Sarkaria Commission was established to study

1. Nature of Indian Federalism: 'Union of States' (basic)

Welcome to your first step in understanding how India works as a nation! To understand Centre-State relations, we must first look at the very first sentence of our Constitution. Article 1(1) declares: "India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States." You might wonder why the framers chose the word 'Union' instead of 'Federation,' especially since our government has both a Centre and States. Introduction to the Constitution of India, NATURE OF THE FEDERAL SYSTEM, p.57

Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, the architect of our Constitution, clarified that while the structure is federal, the term 'Union' was preferred for two fundamental reasons:

• No Agreement: Unlike the American Federation, the Indian Federation is not the result of an agreement by the states to join together. The states did not exist as independent entities that decided to form a central government; rather, the country is one whole unit divided into states for administrative convenience.
• No Right to Secede: The states have no freedom to secede (break away) from the Union. This makes the Indian Union an "indestructible union of destructible states," meaning that while the boundaries of states can be changed by Parliament, the Union itself is permanent and inseparable. Indian Polity, Preamble of the Constitution, p.46

Because of this unique structure, scholars have described the Indian system in various ways to capture its "middle-path" essence. While we have a dual polity (Centre and States), the balance of power often tilts toward the Centre to ensure national integrity against challenges like regionalism or communalism. This led K.C. Wheare to famously describe India as 'quasi-federal'—meaning it is federal in form but unitary in spirit. Indian Polity, Salient Features of the Constitution, p.29

Feature	Traditional Federation (e.g., USA)	Indian 'Union'
Formation	Agreement between sovereign units.	Administrative division of a single unit.
Secession	Historically a point of conflict.	Explicitly forbidden; legally impossible.
Stability	Indestructible States.	Indestructible Union; States can be reorganized.

Sources: Introduction to the Constitution of India, NATURE OF THE FEDERAL SYSTEM, p.57; Indian Polity, Preamble of the Constitution, p.46; Indian Polity, Salient Features of the Constitution, p.29

2. Constitutional Division of Powers (Legislative & Administrative) (basic)

In a federal setup like India, the Constitution acts as a clear guidebook to prevent chaos between the Union and the States. This division is primarily found in Part XI and is divided into two main pillars: Legislative Relations (making the laws) and Administrative Relations (executing the laws). Think of it as a blueprint where the jurisdiction of each level of government is mapped out to ensure they don't step on each other's toes.

Legislative Relations (Articles 245–255) are centered around the Seventh Schedule, which provides a three-fold distribution of subjects Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity, Chapter 14, p.139.

List	Control	Nature of Subjects
Union List	Parliament only	National importance (e.g., Defense, Banking, Census)
State List	State Legislature	Local importance (e.g., Police, Agriculture, Fisheries)
Concurrent List	Both	Shared interest (e.g., Education, Marriage, Forests)

If a subject is not mentioned in any of these three lists, it is called a Residuary Power. Unlike in the USA or Australia where these belong to the states, in India, Article 248 vests residuary powers solely in the Parliament Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity, Chapter 15, p.164.

Administrative Relations (Articles 256–263) ensure that the executive machinery of the States and the Union works in harmony. The general rule is that executive power follows legislative power—if Parliament makes a law on a Union subject, the Union executive carries it out. However, to maintain national unity, the Centre can issue directions to the States to ensure compliance with Union laws. As noted by the Sarkaria Commission, while the Centre is designed to be strong, this strength should be used to support, not undermine, the autonomy of the States Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity, Chapter 15, p.160.

Sources: Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity, Chapter 14: Federal System, p.139; Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity, Chapter 15: Centre State Relations, p.144, 148, 160, 164

3. Fiscal Federalism and the Finance Commission (intermediate)

In the grand architecture of Indian federalism, Fiscal Federalism is the glue that holds the Union and States together. Because the Union government has the primary power to raise high-yield taxes (like Income Tax and Customs), while States bear the heavy burden of social welfare and development, a "vertical imbalance" is created. To bridge this gap, the Constitution provides for a Finance Commission (FC) under Article 280. Think of the FC as the "balancing wheel" of Indian fiscal federalism—a quasi-judicial body appointed by the President every five years to ensure that financial resources are distributed fairly and scientifically Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity, Finance Commission, p.431.

The core mandate of the Finance Commission involves two main types of distribution. First is Vertical Devolution, which determines how much of the total "divisible pool" of Central taxes should be shared with the States. For instance, the 15th Finance Commission recommended that 41% of these taxes be given to the 28 States Vivek Singh, Indian Economy, Government Budgeting, p.182. Second is Horizontal Devolution, which defines the formula for sharing that 41% among the states themselves, based on criteria like population, income distance, and forest cover to ensure equity between richer and poorer states Nitin Singhania, Indian Economy, Indian Tax Structure and Public Finance, p.123.

