Union and its Territory - Clarity Desk Hub IAS

(Articles 1 to 4)

The very first part of our Constitution, Part I, deals with Union and its Territory. It is covered under Articles 1 to 4. Now you may ask, “Sir, why does the Constitution begin with territory?”
Simple reason: Without defining what “India” is and what its geographical boundary is, how will you even apply the Constitution? Hence, this becomes the foundation.

Article 1 – Union of States

Article 1 tells us two things:

Name of the country
Nature of the polity

(a) Name of the Country

There was a debate in the Constituent Assembly. Some members said: “We must use the ancient, cultural name Bharat.” Others said: “We are making a modern Constitution for a democratic state, so let us go with India.”
Finally, a compromise formula was adopted:
👉 “India, that is, Bharat.”
So both names are constitutional and equally valid.

(b) Why “Union of States” and not “Federation of States”?

This is very interesting. Though our Constitution is federal in structure, it does not call India a “Federation.” Instead, it says Union of States.

Dr. B.R. Ambedkar gave two clear reasons:

Not created by Agreement – In the USA, independent colonies came together and signed an agreement to form a federation. India is not like that. Our states never had sovereignty to unite on their own; they are created by the Constitution itself.
Indestructible Union – In a true federation, states can secede (like theoretically in the USA). But in India, no state has a right to separate from the Union. Hence, it is called a Union—once united, always united.

👉 Thus, India is federal in form but unitary in spirit.

Categories of Indian Territory

Article 1 also classifies the Territory of India into three parts:

Territories of the States
Union Territories
Any territories acquired by Government of India in the future

Now, where are all these listed?
👉 In the First Schedule of the Constitution.

As of 2025, India has 28 States and 8 Union Territories.
Special provisions exist under Part XXI for states like Nagaland, Mizoram, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Gujarat, etc.
The Fifth and Sixth Schedules provide separate arrangements for Scheduled Areas and Tribal Areas.

Here, one key distinction:

Union of India = Only States (members of federal system).
Territory of India = States + Union Territories + any future acquired territories.

So, the latter is a wider expression than the former.

Administration of Different Territories

States – They share powers with the Centre under the federal scheme.
Union Territories & Acquired Territories – These are directly administered by the Central Government.

👉 Example: Delhi and Chandigarh are under Centre’s control (though Delhi has special status).

Modes of Acquiring Foreign Territories

Since India is a sovereign state, it can acquire new territories under international law through:

Cession (by treaty, purchase, gift, lease, plebiscite)
Occupation (if the land was unoccupied)
Conquest or Subjugation

Examples:

Dadra & Nagar Haveli, Goa, Daman & Diu, Puducherry, and Sikkim were all acquired after 1950 through one of these modes.

Article 2 – Admission or Establishment of New States

Parliament has two powers under Article 2:

Admit new states → If a state already exists somewhere outside India, it can be admitted.
(e.g., if Bhutan wanted, theoretically it could be admitted)
Establish new states → If a new state is created from a territory that earlier was not a state.

👉 Important: Article 2 deals with new states outside the existing Union.

Article 3 – Changes in Existing States

This is different. Article 3 is about internal re-adjustment:

Formation of new states out of existing ones
Alteration of boundaries
Change of names, etc.

So, remember the distinction:

Article 2 = Admission/Establishment of New States (outside India)
Article 3 = Reorganisation of Existing States (inside India)

✅ So, we have laid down the basics: What is India, why Union not Federation, what territory it covers, and how new states can be created or admitted.

Parliament’s Power to Reorganise States

So far, we understood that India is called a Union of States, but the Union is indestructible while the states are not. Now let’s see how Parliament can reorganise the territory of states.

Powers under Article 3

Article 3 gives Parliament a very wide authority. It can:
(a) Form a new state – either by separating territory from any state, or by uniting two or more states/parts of states, or by merging any territory with a state.
(b) Increase the area of a state.
(c) Diminish the area of a state.
(d) Alter the boundaries of a state.
(e) Alter the name of a state.

👉 In short: Parliament can redraw the map of India as it wishes.

