercises real executive authority in the state. It formulates policies, makes administrative decisions, and ensures implementation through various departments. Headed by the Chief Minister, the Council supervises the work of government machinery and maintains law and order. It advises the Governor on appointments and other executive actions. Although the Governor is the constitutional head, he/she acts on the aid and advice of the Council in nearly all matters, making it the actual centre of administrative authority.

• Legislative Functions

The Council of Ministers plays a dominant role in the legislative process. It prepares and introduces most of the bills in the State Legislature, decides the legislative agenda, and ensures passage through majority support in the assembly. The Council is collectively responsible to the State Legislative Assembly, meaning if it loses the assembly’s confidence, it must resign. Ministers participate actively in debates, present government policies, and respond to members’ questions. The Council also advises the Governor in summoning, proroguing, and dissolving the legislature as per constitutional provisions.

• Financial Functions

The State Council of Ministers controls the financial administration of the state. It prepares the annual state budget, determines taxation, allocates public funds, and oversees government expenditure. The Finance Minister, a member of the Council, presents the budget to the legislature on behalf of the government. No money bill can be introduced without the Council’s approval. The Council ensures financial discipline, secures central assistance when needed, and monitors fund utilization to meet developmental goals and welfare objectives effectively within the state’s financial framework.

• Advisory Functions

The Council of Ministers serves as the primary advisory body to the Governor. Although the Governor is the constitutional head, he/she is bound to act on the advice of the Council in most matters. The Council advises the Governor on crucial decisions like appointments, legislative sessions, ordinance promulgation, and administrative policies. This advisory role ensures that the elected government remains in charge of day-to-day governance and that decisions are in tune with the democratic mandate of the people as expressed through their representatives in the Legislative Assembly.

• Policy-Making Functions

The Council of Ministers formulates and finalizes government policies on key issues such as education, health, agriculture, industry, and welfare. These policies reflect the government’s vision and electoral promises. The Council debates policy matters, evaluates alternatives, and approves plans for implementation. Once policies are formulated, they are implemented through respective departments under ministerial supervision. Policy-making is a continuous function and reflects the dynamic needs of society. It is the Council’s responsibility to adapt, reform, or frame new policies to achieve the state’s development objectives.

• Collective Responsibility

One of the most important functions of the State Council of Ministers is its collective responsibility to the State Legislative Assembly. If the Assembly passes a vote of no confidence, the entire Council, including the Chief Minister, must resign. This principle ensures accountability of the executive to the legislature. It also promotes unity among ministers, as they must publicly support cabinet decisions even if they privately disagree. Collective responsibility ensures stable and responsible governance, aligning the executive with democratic principles and the will of the elected representatives.

Chief Minister (CM) is the head of the government in an Indian state and plays a central role in the state’s political and administrative machinery. Appointed by the Governor, the Chief Minister is usually the leader of the majority party or coalition in the Vidhana Sabha (Legislative Assembly). The CM leads the Council of Ministers and exercises executive powers on behalf of the state government. The office of the Chief Minister is the most powerful position in the state government and is crucial for policy-making, administration, and governance.

Appointment and Position:

Chief Minister is appointed by the Governor, typically the leader of the party or coalition with a majority in the Legislative Assembly. The CM must prove the majority on the floor of the house through a vote of confidence. The Chief Minister holds office for a term of five years, subject to maintaining the confidence of the assembly, and has no term limits. The Governor can dismiss the CM if he/she loses majority support.

Powers of the Chief Minister:

1. Executive Powers

Chief Minister is the real executive authority in the state. Although the Governor is the nominal head, the CM and the Council of Ministers hold real power. The CM:

• Heads the state administration and supervises the work of various departments and officials.

• Advises the Governor on the appointment of ministers and other key officials.

• Allocates portfolios among ministers and can reshuffle or dismiss them.

• Chairs the meetings of the Council of Ministers and ensures that decisions taken by the cabinet are implemented.