Feature	Vertical Devolution	Horizontal Devolution
Definition	Sharing of resources between the Centre and all States combined.	Sharing of the "States' share" among the individual States.
Key Goal	Correcting the imbalance between the Centre's revenue and States' needs.	Correcting the disparity between developed and under-developed States.

The landscape of fiscal federalism has evolved significantly through constitutional amendments. The 80th Amendment Act (2000) introduced an "Alternative Scheme of Devolution," ensuring that almost all Central taxes (not just Income Tax and Excise) became part of the shareable pool Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity, Centre-State Relations, p.153. More recently, the 101st Amendment Act (2016) revolutionized the system by introducing the GST, which forced a new level of cooperative federalism where both Centre and States must now decide on tax rates together through the GST Council.

Sources: Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity, Finance Commission, p.431; Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu, DISTRIBUTION OF FINANCIAL POWERS, p.387; Indian Economy, Vivek Singh, Government Budgeting, p.182; Indian Economy, Nitin Singhania, Indian Tax Structure and Public Finance, p.123; Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity, Centre-State Relations, p.153

4. The Governor’s Role as a Link between Centre and State (intermediate)

In the intricate architecture of Indian federalism, the Governor occupies a unique and often debated position. Unlike the President, who is the ceremonial head of the Union, the Governor serves a dual role: they are the constitutional head of the State, but they also serve as a vital link or agent of the Central Government. This dual capacity is designed to ensure that the State administration functions in harmony with the Union's constitutional obligations. Under Article 154, the executive power of the State is vested in the Governor, but their appointment and tenure are controlled entirely by the Union executive M. Laxmikanth, Indian Polity, Governor, p.321.

The Governor functions as the "eyes and ears" of the Centre. This link is operationalized through several specific constitutional mechanisms:

• Appointment and Tenure: The Governor is appointed by the President and holds office during the 'pleasure' of the President (Article 156). Since the President acts on the advice of the Union Council of Ministers, the Governor is effectively accountable to the Centre D.D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India, The State Executive, p.269.
• Reservation of Bills: Under Article 200, the Governor can reserve certain Bills passed by the State Legislature for the consideration of the President. This is mandatory if a Bill threatens the position of the High Court, but the Governor also has the discretion to reserve other Bills, giving the Centre a 'veto' over state legislation D.D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India, The State Executive, p.276.
• Reporting to the President: If the Governor feels that the State government cannot be carried out in accordance with the Constitution, they send a report to the President, which can lead to the imposition of President’s Rule (Article 356).

While the Governor is generally bound by the aid and advice of the State Council of Ministers (Article 163), their discretionary powers are broader than those of the President. In matters where the Governor acts in their discretion—such as reserving a bill or reporting on the failure of constitutional machinery—they are under the complete control of the President D.D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India, The State Executive, p.276. This often leads to friction, where States perceive the Governor as a "political agent" rather than an impartial bridge.

Feature	Constitutional Head Role	Link/Agent Role
Accountability	To the State Constitution & People	To the President (Union Government)
Action Basis	Aid and Advice of State CoM	Discretionary powers/Union directives
Key Tool	Assent to Bills (Article 200)	Reservation of Bills/Article 356 report

The Sarkaria Commission (1988) emphasized that for this link to remain healthy, the Governor should be a "detached figure" and not a member of the ruling party at the Centre, ensuring that the role promotes cooperative federalism rather than central interference M. Laxmikanth, Indian Polity, Centre State Relations, p.160.

Sources: Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth (7th ed.), Governor, p.321; Introduction to the Constitution of India, D.D. Basu (26th ed.), The State Executive, p.269; Introduction to the Constitution of India, D.D. Basu (26th ed.), The State Executive, p.276; Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth (7th ed.), Centre State Relations, p.160

5. Emergency Provisions and Article 356 (exam-level)

Concept: Emergency Provisions and Article 356

6. Evolution of Committees on Centre-State Relations (exam-level)

Indian federalism has never been static; it has evolved through a series of debates, commissions, and resolutions as the political landscape shifted from one-party dominance to a multi-party, regionalized system. Initially, the Administrative Reforms Commission (1966) emphasized that while the Constitution is functionally sound, the spirit of cooperation needed strengthening. It was the first major body to suggest the activation of the Inter-State Council under Article 263 to resolve disputes Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity, Chapter 15, p.158.