Conditions for Exercise of this Power

But this power is not absolutely unfettered. Article 3 lays down two procedural conditions:

Prior Recommendation of the President – A bill for such changes can be introduced in Parliament only if the President recommends it.
Reference to State Legislature – Before recommending the bill, the President must send it to the concerned state legislature to get its views within a specified time.

Now comes the crucial point—
👉 The President (and Parliament) is not bound by the opinion of the state legislature. Even if the state says NO, Parliament can go ahead.

Also, if amendments are made in the bill during passage, there is no need to send it back again to the state legislature.
For Union Territories, no reference is needed at all.

This shows the supremacy of Parliament in territorial matters.

Implication: Indestructible Union of Destructible States

Since Parliament can change state boundaries, merge or divide them, or even alter their names without their consent, the states in India do not enjoy guaranteed territorial existence.
Therefore, India is rightly called:
👉 “An indestructible Union of destructible states.”

Contrast this with the USA:

In America, the territorial integrity of states is guaranteed.
The federal government cannot alter boundaries or create new states without the consent of concerned states.
👉 Hence, USA is called “An indestructible Union of indestructible states.”

This difference highlights India’s quasi-federal character, with strong unitary tilt.

Role of Article 4

Another important point:
Article 4 says that any law passed under Article 2 (admission/establishment of new states) or Article 3 (reorganisation of states) will not be treated as a constitutional amendment under Article 368.

👉 Meaning:

Such laws require only a simple majority in Parliament,
And they follow the ordinary legislative procedure,
No special amendment process is needed.

This makes it much easier for Parliament to reorganise states.

Cession of Indian Territory – The Berubari Case (1960)

Now comes a very important question:
If Parliament can diminish the area of a state (under Article 3), does it mean Parliament can also cede Indian territory to another country?

This issue arose in Berubari case (1960).

Context: Government of India decided to cede part of Berubari Union (in West Bengal) to Pakistan. This caused huge political controversy, and the matter was referred to the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court held:
👉 No, Parliament cannot cede Indian territory under Article 3.
👉 For such transfer to a foreign country, a constitutional amendment under Article 368 is required.

As a result, the 9th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1960 was passed to transfer Berubari to Pakistan.

Boundary Disputes with Foreign Countries (1969 Ruling)

But in 1969, Supreme Court clarified another point:

If India only settles a boundary dispute with a foreign country, that does not amount to ceding Indian territory.
This can be done by executive action (i.e., by the Government itself), without needing constitutional amendment.

Exchange of Territories with Bangladesh

This story is about how India and Bangladesh finally resolved one of the longest pending border disputes in the world, and how it required a Constitutional Amendment because Indian territory was being transferred.

The 100th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2015

Parliament passed the 100th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2015 to implement the India–Bangladesh Land Boundary Agreement (LBA) and its 2011 Protocol.
Under this deal:
- India transferred 111 enclaves to Bangladesh.
- Bangladesh transferred 51 enclaves to India.
Along with this exchange:
- Areas under adverse possession were corrected.
- The remaining 6.1 km of undemarcated border was finally settled.
To give effect to this, changes were made in the First Schedule of the Constitution regarding the territories of Assam, West Bengal, Meghalaya, and Tripura.

👉 So, like in Berubari case, since cession of Indian territory was involved, only a constitutional amendment (not ordinary law) could achieve this.

Background to the Amendment

This problem did not appear suddenly in 2015. It has a long history dating back to Partition (1947).

(a) Radcliffe Award (1947)

At the time of Partition, the boundary between India and East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) was drawn by the Radcliffe Commission.
But due to haste, ambiguities, and practical issues, many enclaves and boundary disputes remained unresolved.

(b) Bagge Award (1950)

Some disputes were referred to the Bagge Tribunal, which gave its award in 1950.
But that did not end the problem.

(c) Nehru–Noon Agreement (1958)

Another effort was made through this agreement between Prime Ministers Nehru (India) and Noon (Pakistan).
But the Berubari Union dispute reached the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court ruled: “Parliament cannot cede territory under Article 3. A Constitutional Amendment under Article 368 is needed.”
Result: 9th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1960 was passed.

