New Law College

Assignment Based Evaluation –

Constitutional Law

Mayank Sharma
FYLLB, Div. A
Roll No. 051
INTRODUCTION

It is very difficult to govern a vast nation like India, so the mechanism of federal
governance was adopted. The heading in Part I i.e. Union and its territory reflects the
unitary biasness of the federal structure as a union is considered to be the centre and it
comprises of states which is termed as territory. The country is divided into various
states just for the sake of smoothing the administration. For the sake of administration
and smooth functioning as a nation Constitution of India was drafted. The constitution
is nothing but a legal document and the Indian constitution is the supreme law of India.
It explains the various players who are in authority in the country, their power and limits
of their power. It also defines the fundamental rights and duties of citizens. World’s
largest constitution presently having 448 articles in 25 parts and 12 scheduled. But it
had 395 articles in 22 parts and 8 schedules in commencement time. Part 1 of the
Constitution is titled as The Union and its Territory. Part 1 of the Constitution
comprising of Articles 1 to 4, provides a self-contained mechanism for effecting
changes in the constitution of states or union territories of the Union of India. By a
simple majority and by ordinary legislative process, Parliament may form a new state
or alter the boundaries, etc. of existing states and thereby change the political map of
India. Let’s discuss the union and its territory in detail.

ARTICLE 1: Name and territory of the Union

 India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States.

 The States and the territories thereof shall be as specified in the First Schedule.
 The territory of India shall comprise— (a) the territories of the States; (b) the
Union territories specified in the First Schedule; and (c) such other territories as
may be acquired.

Article 1 of the Constitution describes India, that is, Bharat as a ‘Union of States’. The
reasons behind this were made clear by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar in the Constituent
Assembly. Ambedkar said that the Indian federation was a “Union” because it was
Indissoluble, and no State had a right to secede from the Indian Union. He said: “The
Drafting Committee wanted to make it clear that though India was to be a federation,
the federation was not the result of an agreement by the States to join in a federation,
and that the federation not being the result of an agreement, no State has the right to
secede from it. The federation is a Union because it is indestructible. Though the
country and the people may be divided into different states for convenience of
administration, the country is one integral whole, its people a single people living under
a single imperium derived from a single source. The Americans had to wage a civil war
to establish that the States have no right of secession and that their federation was
indestructible. The Drafting Committee thought that it was better to make it clear at the
outset rather than to leave it to speculation or to dispute.”

The phrases ‘Union of India’ and ‘Territory of India’ need to be distinguished. The
Union of India includes only the States which enjoy the status of being members of the
federal system and share a distribution of powers with the Union. The Union Territories
are not included in the “Union of States” whereas the expression “Territory of India”
includes not only the States, but also the Union Territories and such other territories as
may be acquired by India. The States and the Territories, thereof, are specified in the
First Schedule of the Constitution.

Therefore, Article 1 says pertains to the above ideology whose essentials are:

Union of States

Article 1 says that India will also be known as Bharat and it shall be the ‘Union’ of
states. Moreover, it also states that the states and union territories are mentioned in the
1st Schedule of the constitution. Indian territory will comprise of:

 The state territories.

 Union territories.
 Territories which may be acquired by the government of India.

There are at present 28 states and 8 union territories in the union of India. No
parliamentary legislation is required to acquire a foreign territory. It is the inherent
attribute of a sovereign State to acquire new territories.

Meaning of Acquisition

The expression ‘acquisition’ means by any notifications, declarations or assertions by

which the government of India has declared and treated as a part and parcel of India,
then the courts will be bound to recognize an “acquisition” as having taken place the
consequence that territory would be the part of the union. Acquisition may be brought
about in the following manners:

 Conquest
 Cession following treaty
 Occupation of territory hitherto unoccupied by any recognized ruler
 Accretion

The annexation of Sikkim, Daman & Diu, Goa, Dadar and Nagar Haveli, and
Pondicherry are examples of acquisition.

ARTICLE 2: Admission or establishment of new States

Article 2 of the Constitution confers power on the Parliament to admit or establish new
States. Parliament has admitted by using this power, for example, the French
settlements of Pondicherry, Karaikal, Mahe and Yanam, the Portuguese settlements of
Goa, and Daman and Sikkim, etc., into India. It deals with admission or establishment
of new States. Parliament may by law admit into the Union, or establish, new States
based on terms and conditions as it thinks fit. Article 2 relates to admission or
establishment of new states that were/are not part of India.

Article. 2 provides: “Parliament may by law admit into the Union, or establish, new
states, on such terms and conditions as it thinks fit.”

Article 2 enables Parliament by Law to admit into the Union or establish new States on
such terms as it thinks fit. It will be noted that there are two powers given to the
Parliament by Article 2 namely:

 The power to admit into Union new States and

 The power to establish new States.

