Courses
Courses for Kids
Free study material
Offline Centres
More
Store Icon
Store

Indian Commissions: Sarkaria, Rajamannar And Punchhi Commission

Reviewed by:
ffImage
hightlight icon
highlight icon
highlight icon
share icon
copy icon
SearchIcon
widget title icon
Latest Updates

What is a Commission?

The Government of India creates commissions on an ad hoc or permanent basis to guide, advise, or give answers to different situations that fall under the purview of the respective ministry. This article will cover several types of commissions such as Sarkaria commission, Rajamannar commission, Punchhi commission and also their recommendations.


Sarkaria Commission

In 1983, the Indian government formed the Sarkaria Commission. The Sarkaria Commission was mandated with evaluating the central-state interaction in a number of areas and making recommendations within the Indian Constitution's framework. The Commission was named after Justice Ranjit Singh Sarkaria, a retired Supreme Court of India judge who acted as the commission's Chairman. Shri B. Sivaraman and Dr S.R. Sen were the committee's other members. 


The Commission will study and assess the current arrangements between the Union and States in terms of authorities, functions, and duties in all sectors, and make any necessary adjustments or recommendations. It was granted one year to finish its task at first, but the deadline was extended four times. In January 1988, it submitted its report. The study is divided into 19 chapters and contains 247 recommendations. Below we discuss some important recommendations of Sarkaria Commission. On the government website the Sarkaria commission pdf is available that include the all recommendations of Sarkaria Commission.


Sarkaria Commission Recommendations

  • Under Article 263, a permanent Inter-State Council called the Intergovernmental Council should be established.

  • Article 356 (President's Rule) should be used in severe situations, as a last resort after all other options have failed.

  • The All-India Services institution should be strengthened, and additional similar services should be formed.

  • The residuary taxation powers should remain with Parliament, but the other residuary powers should be put in the Concurrent List.

  • The reasons for the president's refusal to sign state bills should be communicated to the state government.

  • The National Development Council (NDC) should be reconstituted and renamed the National Economic and Development Council (NEDC).

  • To promote the spirit of federalism, the zonal councils should be reconstituted and reactivated.

  • Even without the consent of states, the Centre should be able to deploy its armed forces. It is, however, desirable that the states be consulted.

  • Before enacting a bill on a topic from the Concurrent List, the Centre shall confer with the states.

  • Governors should be eminent individuals, from outside the state, who have not been involved in active politics for at least a period of time before their appointment, and so on. 


Rajamannar Commission

From 1957 to 1958, Pakala Venkataramana Rao Rajamannar served as the interim Governor of Madras State. Rajamannar was the first Indian Chief Justice of the Madras High Court after independence, serving from the year 1948 to 1961. He was also the first Chairman of New Delhi's Sangeet Natak Akademi. The DMK government of Tamil Nadu appointed a three-member committee, chaired by Dr P.V. Rajamannar, to investigate the entire issue of Centre-state relations in September 1969. The committee submitted its report two years later, in 1971.


Rajamannar Commission Recommendations

  • An Inter-State Council should be established right away.

  • Every Bill of National Importance or that is likely to affect the interests of one or more States shall be referred to the Inter-State Council before being introduced in Parliament, and the Inter-State Council's comments should be communicated to Parliament at the time of Bill's introduction.

  • Several subjects from the Union and Concurrent Lists should be transferred to the State List.

  • The states should be granted the residuary powers.

  • IAS, IPS, and IFS (all-India services) should be abolished.

  • The Finance Commission should be established as a permanent entity.

  • The Planning Commission should be scrapped and replaced by a statutory body.

  • Articles 356, 357, and 365 (which deal with the President's Rule) should be eliminated.

  • The provision that the state ministry serves at the governor's pleasure should be eliminated.


Punchhi Commission

The Government of India established the Punchhi Commission on Centre-State Relations on April 27, 2007, under the chairmanship of Justice Madan Mohan Punchhi, former Chief Justice of India, to look into new issues of Centre-State relations, taking into account the changes in India's polity and economy since the Sarkaria Commission looked into the issue last. 


The Punchhi Commission investigated and reviewed the current Union-State arrangements, as well as various Court pronouncements on functions, responsibilities, and powers in all spheres, including administrative relations, financial relations, emergency provisions, governors' role, economic and social planning, Panchayati Raj institutions, and so on. In its seven-volume report, which was delivered to the government on March 30, 2010, the Commission made 273 recommendations.


