Powers of the Centre and the States: The Federalism Debate (Class 12 History)
Updated 15 October 2026 · Fact-checked
The Draft Constitution divided subjects into Union, State and Concurrent lists, gave the Centre control of key industries and minerals and, through Article 356, power to take over a state. K. Santhanam warned that this would cripple the states, but after Partition and amid riots most members, including Nehru and Ambedkar, wanted a strong Centre.
Notice the Centre can reach down to a state through Article 356, and that Partition and riots pushed members toward a strong Centre.
Illustration drawn for QuestionBuddy.
Understand Powers of the Centre and the States
Why this topic matters. Centre-state powers is the most examined part of Theme 12: 8-mark questions on why members wanted a strong Centre or on views about division of powers, and 3-mark questions on the three lists, federalism debates and Ambedkar's 'strong Centre'. NCERT section 4 (4.1-4.2) and Source 9.
1. Nehru's starting point. In a letter to the President of the Assembly, Nehru wrote that now that Partition was a settled fact, a weak central authority would be injurious: it could not ensure peace, coordinate vital common matters, or speak for the country internationally.
2. What the Draft Constitution provided.
| Provision | Detail |
|---|---|
| Three lists | Union (Centre only), State (states), Concurrent (shared) |
| Balance | More items under exclusive Union control than in other federations; more on the Concurrent list than provinces wanted |
| Economy | Union control of minerals and key industries |
| Article 356 | Centre can take over a state administration on the Governor's recommendation |
3. Fiscal federalism.
| Category | Examples |
|---|---|
| Centre keeps all proceeds | Customs duties, Company taxes |
| Shared with states | Income tax, excise duties |
| Assigned wholly to states | Estate duties |
| States levy and collect | Land and property taxes, sales tax, tax on bottled liquor |
4. The case for the states (4.1).
- K. Santhanam (Madras): reallocating powers would strengthen both states and Centre. It was an 'obsession' to think adding powers made the Centre strong; an overburdened Centre could not work well, and transferring some functions would make it stronger.
- The proposed allocation would cripple the states; fiscal provisions would impoverish provinces, since most taxes except land revenue went to the Centre: without finance, no development. He did not want states to beg the Centre for doles for education, sanitation or roads; better a unitary system than a sham federation.
- He predicted that in a few years the provinces would rise in 'revolt against the Centre'.
- Others fought for fewer items on the Union and Concurrent lists; a member from Orissa warned that 'the Centre is likely to break' from excessive centralisation.
- Sir A. Ramaswamy Mudaliar (Mysore, 21 August 1947): proposing a strong Centre did not make one a better patriot than those who wanted resources examined more carefully (Source 9).
5. The case for a strong Centre (4.2).
- Ambedkar wanted a strong and united Centre, much stronger than under the 1935 Act.
- Members recalled the riots and violence: a strong Centre was needed to stop communal frenzy.
- Gopalaswami Ayyangar: the Centre should be 'as strong as possible'.
- Balakrishna Sharma (United Provinces): only a strong Centre could plan for the country's well-being, mobilise economic resources, establish proper administration and defend against foreign aggression.
6. Why the balance shifted.
- Before Partition, Congress had agreed to considerable provincial autonomy to reassure the Muslim League that the Centre would not interfere in League provinces.
- After Partition, that pressure was gone; a unitary system imposed by colonial rule already existed; the violence of the times pushed further towards centralisation, seen as necessary to forestall chaos and plan economic development.
- Result: the Constitution showed a distinct bias towards the Union over the states.
7. Related outcome: language (section 5). The same spirit of give-and-take settled language: Hindi in Devanagari as the official (not national) language, with English for fifteen years and provinces free to choose a regional language for their own work, after debates involving R.V. Dhulekar, G. Durgabai, Shankarrao Deo and T.A. Ramalingam Chettiar.
Key quotations
Short lines worth knowing by heart: who says them, when, and why they matter.
the Centre is likely to break
A member from Orissa (NCERT section 4.1): Warning against excessive centralisation.
