NEW DELHI: Amid constant tension between Centre and opposition-ruled states over many issues, including revenue sharing, CJI D Y Chandrachud has said the concept of cooperative federalism , which is at the core of India's democratic governance, does not mandate states to toe the Centre's line of policy.
Speaking at the Loksatta series of lectures in Mumbai on Saturday, the CJI said federalism is not a monolithic concept and is inherently multi-faceted, with those facets having innumerable concepts. He said in 1977, the SC for the first time had ruled that the federalism model of India is predominantly cooperative, where states and the Centre iron out their differences through deliberations to achieve the common goal of development.
Citing his own judgment in the 2022 Union of India vs Mohit Minerals case, the CJI said, "It is not necessary that 'cooperation' between states and the Union is the only way to uphold federal principles. It is necessary to view Indian federalism as a dialogue in which states and the Union engage in conversations. Just like the conversations that we engage in on an everyday basis, it could either be easy-going or it could cause friction between the units."
He said, "The easy-going conversations must not be viewed as the 'good', and the friction, as the 'bad'. The dialogues between the Union and states must be placed on two ends of the spectrum."
"Collaborative discussions that cooperative federalism fosters are at the end of one spectrum and interstitial contestations are at the other hand. Both forms of dialogue are equally important for federalism to flourish. Federalism does not therefore entail only convenient outcomes but is equally welcoming of some contest," he said.
He said what India is experiencing at present is ' asymmetric federalism ', which could be understood at two levels-one, Union and states are independent at their respective spheres; and two, the unique asymmetric relationship that each state shares with the Centre.
"In a nation as diverse and plural as ours, it is impossible to put all the states in a box and treat them alike vis-a-vis the Union. The constitutional integration of various states to form the nation of 'India', if anything, indicates the unique considerations for the integration of each state," he said.
Referring to judicial contribution to the development of federalism in India, the CJI cited the famous S R Bommai judgment that blunted the veto power with the governor, who are increasingly now being told by the SC to clear bills expeditiously-a situation to which the states had no remedy earlier.
He also referred to the recent nine-judge bench judgment in the Mineral Area Development Authority case, in which the traditionally followed principle of barring states from taxing extracted minerals and mineral bearing lands was set aside.
Speaking at the Loksatta series of lectures in Mumbai on Saturday, the CJI said federalism is not a monolithic concept and is inherently multi-faceted, with those facets having innumerable concepts. He said in 1977, the SC for the first time had ruled that the federalism model of India is predominantly cooperative, where states and the Centre iron out their differences through deliberations to achieve the common goal of development.
Citing his own judgment in the 2022 Union of India vs Mohit Minerals case, the CJI said, "It is not necessary that 'cooperation' between states and the Union is the only way to uphold federal principles. It is necessary to view Indian federalism as a dialogue in which states and the Union engage in conversations. Just like the conversations that we engage in on an everyday basis, it could either be easy-going or it could cause friction between the units."
He said, "The easy-going conversations must not be viewed as the 'good', and the friction, as the 'bad'. The dialogues between the Union and states must be placed on two ends of the spectrum."
"Collaborative discussions that cooperative federalism fosters are at the end of one spectrum and interstitial contestations are at the other hand. Both forms of dialogue are equally important for federalism to flourish. Federalism does not therefore entail only convenient outcomes but is equally welcoming of some contest," he said.
He said what India is experiencing at present is ' asymmetric federalism ', which could be understood at two levels-one, Union and states are independent at their respective spheres; and two, the unique asymmetric relationship that each state shares with the Centre.
"In a nation as diverse and plural as ours, it is impossible to put all the states in a box and treat them alike vis-a-vis the Union. The constitutional integration of various states to form the nation of 'India', if anything, indicates the unique considerations for the integration of each state," he said.
Referring to judicial contribution to the development of federalism in India, the CJI cited the famous S R Bommai judgment that blunted the veto power with the governor, who are increasingly now being told by the SC to clear bills expeditiously-a situation to which the states had no remedy earlier.
He also referred to the recent nine-judge bench judgment in the Mineral Area Development Authority case, in which the traditionally followed principle of barring states from taxing extracted minerals and mineral bearing lands was set aside.
You may also like
2 women drug peddlers among six held across Jammu region; cash, contraband seized
BREAKING: Carlos Sainz wins Mexico GP as Lando Norris and Max Verstappen renew hostilities
3 killed in Jammu accident
Lando Norris and Max Verstappen battle explodes as Carlos Sainz wins Mexican Grand Prix
Roy Keane called 'pathetic' after strange comments on Arsenal vs. Liverpool