👉 However, because of litigation and political reasons, this Act was not fully implemented in relation to East Pakistan.

(d) Land Boundary Agreement (1974)

After Bangladesh was created (1971), Prime Ministers Indira Gandhi and Sheikh Mujibur Rahman signed a comprehensive Land Boundary Agreement (LBA) in 1974.
But Parliament never ratified it because it required a constitutional amendment.

(e) Protocol of 2011

In 2011, both countries signed a Protocol to the 1974 Agreement.
This Protocol identified:
- Exchange of enclaves,
- Settlement of adverse possession,
- Demarcation of undemarcated areas.
Importantly, the Protocol had the concurrence of the concerned state governments (Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura, West Bengal).

Final Settlement – 2015

After decades of delay, political will was built up, and in 2015 Parliament finally passed the 100th Constitutional Amendment Act.

👉 Effect:

Around 50,000 people living in enclaves got clarity about their citizenship and rights.
A 68-year-old dispute was resolved, improving India–Bangladesh relations.

✅ In short:

The Land Boundary problem started with Partition (Radcliffe Award).
Multiple attempts (1950 Bagge, 1958 Nehru–Noon, 1974 LBA) failed.
Finally, 2011 Protocol + 2015 Constitutional Amendment resolved it.
This is a practical example of how territorial changes involving cession always require a constitutional amendment under Article 368.

Evolution of States and Union Territories

Excellent — this part is a chronological and constitutional story: how the political map of India transformed from 1947 to the present.

Two kinds of units at independence — Provinces and Princely States

At Independence India had:
- British provinces (direct British rule), and
- Princely states (ruled by native princes under British paramountcy).
Indian Independence Act, 1947: princely states could join India, join Pakistan or remain independent. Out of ~552 princely states, 549 joined India; Hyderabad, Junagarh and Kashmir initially did not — they were later integrated (Hyderabad by police action, Junagarh by referendum, Kashmir by Instrument of Accession).

The original constitutional classification (1950) — Part A / B / C / D

The Constitution (1950) had four categories: Part A, Part B, Part C and Part D states/territories (total 29).
- Part A = former Governor’s provinces (with governors).
- Part B = certain princely states with legislatures.
- Part C = Chief Commissioner’s provinces + some princely areas (centrally administered).
- Part D = Andaman & Nicobar (single territory).
This classification was temporary/ad hoc and not stable politically.

Early attempts at reorganisation — Dhar Commission and JVP Committee

Dhar Commission (1948) → recommended reorganisation based on administrative convenience, not language. This upset many, especially in South India.
JVP Committee (Nehru–Vallabhbhai Patel–Pattabhi Sitaramayya, 1948–49) → formally rejected language as the basis.
But popular pressure (and political events) kept the language demand alive.

First linguistic state — Andhra (1953)

Potti Sriramulu’s hunger strike (56 days) and his death led to creation of Andhra State (Telugu-speaking areas separated from Madras) in October 1953 — the first linguistic state.
This set off a chain reaction across India for linguistic reorganisation.

Fazl Ali Commission / States Reorganisation Commission (SRC), 1953–55

Government appointed States Reorganisation Commission (Fazl Ali, K.M. Panikkar, H.N. Kunzru) in 1953. Report (1955):
- Accepted language as an important basis but rejected absolute “one language–one state”.
- Emphasised four factors for reorganisation:
  (a) Unity & security of country; (b) Linguistic & cultural homogeneity; (c) Financial, economic and administrative considerations; (d) Welfare & planning considerations.
Recommendation: abolish Part A/B/C/D classification and reconstitute states/UTs. Government broadly accepted it.

States Reorganisation Act, 1956 & 7th Constitutional Amendment (1956)

By 1 November 1956: new map — 14 states and 6 union territories created.
Important mergers/changes:
- Kerala = Travancore–Cochin + Malabar (Madras) + Kasargod.
- Andhra Pradesh (big) = Andhra + Telugu areas of Hyderabad State.
- Madhya Pradesh (Madhya Bharat, Vindhya, Bhopal merged).
- Bombay enlarged (Saurashtra + Kutch merged), Coorg → Mysore, Pepsu → Punjab, Ajmer → Rajasthan, etc.
- Laccadive, Minicoy and Amindivi Islands created as a union territory (later Lakshadweep).