As regional parties gained power, demands became more radical. The Rajamannar Committee (1969), appointed by the Tamil Nadu government, and the Anandpur Sahib Resolution (1973) in Punjab, pushed for extreme decentralization. They sought to limit the Centre’s power to just four areas—Defence, Foreign Affairs, Communications, and Currency—while shifting all residuary powers to the states Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity, Chapter 15, p.159. These movements reflected a deep-seated desire for political autonomy and a 'bolbala' (dominance) of regional identities NCERT Class XII, Politics in India since Independence, Chapter 7, p.123.

The most defining moment in this evolution was the Sarkaria Commission (1983). Unlike previous regional demands, the Sarkaria Commission took a balanced view of "Cooperative Federalism." It argued that a strong Centre is indispensable for national unity, but warned that over-centralization leads to blood pressure at the Centre and anemia at the periphery. Its most significant legacy was the 1988 recommendation to establish a permanent Inter-State Council, which the government finally implemented in 1990 Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity, Chapter 15, p.160.

Committee/Resolution	Key Stance	Major Recommendation
Rajamannar Committee	Pro-State Autonomy	Abolish Articles 356, 357, and 365.
Anandpur Sahib	Regional Aspirations	Centre to keep only 4 subjects; States get residuary powers.
Sarkaria Commission	Cooperative Federalism	Set up Inter-State Council; Art 356 as a "last resort."

Sources: Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity, Chapter 15: Centre State Relations, p.158-160; Politics in India since Independence, NCERT Class XII, Chapter 7: Regional Aspirations, p.123; Indian Constitution at Work, NCERT Class XI, Chapter 7: FEDERALISM, p.166

7. The Sarkaria Commission (1983): Mandate and Impact (exam-level)

By the early 1980s, India’s federal structure was under significant strain. The rise of regional parties and frequent friction between the Union and the States led the Government of India to appoint a commission in 1983 to review the entire spectrum of Centre-State relations. Headed by Justice Ranjit Singh Sarkaria, this commission was not tasked with rewriting the Constitution; rather, its mandate was to suggest improvements within the existing constitutional framework to ensure smoother coordination. Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity, Chapter 15, p.160.

The philosophy of the Sarkaria Commission was rooted in Cooperative Federalism. It argued that while a strong Centre is indispensable for maintaining national integrity and unity, "strong" does not mean "centralized." The Commission famously noted that the Centre should not undermine the autonomy of the States. It submitted its massive report in 1988, containing 247 recommendations. These recommendations touched upon sensitive nerves like the role of Governors (who should be eminent persons from outside the state), the use of Article 356 (which it urged should be used only as a "last resort"), and the sharing of legislative powers. Indian Constitution at Work, NCERT Class XI, Chapter 7, p.166.

Perhaps its most enduring legacy was the recommendation to establish a permanent Inter-State Council under Article 263. The Commission even suggested it be called the "Inter-Governmental Council" to emphasize its collaborative nature. Although the report was submitted in 1988, it was the V.P. Singh government that finally implemented this recommendation in 1990, creating a platform for the Prime Minister and Chief Ministers to discuss issues of common interest. Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity, Chapter 16, p.168. To date, approximately 180 of its recommendations have been implemented, proving its status as the foundational document for modern Indian federalism.

Sources: Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity, Chapter 15: Centre State Relations, p.160; Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity, Chapter 16: Inter-State Relations, p.168; Indian Constitution at Work, NCERT Class XI, Chapter 7: FEDERALISM, p.166

8. Solving the Original PYQ (exam-level)

Now that you have explored the intricacies of federalism and the distribution of powers, you can see how the Sarkaria Commission acts as the central pillar connecting these concepts. While you previously studied individual components such as the Governor’s office, Article 356, and legislative lists, this commission was the comprehensive mechanism designed to review how these "building blocks" function together. As explained in Indian Polity by M. Laxmikanth, the commission sought to promote cooperative federalism by ensuring that a strong Union does not come at the expense of State autonomy.

When tackling this question, your reasoning should focus on the scope of the mandate. Although the commission made landmark suggestions regarding the appointment of Governors, that was just one part of its broader objective to examine the (B) Centre-State relations. Always look for the overarching theme: Justice Sarkaria was tasked with reviewing the "existing arrangements" across legislative, administrative, and financial spheres. This is why the Inter-State Council, recommended by the commission and established under Article 263, became its most enduring legacy, as it provided a permanent forum for managing this systemic relationship.

UPSC often uses subset traps to confuse students. Option (A) is a classic example—it is a specific issue within the larger framework but does not represent the commission's total purpose. Option (C) relates to Local Self-Government (Panchayati Raj), which involves committees like Balwant Rai Mehta or L.M. Singhvi, as noted in Indian Constitution at Work (NCERT). Option (D) deals with the Parliamentary Executive, which is an internal Union matter. By identifying these as either too narrow or irrelevant to the federal structure, you can confidently isolate the correct answer.