The Sarkaria Commission played a historic role in shaping Centre–State relations in India. It was set up in 1983 to examine the working of existing arrangements between the Union and the States and to recommend reforms. The Commission was chaired by Justice R. S. Sarkaria, a retired judge of the Supreme Court, and included B. Sivaraman and Dr. S. R. Sen as members. After nearly five years of study, the Commission submitted its report in 1988. The report contained 247 recommendations. Its central aim was to strengthen cooperative federalism, reduce central dominance, and create a balanced relationship between the Union and States. Even today, its findings remain a touchstone in discussions on federalism.
Why Was the Sarkaria Commission Established?
The Commission was established at a time when Centre–State relations faced growing strain. Frequent use of Article 356, disputes over the appointment of Governors, and financial dependence of States on the Centre were creating tension. Several States felt that the Union was exercising disproportionate authority. To address these concerns, the Government of India decided to constitute the Sarkaria Commission. Its purpose was to review the arrangements of power-sharing in the Constitution and suggest reforms for efficiency, autonomy, and harmony.
What Did the Commission Recommend on the Inter-State Council?
The Commission placed great emphasis on institutional mechanisms for consultation. It recommended the creation of a permanent Inter-State Council under Article 263 of the Constitution. The council would serve as a forum for dialogue, policy coordination, and dispute resolution. The Commission believed that such a body could reduce friction and provide a platform for continuous communication between the Union and States. Following this recommendation, the Inter-State Council was finally established in 1990. This was one of the most significant outcomes of the Commission’s work.
What Were the Recommendations on the Governor’s Office?
The office of the Governor had been a source of political controversy. The Commission sought to depoliticize this position. It recommended that the Chief Minister of the concerned State should be consulted before the appointment of a Governor. The Vice President and the Speaker of the Lok Sabha should also be involved in the process. Governors should be eminent persons from outside the State. They should not be involved in local politics and should not take up any further public office after retirement.
The Commission suggested a fixed tenure of five years for Governors. It emphasized that Governors must act impartially and avoid becoming instruments of the Union government. By setting these standards, the Commission tried to protect the dignity of the post and ensure that Governors served as neutral constitutional heads rather than political actors.
How Did the Commission View Emergency Provisions?
The misuse of Article 356 had become one of the most debated issues in Indian politics. The Commission expressed serious concern about frequent dismissals of State governments under President’s Rule. It recommended that Article 356 should be used sparingly and only as a last resort. Before invoking it, the Union should explore all other alternatives.
The Commission proposed that the Union should issue a formal warning to the State government before imposing President’s Rule. The explanation of the State should be considered carefully. Moreover, the Legislative Assembly of the State should not be dissolved until Parliament approves the proclamation. These safeguards were meant to prevent arbitrary dismissals and ensure respect for democratic processes in the States.
What Were the Suggestions on Financial Relations?
Financial dependence was another area of tension between the Centre and States. The Commission recommended that States must be given adequate financial resources to reduce their reliance on the Union. It called for strengthening fiscal federalism. Grants and financial transfers should be based on transparent principles. States should be given more flexibility in the use of funds.
The Commission observed that concentration of financial powers in the Centre created imbalance. To correct this, it suggested a more equitable sharing of resources. It also called for a greater role of the Finance Commission in recommending measures to support States. These ideas continue to influence debates on fiscal federalism and devolution of resources.
What Were the Recommendations on Legislative Relations?
The Sarkaria Commission reviewed the division of legislative powers. It suggested that Parliament should retain residuary powers only in the field of taxation. For other residuary subjects, powers should be shifted to the Concurrent List. This would allow both the Union and States to legislate on emerging matters.
The Commission also emphasized the need for mutual consultation in matters of the Concurrent List. Laws in this field should be made with dialogue and understanding. States should also be consulted when the President considers giving or withholding assent to State bills. This would respect State autonomy and reduce conflicts over legislative matters.
What Did the Commission Recommend on All-India Services?
The Commission recognized the importance of All-India Services like the IAS and IPS in maintaining administrative unity. It recommended that these services should be strengthened and expanded. States should not be encouraged to opt out of them. At the same time, it called for reforms in the services themselves. Selection, training, specialization, and career development of officers should be improved. By creating a professional and efficient cadre, the Commission believed that national integration and good governance could be promoted.
What Were the Recommendations on Administrative Relations?
The Commission made several observations on administrative relations. It suggested that the appointment of Chief Ministers should be based on clear majority support. In cases of coalition governments, guidelines should be followed to ensure stability. The Union should use a consultative process before deploying central armed forces in a State. This would respect State authority while maintaining national security.
The Commission also emphasized cooperation in areas like planning, development, and law and order. It believed that consultation and collaboration should be the guiding principles of administrative relations. By doing so, the Union and States could function as partners rather than adversaries.
How Many Recommendations Did the Commission Make and What Was Their Impact?
The Sarkaria Commission made a total of 247 recommendations. These covered almost every aspect of Centre–State relations, including legislative, financial, administrative, and emergency provisions. Not all recommendations were implemented, but many influenced policy, legislation, and judicial interpretation.
One of the most important outcomes was the establishment of the Inter-State Council in 1990. The Commission’s views on limiting misuse of Article 356 were later echoed in the landmark S. R. Bommai judgment of the Supreme Court. Its emphasis on fiscal federalism influenced later Finance Commissions. Its guidelines on Governors and Chief Ministers continue to be discussed whenever controversies arise.
The Commission’s report has remained a reference point in debates on federalism. Even decades later, its recommendations are cited in discussions on constitutional amendments and reforms. The report has helped shape a more balanced understanding of the federal structure.
Why Is the Sarkaria Commission Still Relevant?
The Sarkaria Commission is still relevant because the issues it addressed continue to affect Indian federalism. Disputes over Governors, the use of Article 356, financial devolution, and Centre–State coordination remain current. The principles of consultation, cooperation, and balance between Union authority and State autonomy are timeless.
In a diverse country like India, federal harmony is essential. The Sarkaria Commission offered a blueprint for achieving it. Its recommendations promote unity without undermining diversity. They provide a framework for cooperative federalism, which is crucial in the functioning of a large democracy.
For any specific query call at +91 – 8569843472
Conclusion
The Sarkaria Commission on Centre–State Relations was a landmark initiative to strengthen Indian federalism. It studied the functioning of constitutional arrangements and suggested 247 recommendations. Its key proposals included creating a permanent Inter-State Council, reforming the office of the Governor, limiting the misuse of Article 356, strengthening financial autonomy of States, reforming legislative and administrative relations, and expanding All-India Services.
The Commission’s report emphasized cooperation, consultation, and respect for democratic principles. Many of its ideas shaped reforms, judicial decisions, and institutional changes. Even today, the Sarkaria Commission remains one of the most important documents on Centre–State relations in India. It continues to guide debates on federalism, ensuring balance between national unity and State autonomy.
