Which one of the following leaders of the Congress was totally in favour of Cabinet Mission Plan ?

1. Post-WWII Political Crisis & The Need for Settlement (basic)

By the end of 1945, the political landscape in India had reached a boiling point. The British Empire, though victorious in World War II, emerged economically exhausted and militarily overstretched. In India, the Quit India Movement of 1942 had already shattered the illusion of British permanence, but the post-war period brought a new, more militant energy. The British realized that to maintain any semblance of order or to protect their long-term interests, they needed a formal political settlement with the two main Indian parties: the Indian National Congress and the Muslim League. This necessity led to the Wavell Plan and the subsequent Simla Conference in June 1945, where leaders like Maulana Abul Kalam Azad (the then Congress President), Jawaharlal Nehru, and Sardar Patel were released from prison to negotiate a temporary Indianized government Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Chapter 24, p.455.

The urgency for a settlement was fueled by what historians call the "three upsurges" of the winter of 1945-46. These were not just peaceful protests but violent confrontations that shook the very foundations of British authority. The public was incensed by the INA (Indian National Army) trials at the Red Fort, leading to massive riots in Calcutta in November 1945 and February 1946. However, the most decisive blow was the Royal Indian Navy (RIN) Revolt in Bombay in February 1946. For the first time, the British realized they could no longer rely on the loyalty of the Indian armed forces to sustain their rule Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Chapter 24, p.466.

These events created a "post-war political crisis" that forced a shift in British policy from suppression to negotiation. Lord Wavell had already convinced the British government that a coalition government was the only way to manage the transition and prevent a complete collapse of the administration History, Class XII (TN State Board), Chapter 7, p.92. This realization set the stage for the Cabinet Mission, as the British sought an exit strategy that would leave behind a stable, united, or at least orderly, India.

Sources: A Brief History of Modern India (SPECTRUM), Chapter 24: Post-War National Scenario, p.455, 466; History, Class XII (Tamilnadu State Board), Chapter 7: Last Phase of Indian National Movement, p.92

2. Cabinet Mission Plan 1946: Core Proposals (intermediate)

By 1946, the British realized that holding onto India by force was no longer sustainable due to post-war economic exhaustion and the rising tide of Indian nationalism. To find a way to transfer power peacefully, the Attlee government sent a high-powered committee known as the Cabinet Mission, consisting of three British Cabinet members: Pethick Lawrence (Chairman), Stafford Cripps, and A.V. Alexander Rajiv Ahir. A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.). SPECTRUM, Chapter 24, p.470. Their primary task was to negotiate the formation of an interim government and define the principles for a new Constitution.

Since the Congress (demanding a united India) and the Muslim League (demanding a separate Pakistan) could not agree, the Mission proposed its own plan in May 1946. It famously rejected the demand for a sovereign Pakistan, arguing that a small Pakistan would be non-viable and a large one would include too many non-Muslims. Instead, it proposed a unique three-tier federal structure to balance local autonomy with national unity:

Level	Scope/Powers
Union of India	Central control over Defense, Foreign Affairs, and Communications.
Groups (A, B, C)	Provinces were grouped into three sections (Hindu-majority, NW Muslim-majority, and NE Muslim-majority) to decide common subjects.
Provinces	Full autonomy over all residuary subjects not held by the Union.

The Plan also proposed the setting up of a Constituent Assembly elected by provincial assemblies and an Interim Government representing all major parties History, class XII (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Chapter 7, p.93. While both major parties initially accepted the plan, their interpretations differed—especially regarding whether the "grouping" of provinces was compulsory or optional. Amidst this uncertainty, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad emerged as the most dedicated proponent of the Plan, viewing it as the best possible solution to preserve India's unity while addressing the League's fears Rajiv Ahir. A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.). SPECTRUM, Chapter 24, p.475.