• Coordinates the activities of the ministries and departments to maintain efficient governance.

• Represents the state in interactions with the Central Government and other states.

2. Legislative Powers

Chief Minister is a member of the legislative assembly and plays a key role in the law-making process:

• Leads the party or coalition in the legislative assembly, setting the legislative agenda.

• Introduces bills and policies on behalf of the government.

• Guides debates and discussions to ensure the passage of government legislation.

• Advises the Governor on summoning, proroguing, and dissolving the legislative assembly.

• Answers questions and participates in discussions related to government policies and administration.

• Maintains the confidence of the assembly to remain in office; if confidence is lost, the CM must resign.

3. Financial Powers

Chief Minister plays a central role in the financial administration of the state:

• Heads the preparation of the state budget, which outlines the government’s revenue and expenditure plans.

• Controls allocation of funds to various departments and ensures financial discipline.

• Presents financial proposals and defends government expenditure before the legislative assembly.

• Oversees the implementation of financial policies, taxation, and fiscal management.

• Coordinates with the Finance Minister and other officials to ensure effective economic governance.

• Ensures that government spending aligns with the priorities of the state and legislative mandates.

4. Judicial Powers

Though judicial powers mainly lie with the judiciary, the Chief Minister influences legal and administrative justice through:

• Recommending pardons, reprieves, and remissions of punishment to the Governor.

• Ensuring that laws passed by the assembly are implemented effectively.

• Supervising the enforcement of laws and maintaining law and order in the state.

• Coordinating with the police and law enforcement agencies to maintain peace and security.

• Addressing issues of justice and fairness in state governance.

5. Political Powers

Chief Minister’s political powers are crucial for maintaining the government’s stability:

• Acts as the leader and spokesperson of the ruling party or coalition in the state.

• Mobilizes support within the legislative assembly and party to pass legislation and policies.

• Builds and maintains alliances with other political parties and interest groups.

• Represents the state government at national political forums and in negotiations with the central government.

• Addresses public grievances and manages political challenges to maintain popularity and authority.

• Exercises influence over party organization and strategy in the state.

Functions of the Chief Minister:

Chief Minister’s functions cover various dimensions of governance, administration, and leadership:

• Policy Formulation and Implementation

CM plays a pivotal role in framing policies for the state’s development. This involves identifying priorities in sectors such as agriculture, education, health, infrastructure, and welfare. The CM works closely with ministers, bureaucrats, and experts to draft policies, ensuring they reflect the people’s needs and the government’s vision. Once policies are approved, the CM oversees their implementation, monitors progress, and makes necessary adjustments.

• Administration and Governance

Chief Minister directs the administrative machinery to ensure efficient delivery of public services. This involves supervising government departments, resolving inter-departmental conflicts, and ensuring transparency and accountability. The CM is responsible for maintaining law and order and disaster management, coordinating with police, home department, and other agencies.

• Legislative Leadership

CM steers the legislative agenda by scheduling debates, prioritizing bills, and managing government business in the assembly. The CM addresses assembly sessions, explains government policies, defends legislation, and responds to opposition criticism. Maintaining the confidence of the legislature is essential for the CM’s survival in office.

• Financial Management

Overseeing the state budget preparation and ensuring judicious use of public funds are core functions. The CM coordinates with the Finance Minister and department officials to maintain fiscal health and to secure funds from the central government. The CM ensures that government spending is targeted at development goals and social welfare.

• Representation and Communication

Chief Minister represents the state at national and international forums. The CM communicates government policies to the public through speeches, press conferences, and media interactions. As the face of the state government, the CM builds public trust and manages political relations with opposition parties, the central government, and other stakeholders.

• Crisis Management

CM is responsible for managing crises such as natural disasters, communal tensions, or political instability. The CM coordinates relief efforts, mobilizes resources, and assures public safety and order. The CM’s leadership during emergencies can significantly affect the state’s stability and public confidence.