Shows the provinces' fear of an overloaded Centre.
revolt against the Centre
K. Santhanam of Madras (NCERT section 4.1): Predicting the result of the proposed distribution of powers.
The strongest warning from the states' side.
the Centre should be made as strong as possible
Gopalaswami Ayyangar (NCERT section 4.2): Replying to demands for more provincial power.
Typical of the majority view after Partition.
a strong and united Centre
B.R. Ambedkar (NCERT section 4.2): Wanting a Centre much stronger than under the 1935 Act.
Shows the Drafting Committee chairman's position.
Powers of the Centre and the States: key facts
- Draft provisions
Union list subjects for the Centre alone State list subjects for the states Concurrent list shared, with more items than provinces wanted Union control minerals and key industries Article 356 Centre may take over a state on the Governor's recommendation - More items under exclusive Union control than in other federations.
- Fiscal federalism
Centre keeps customs duties, Company taxes Shared with states income tax, excise duties Assigned to states estate duties States levy and collect land and property taxes, sales tax, tax on bottled liquor - Santhanam: most taxes except land revenue went to the Centre.
- For the states
- K. Santhanam (Madras): an overburdened Centre is weak; states crippled; predicted revolt
- Member from Orissa: 'the Centre is likely to break'
- Sir A. Ramaswamy Mudaliar (Mysore, 21 August 1947): a strong Centre is no test of patriotism
- They fought for fewer items on the Union and Concurrent lists.
- For a strong Centre
Jawaharlal Nehru peace, coordination, a voice abroad B.R. Ambedkar much stronger than under the 1935 Act Gopalaswami Ayyangar 'as strong as possible' Balakrishna Sharma (UP) plan, mobilise resources, administer, defend - Riots and Partition formed the backdrop.
- Why centralisation won
Before Partition provincial autonomy accepted to reassure the Muslim League After Partition that pressure gone Inheritance a unitary system imposed by colonial rule Violence centralisation seen as needed to forestall chaos and plan development - Result: a distinct bias towards the Union.
How to answer Powers of the Centre and the States questions
Expect 8-mark questions on why members argued for a strong Centre, or on members' views on division of powers between Centre and states; 3-mark questions on the three lists, federalism debates or Ambedkar's 'strong Centre'; and 1-mark items on lists, Article 356 and speakers.
- 1Begin with Nehru's letter and the Partition context.
- 2Describe the Draft's three lists, Union control of key industries and Article 356.
- 3Explain fiscal federalism with examples.
- 4Give the states' case: Santhanam, the Orissa member, Mudaliar.
- 5Give the strong-Centre case: Ambedkar, Ayyangar, Balakrishna Sharma.
- 6Explain why the balance shifted after Partition.
- 7Conclude: a Constitution with a distinct bias towards the Union, reached through debate.
Powers of the Centre and the States in real life
The idea, met in an everyday situation. Answer the question in your own words, then compare with the model answer. The one-line hook is what to remember.
An overloaded head office
Suppose a company insists that every branch must get head-office approval for every expense, and branches lose most of their income to head office. Soon head office is swamped and branches cannot fix even small problems.
Which Constituent Assembly argument does this illustrate?
Try it first, then show the solutionSolution
- Santhanam said an overburdened Centre could not function effectively.
- He argued that giving some functions to the states would make the Centre stronger.
- Without funds, states could not educate people or build roads and would have to beg for doles.
Answer: Santhanam's argument that excessive centralisation weakens both the Centre and the states.
Memory hook: Hold everything, manage nothing.
Crisis and central control
Imagine a city during floods and riots: residents accept that a single disaster-management authority should take charge, even if wards normally run their own affairs.
How does this help explain why most Assembly members wanted a strong Centre?
Try it first, then show the solutionSolution
- After Partition, riots and violence were tearing the country apart.
- Members argued that a strong Centre was needed to stop communal frenzy and forestall chaos.
- It was also needed to plan development and defend the country.