Sources: Rajiv Ahir. A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.). SPECTRUM., Chapter 24: Post-War National Scenario, p.470, 472, 475; History, class XII (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Chapter 7: Last Phase of Indian National Movement, p.93

3. The Grouping Clause & Interpretation Conflict (exam-level)

The Cabinet Mission Plan of 1946 proposed a unique three-tier administrative structure to preserve Indian unity while addressing the Muslim League's demand for autonomy. The heart of this plan was the Grouping Clause, which divided the British Indian provinces into three sections: Section A (Hindu-majority provinces like Madras and Bombay), Section B (Muslim-majority provinces in the Northwest like Punjab and Sindh), and Section C (Muslim-majority provinces in the Northeast, namely Bengal and Assam). These groups were intended to frame their own provincial constitutions and, potentially, a group constitution before dealing with the Union constitution History, class XII (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Chapter 7, p.80.

The plan quickly became a battlefield of interpretation. The Indian National Congress argued that grouping should be optional; they believed a province should have the right to opt-out of a group before the constitution was framed. This was crucial for the Congress-led North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) and Assam. Conversely, the Muslim League insisted that grouping was compulsory, viewing these blocks as the functional 'seed' of a future Pakistan Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Chapter 24, p.474. The British government eventually clarified that the League’s interpretation was correct: grouping was mandatory at the start, though provinces could opt-out after the first general elections under the new constitution.

This conflict created a fragile political environment. While leaders like Maulana Abul Kalam Azad championed the plan as a 'glorious event' that could prevent partition, others were wary. Jawaharlal Nehru’s later public remarks—suggesting that the Congress was not bound by the grouping scheme once the Constituent Assembly met—alarmed the League and ultimately led to their withdrawal of support for the plan Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Chapter 24, p.475. This deadlock over a single clause effectively ended the last real hope for a united, independent India.

Feature	Congress Interpretation	Muslim League Interpretation
Nature of Grouping	Optional/Voluntary at the start.	Compulsory/Mandatory at the start.
Provincial Autonomy	Provinces should choose their group immediately.	Provinces must join the assigned group first.
Long-term Goal	Maintain a strong, unified central thread.	Create autonomous blocks (basis for Pakistan).

Sources: History, class XII (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Chapter 7: Last Phase of Indian National Movement, p.80, 93; Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Chapter 24: Post-War National Scenario, p.474-475

4. Interim Government and the 1946 Constitutional Deadlock (intermediate)

The formation of the Interim Government in 1946 was intended to be a bridge between British rule and Indian independence. However, rather than a smooth transition, it became a theater of constitutional deadlock. Following the Cabinet Mission's proposals, the Congress formed the government on September 2, 1946, with Jawaharlal Nehru as the Vice-President of the Executive Council NCERT 2025 ed., Framing the Constitution, p.341. Initially, the Muslim League stayed away, choosing instead to observe 'Direct Action Day' to press its demand for Pakistan. This period was marred by intense communal violence across Bombay, Ahmedabad, and beyond TN State Board 2024 ed., Last Phase of Indian National Movement, p.94.

By October 1946, Viceroy Wavell managed to bring the Muslim League into the government. However, this was not a sign of reconciliation. The League joined without rescinding its rejection of the Cabinet Mission’s long-term plan and without giving up its call for 'Direct Action' Rajiv Ahir, Spectrum, p.476. Their entry was a strategic move to fight for Pakistan from within the administration rather than cooperating with the Congress. This created a 'government within a government,' where the two parties were in constant conflict.

The deadlock manifested most sharply in two ways:

• Administrative Paralysis: The 'informal' cabinet meetings, intended to settle differences before formal sessions with the Viceroy, stopped happening because the League members refused to participate TN State Board 2024 ed., Last Phase of Indian National Movement, p.95.
• The 'Budget' Weapon: Liaquat Ali Khan, as the Finance Minister, presented the 1947 budget (often called the 'Poor Man’s Budget'). He proposed heavy taxes on industry and trade, which were interpreted as a political move to target the wealthy business class that supported the Congress TN State Board 2024 ed., Last Phase of Indian National Movement, p.95.

Ultimately, the Interim Government was a "continuation of the old executive." Even in its final days, the Viceroy (Wavell) continued to exercise his veto, such as when he overruled the Indian ministers regarding the release of INA prisoners in March 1947 Rajiv Ahir, Spectrum, p.476. The refusal of the League to join the Constituent Assembly on December 9 made the partition of the country almost inevitable.