New states / UTs after 1956 — a chronological run-through (short notes + reason)

1960 — Maharashtra & Gujarat: Bombay bifurcated on linguistic lines (Marathi / Gujarati).
1961 — Dadra & Nagar Haveli: liberated from Portuguese; became UT by 10th Amendment (1961).
1961/1962 — Goa, Daman & Diu: liberated (1961); made UT by 12th Amendment (1962); Goa later granted statehood in 1987 (Daman & Diu remained UT).
Puducherry (French enclaves: Pondicherry, Karaikal, Mahe, Yanam) → handed over 1954; made a UT by 14th Amendment (1962). Renamed Puducherry in 2006 (from Pondicherry).
1963 — Nagaland: carved from Assam to address Naga demands (earlier governor’s control from 1961).
1966 — Haryana + Chandigarh + Himachal Pradesh changes: Punjab split (Hindi-speaking areas → Haryana; Punjabi-speaking → Punjab; hill areas → Himachal). Himachal later became state in 1971. Chandigarh became a UT/capital.
1972 — Manipur, Tripura, Meghalaya; NE changes: Manipur & Tripura (UT → states), Meghalaya (from ‘autonomous state’ to full state later). Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh (NEFA) became separate UTs.
1974–75 — Sikkim: 35th Amendment (1974) made Sikkim an associate state (Article 2-A); referendum (1975) led to full statehood by 36th Amendment (1975) — Sikkim became the 22nd state. Article 371-F provided special provisions.
1987 — Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh, Goa: became states (Mizoram via peace accord; Arunachal from UT; Goa separated from Goa, Daman & Diu).
2000 — Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, Jharkhand: created from Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar respectively (driven by regional demands for better administration, identity, development).
2014 — Telangana: carved out of Andhra Pradesh (after long movement and political process).
2019 — Jammu & Kashmir & Ladakh: Special status under Article 370 (erstwhile) was made inoperative by The Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order, 2019; Jammu & Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019 created two union territories — Jammu & Kashmir (with legislature) and Ladakh (without legislature). Leh & Kargil → Ladakh UT.

Net result: States rose from 14 (1956) to 28 (2019); Union Territories from 6 (1956) to 8 (2025).

Changes of names — quick list (important for prelim recall)

United Provinces → Uttar Pradesh (1950)
Madras → Tamil Nadu (1969)
Mysore → Karnataka (1973)
Laccadive, Minicoy & Amindivi Islands → Lakshadweep (1973)
Delli → National Capital Territory of Delhi (re-designated by 69th Amendment Act, 1991; still not a full state)
Uttaranchal → Uttarakhand (2006)
Pondicherry → Puducherry (2006)
Orissa → Odisha (2011)

Why this history matters for UPSC (and how to present it in answers)

Constitutional provisions to remember: Articles 1–4 (Union & Territory, admission/establishment, reorganisation), Article 368 (amendment), Article 2-A / 371-F (Sikkim special), Fifth & Sixth Schedules (tribal areas), Part XXI (special state provisions).
Case law to pair with facts: Berubari case (1960) — Parliament cannot cede territory by ordinary law; needs constitutional amendment. (You already have this in your previous part.)
Classic model answer pattern: Start with constitutional provision, explain procedure (President’s recommendation, state reference under Article 3), give historical examples (States Reorganisation Act 1956, Andhra 1953, Telangana 2014, J&K 2019), end with significance/impact on federalism.
Map and timeline questions: very common in prelims and helpful in mains illustration — dates + reasons (linguistic, administrative efficiency, ethnic/insurgency settlements, development) give strong context.

Short summary

India’s map evolved from a colonial mix of provinces and princely states into the present federal structure through constitutional mechanisms, political movements, commissions (Dhar, JVP, States Reorganisation Commission), and a sequence of legislative and constitutional amendments. Reorganisation balanced linguistic/cultural identity, administrative efficiency, security, and national unity.