Punchhi Commission Recommendations

  • Relationships between the centre and the states have evolved.

  • Recommendations on Article 19, Articles 355 and 356 of the Constitution, and Article 263 of the Constitution.

  • The upgrading of the planning model to remove regional imbalances is one of the economic and financial relations and recommendations.

  • Recommendations on the 73rd and 74th amendments, as well as the Sixth Schedule

  • Terror, Naxalism, insurgency, and communal violence are all covered under internal security.

  • Issues relating to the environment and resource sharing, notably in the areas of rivers and minerals.

  • Good governance and social development.


Conclusion

Thus, these commissions were established in order to study the Center and State relations. The Sarkaria Commission's duty was to study the central-state interaction in a variety of sectors and provide recommendations within the framework of the Indian Constitution. The study is divided into 19 chapters and contains 247 recommendations. Rajamannar was the first Indian to be appointed to the Madras High Court as Chief Justice. The Punchhi Commission examined and reviewed the functioning of existing Union-State arrangements. In its seven-volume report, delivered to the government on March 30, 2010, the Commission made 273 recommendations.

FAQs on Indian Commissions: Sarkaria, Rajamannar And Punchhi Commission

1. What are Centre-State relations in the context of Indian politics?

Centre-State relations refer to the division of powers and responsibilities between the Union Government (at the Centre) and the various State Governments in India. This relationship, defined by the Constitution, covers legislative, administrative, and financial areas to ensure the country functions as a cohesive federal system.

2. What was the primary purpose of the Sarkaria Commission?

The Sarkaria Commission was set up in 1983 by the central government to examine the relationship and balance of power between the central and state governments. Its main goal was to suggest changes within the framework of the Indian Constitution to address growing tensions and promote better cooperation and coordination.

3. Which government established the Rajamannar Committee and why?

The Rajamannar Committee was established in 1969 by the DMK government in Tamil Nadu. Unlike the Sarkaria and Punchhi Commissions set up by the Centre, this was a state-level initiative. Its purpose was to identify areas where state autonomy was being eroded by the Centre and to recommend constitutional amendments to grant more powers to the states.

4. What was the main focus of the M.M. Punchhi Commission?

The Punchhi Commission, established in 2007, was tasked with re-examining Centre-State relations in light of the significant political and economic changes in India since the Sarkaria Commission. It focused on new challenges related to coalition governments, economic liberalisation, and the rise of regional parties, providing a modern perspective on federal governance.

5. How were the recommendations of the Punchhi Commission different from the Sarkaria Commission?

While both commissions aimed to improve Centre-State relations, their focus differed due to the changing times.

  • The Sarkaria Commission primarily focused on strengthening existing cooperative mechanisms and advised against drastic structural changes. It recommended a cautious approach to the use of Article 356 (President's Rule).
  • The Punchhi Commission dealt with issues of the 21st century, like terrorism, suggesting a more structured framework for central intervention called 'localised emergency'. It also gave more detailed recommendations on the role of Governors.

6. Why did these commissions place so much importance on the role of the Governor?

The role of the Governor is crucial because they act as a bridge between the Centre and the State. These commissions focused on this role because the Governor's office was often a point of conflict. Controversies arose over the Governor's powers, such as recommending President's Rule (Article 356), appointing a Chief Minister, and reserving bills for the President's consideration. The commissions aimed to define these powers more clearly to prevent misuse.

7. What is one major recommendation of the Rajamannar Committee that was considered very radical?

One of the most radical recommendations of the Rajamannar Committee was the proposal to completely abolish Article 356 of the Constitution, which allows for the imposition of President's Rule in a state. This was seen as a bold step to protect state autonomy from central interference, which was far more drastic than the Sarkaria Commission's suggestion to use the article sparingly.

8. Why do we still study the Sarkaria, Rajamannar, and Punchhi commissions today?

We study these commissions because they provide a deep understanding of India's federal structure and its challenges. Their reports are not just historical documents; they are important references for ongoing debates about states' rights, national unity, and the balance of power. The issues they addressed, like financial autonomy for states and the role of governors, remain highly relevant in Indian politics.