Sources: THEMES IN INDIAN HISTORY PART III, History CLASS XII (NCERT 2025 ed.), FRAMING THE CONSTITUTION, p.341; History , class XII (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Last Phase of Indian National Movement, p.94-95; Rajiv Ahir. A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.). SPECTRUM., Post-War National Scenario, p.476

5. Evolution towards Partition: The Mountbatten Plan (intermediate)

By early 1947, the hope for a united India under the Cabinet Mission Plan had largely evaporated due to the deadlock between the Congress and the Muslim League. When Lord Mountbatten arrived as the last Viceroy, his primary task was to find a way out of the communal impasse. He quickly realized that partition was the only 'feasible' solution to avoid a full-scale civil war. This realization led to the June Third Plan (also known as the Mountbatten Plan), which formally accepted the principle of partition and provided a mechanism for the transfer of power. Unlike previous plans that sought a loose federation, this plan focused on the surgical division of the subcontinent into two independent dominions: India and Pakistan Rajiv Ahir, Post-War National Scenario, p.823.

The mechanics of the plan were distinct. It did not simply draw a line; it provided for self-determination in the disputed provinces. The Provincial Legislative Assemblies of Bengal and the Punjab were asked to meet in two parts—one representing the Muslim-majority districts and the other the rest of the province. If either part voted by a simple majority for partition, the province would be divided D. D. Basu, THE MAKING OF THE CONSTITUTION, p.18. To define the exact borders, a Boundary Commission was appointed under the chairmanship of Sir Cyril Radcliffe Rajiv Ahir, Post-War National Scenario, p.823. For regions like the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) and the Sylhet district of Assam, referendums were proposed to decide their fate.

One of the most striking features of this plan was the accelerated timeline. To prevent further administrative collapse, the date for the transfer of power was brought forward from June 1948 to August 15, 1947. This was achieved by granting "Dominion Status" to the two new nations. The British Parliament acted with "amazing speed," introducing the Indian Independence Bill on July 4, 1947, and receiving Royal Assent by July 18, 1947 D. D. Basu, THE MAKING OF THE CONSTITUTION, p.18. This Act declared the Constituent Assembly of India to be a fully sovereign body, effectively ending British suzerainty Rajiv Ahir, Making of the Constitution for India, p.615.

Feature	Cabinet Mission Plan (1946)	Mountbatten Plan (1947)
Unity/Partition	Envisaged a United India (Loose Federation).	Accepted Partition (India and Pakistan).
Grouping	Compulsory/Optional grouping of provinces.	Provinces (Punjab/Bengal) to vote on division.
Sovereignty	Assembly worked within British framework initially.	Constituent Assembly became a fully sovereign body.

Sources: A Brief History of Modern India (Spectrum), Post-War National Scenario, p.823; Introduction to the Constitution of India (D.D. Basu), THE MAKING OF THE CONSTITUTION, p.18; A Brief History of Modern India (Spectrum), Making of the Constitution for India, p.615

6. Congress Leaders: Differing Perspectives on the Plan (exam-level)

The Cabinet Mission Plan of 1946 was a high-stakes compromise aimed at preserving Indian unity while granting provincial autonomy. While the Indian National Congress formally accepted the plan on June 24, 1946, the internal reception among its top brass was far from uniform, reflecting deep-seated concerns about India's future structure. Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Chapter 24, p.475

Maulana Abul Kalam Azad stood out as the most staunch and consistent advocate for the Plan within the Congress. He viewed the scheme as a "glorious event" because it offered a way to avoid the partition of India while addressing the Muslim League's fears through a decentralized federal structure. Azad remained fully committed to its implementation and even attempted to persuade other leaders to salvage the settlement when it began to fracture. History, Class XII (TN State Board), Chapter 7, p.93

In contrast, Jawaharlal Nehru held a more complex and ultimately disruptive perspective. While he moved the resolution to accept the plan at the AICC on July 7, 1946, he viewed the proposed Constituent Assembly as a completely sovereign body. In a controversial press statement on July 10, 1946, Nehru asserted that the Congress was "not bound by a single thing" except the decision to join the Assembly, implying they could change the rules of the plan—specifically the compulsory grouping of provinces—once they met. Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Chapter 24, p.475

This difference in interpretation was critical:

• The "Grouping" Conflict: The Mission proposed three sections (A, B, and C) for provinces. The League saw this grouping as compulsory (the heart of their "internal Pakistan"), while Nehru and Gandhi argued it should be optional to protect provinces like Assam and the NWFP.
• The Outcome: Nehru’s remarks about the Assembly's sovereignty gave Muhammad Ali Jinnah the pretext to claim the Congress would use its majority to scrap the plan's protections. Consequently, the League withdrew its acceptance on July 29, 1946, leading to the tragic "Direct Action Day." History, Class XII (TN State Board), Chapter 7, p.94

Sources: A Brief History of Modern India, Post-War National Scenario, p.475; History, Class XII (TN State Board), Last Phase of Indian National Movement, p.93-94

7. Maulana Abul Kalam Azad: The Defender of Unity (exam-level)

Maulana Abul Kalam Azad occupies a unique and pivotal position in India's constitutional history, particularly as the staunchest defender of a united India during the terminal years of British rule. While the 1940s were marked by the rising tide of communalism and the demand for Pakistan, Azad remained intellectually and politically committed to a federal solution that could prevent the partition of the subcontinent. When the Cabinet Mission arrived in March 1946 Rajiv Ahir, Chapter 24, p.472, Azad saw their proposal not just as a constitutional scheme, but as a final opportunity to preserve the integrity of the nation. Azad famously described the acceptance of the Cabinet Mission Plan as a 'glorious event'. His support was rooted in the fact that the Plan rejected the creation of a separate Pakistan while offering a three-tier structure that provided enough autonomy to Muslim-majority provinces to satisfy their security concerns History, TN State Board, Chapter 7, p.93. To Azad, the grouping of provinces was a small price to pay for a single Constituent Assembly and a unified defense and communications system. He was the Congress leader most completely committed to the Plan's implementation, viewing it as a sophisticated compromise that balanced central unity with provincial diversity. However, this commitment was tested in July 1946. After Jawaharlal Nehru made a controversial statement at a press conference suggesting that the Congress might change the grouping scheme once the Constituent Assembly met, the Muslim League withdrew its acceptance. During this crisis, Azad worked tirelessly behind the scenes to persuade both Gandhi and Nehru to salvage the settlement. He feared that any deviation from the agreed-upon plan would lead inevitably to partition—a fear that unfortunately materialized. Even as he joined the Interim Government as the first Minister of Education Rajiv Ahir, Chapter 24, p.591, his primary focus remained the preservation of the pluralistic fabric of India.

Sources: Rajiv Ahir. A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.). SPECTRUM., Chapter 24: Post-War National Scenario, p.472, 475, 591; History, class XII (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Chapter 7: Last Phase of Indian National Movement, p.93

8. Solving the Original PYQ (exam-level)

Now that you have mastered the timeline of the 1940s, you can see how the Cabinet Mission Plan (1946) served as the final attempt to maintain a United India. This question requires you to move beyond knowing that the Congress formally accepted the plan and focus on the internal ideological commitment of its leaders. While the party agreed to the plan to form an Interim Government, the specific nuances of the three-tier structure and the grouping of provinces were met with varying levels of enthusiasm and suspicion within the high command.

To arrive at the correct answer, you must identify the leader who viewed this plan as the ultimate solution to prevent partition. Maulana Abul Kalam Azad was the most consistent and total supporter of the Plan. As noted in History, class XII (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), he described the plan as a "glorious event" and was its primary architect within the Congress. Even when the settlement was jeopardized by external pressures and internal remarks, Azad remained unequivocally committed to its implementation, seeing it as the only way to preserve the country's integrity without the creation of Pakistan.

UPSC often uses the most prominent leaders as distractors. For instance, Jawaharlal Nehru is a common trap; although he publicly accepted the plan, A Brief History of Modern India (Spectrum) highlights that his controversial press conference stating that Congress was "free to change the plan" effectively undermined it. Similarly, Mahatma Gandhi had serious reservations about the compulsory grouping of provinces (specifically Assam), and Sardar Patel was more focused on the immediate formation of the Interim Government rather than the long-term federal structure. Therefore, among the choices, only Maulana Abul Kalam Azad fits the description of being totally in favour.