The first refers to the admission of duly organised political communities and second to
the formation of a State where none existed before. It will be recalled that the territory
acquired by the Union becomes Indian Territory by virtue of clauses 3(c) of Article 1.
No Parliamentary sanction is required for acquisition of territory acquired by the
Government of India, though factually becomes territory of India from the date of its
acquisition, the formal or legal assimilation is brought about only by Parliamentary
Legislation made either under this article when the acquired territory is established as
a new State of the Union, or when the acquired territory is merged into an existing State
under Article 3 of the Constitution.”

The expression “admit” refers to the admission of a state already in existence as a ‘state’
i.e. duly organized political community. The term “establish” refers to the creation of a
state where none existed before.

A new state may be admitted into the union in any of the following ways –

1. An inferior category such as a union territory, may be raised to the status of full
state,
2. A foreign territory acquired by India may be made a state and admitted into the
union,
3. A territory separated from an existing state reorganized into a full state.
However, article. 2 deals with admission, etc. of new states, which may be
formed of the foreign territories… article. 2 does not refer to the territories
forming part of the existing states (article. 3 provides for that).

ARTICLE 3: Formation of new States and alteration of areas,

boundaries or names of existing States

Parliament is empowered under Article 3 of the constitution to:

1. Either from a new state by separation of territory from any state or by merging
two or more states or by uniting any territory to a part of any state.
2. Increase in the area of any state.
3. A decrease in the area of any state.
4. Alteration in the boundary of any state.
5. Alteration in the name of any state.

This can be done if no bill for the purpose is introduced in the parliament except on the
recommendation of the President of India. A bill to become a law under Article 3 of the
constitution need to fulfil 2 conditions. Firstly, the bill must be introduced in either
house of the parliament only on the recommendation of the President of India.
Secondly, where the proposal in the bill affects or change the area, boundaries, or name
of any states, after this, the President must refer the bill to the legislature of the state
which is going to be affected by the bill to express its will on matters pertaining to any
alteration, formation or the name of that state.

Parliament may increase or decrease the area of any State or may alter the borders or
names of any State. In this respect, Parliament follows the following procedures.

In the case of Union Territories, before such a bill, it is not necessary to seek the views
of the Legislatures of Union Territories, for example, such Bills concerning Mizoram,
Arunachal Pradesh, Goa, Daman, and Diu were introduced in Parliament without
obtaining such views. Article 3 thus demonstrates the vulnerability and dependence of
the territorial integrity of the States on the Union, whereas, in federations such as the
USA or Australia, the borders or names of States cannot be changed by the Federation
without the consent of the States.

The state legislature is required to express its view within a specified time period as
directed by the president. He may extend the time so specified. The parliament,
however, is not bound to accept these views. Once the bill has been referred to the
concerned state legislatures, and thereafter duly introduced in parliament, subsequent
amendments seeking to make provisions different from those contained in the original
bill at the time of its introduction, are not required to be referred again to the state
legislatures (if the amendments are germane to the subject matter of the original
proposal or are not a direct negation thereof). Also, no fresh recommendation of the
president is necessary for the consideration of the proposed amendment to the bill.

Explanation 1 to article. 3 – The term “state” in clauses (a) to (e) of article 3 include a
“union territory”. But the term “state” used in proviso to article 3 does not include a
union territory (the reason being that the union territories are under the administration
of the president himself).

Explanation 2 to article. 3 – The power conferred on parliament by clause (a) of article.

3, to form a new state, include the power to form a new union territory also.
ARTICLE 4: Laws made under articles 2 and 3 to provide for the
amendment of the First and the Fourth Schedules and supplemental,
incidental and consequential matters

Article 4 states that any law referred to in Article 2 or Article 3 shall contain such
provisions as required to amend the 1st Schedule and IV Schedule in order to give effect
to the provisions of the law and may also contain such specific, incidental and
consequential provisions as the provisions may be considered necessary by the
Parliament. may deem necessary.

Article 4 allows for consequential changes to the First Schedule (names of the States in
the Union of India) and the Fourth Schedule (number of seats allocated by each State
to the Rajya Sabha). It also notes that it does not consider a constitutional amendment
under Article 368. It also states that no law existing States or creating a new State will
be considered a constitutional amendment. It is in line with the previous provisions of
the requirement, of a simple majority in Parliament and suggests full control of the
Union over the territories of the individual States of the Union.

Article. 4(1) directs the parliament, in case it makes a law under article. 2 or 3, to include
therein necessary provisions (supplement, incidental and consequential) for the
amendment of first and fourth schedules of the constitution[15]. The first schedule
specifies the number of states which are members of the union and their respective
territories. The fourth schedule specifies the number of seats to which each state is
entitled to in the council of states.

Article. 4(2) said that laws relatable to article. 2 or 3 do not amount to constitutional
amendments for the purposes of article. 368. Thus, such laws may be passed by the
parliament by simple majority procedure (subject to the requirements laid down by
proviso to article. 3) and without going through the special majority procedure
prescribed by article 368.

Cession of territory to a foreign state

The powers given to parliament to reorganize states cannot be availed of by it to cede

any Indian territory to a foreign country.