Answer: In times of crisis people accept stronger central authority; the violence of 1946-47 pushed the Assembly towards a strong Centre.
Memory hook: Crisis centralises.
Tricks to remember Powers of the Centre and the States
Short memory aids. Say each one aloud once, then use it on a question the same day.
U-S-C lists
Union, State, Concurrent: 'Us, States, Common'.
Use it when: The three lists.
Strong Centre team: N-A-A-S
Nehru, Ambedkar, Ayyangar, Sharma: 'Nation Above All States'.
Use it when: Speakers for a strong Centre.
States' team: S-O-M
Santhanam, Orissa member, Mudaliar: 'Save Our Money'.
Use it when: Speakers for more provincial power.
Powers of the Centre and the States: solved examples
Ordered from board level to HOTS. Try each one before you open the solution.
Example 1: Article 356 · 1 mark · MCQBoard level
Under which Article could the Union assume control of a state's government after a report from the Governor?
(a) Article 14
(b) Article 17
(c) Article 356
(d) Article 25
Try it first, then show the solutionSolution
- NCERT section 4 names Article 356 (1 mark).
Answer: (c) Article 356
Example 2: Three lists · 3 marks · Short answerBoard level
Explain how the Draft Constitution distributed subjects between the Centre and the states. (3 marks)
Try it first, then show the solutionSolution
- Union list for the Centre; State list for the states (1 mark).
- Concurrent list shared (1 mark).
- More items under Union and Concurrent than in other federations or than provinces wanted; minerals, key industries; Article 356 (1 mark).
Answer: The Draft Constitution provided three lists of subjects. Subjects in the Union list were the preserve of the Central Government, those in the State list were vested in the states, while the Concurrent list was a joint responsibility. Compared with other federations, though, far more subjects went exclusively to the Union, and more were placed on the Concurrent list than the provinces wanted. The Union also controlled minerals and key industries, and Article 356 let the Centre take over a state's administration on the Governor's recommendation.
Example 3: Assertion and reason: before and after Partition · 1 mark · Assertion-reasonHarder board level
Assertion (A): After Partition most nationalists gave up their earlier support for considerable provincial autonomy.
Reason (R): The earlier autonomy had been meant to reassure the Muslim League, and that political pressure no longer existed.
(a) Both A and R are true and R is the correct explanation of A.
(b) Both A and R are true but R is not the correct explanation of A.
(c) A is true but R is false.
(d) A is false but R is true.
Try it first, then show the solutionSolution
- NCERT gives this explanation for the change of position (1 mark).
Answer: (a) Both A and R are true and R is the correct explanation of A.
Example 4: Santhanam's case · 3 marks · Short answerHarder board level
Why did K. Santhanam argue that greater powers for the states would also strengthen the Centre? (3 marks)
Try it first, then show the solutionSolution
- Obsession with adding powers to the Centre is a misconception; overburdened Centre ineffective (1 mark).
- Transferring functions would make the Centre stronger (1 mark).
- States crippled by fiscal provisions; would beg for doles; predicted revolt (1 mark).
Answer: Santhanam said there was almost an obsession that adding all kinds of powers to the Centre would make it strong, which he called a misconception: if the Centre was overburdened with responsibilities it could not function effectively, while relieving it of some functions and transferring them to the states would actually make it stronger. He also warned that the proposed allocation would cripple the states, because most taxes except land revenue went to the Centre, leaving them unable to fund education, sanitation or roads. He predicted that within a few years the provinces would rise in revolt against the Centre.
Example 5: Source-based: Mudaliar on patriotism · 4 marks · Source-basedHarder board level
Read the source (summarised for this page from Sir A. Ramaswamy Mudaliar's speech of 21 August 1947 in NCERT) and answer.
Mudaliar warned members not to flatter themselves that they were better patriots simply because they wanted a strong Centre, or to suggest that those who asked for a closer look at how resources were divided lacked national spirit. Who, he asked, was the better patriot?
(i) From which region did Mudaliar come? (1)
(ii) What kind of argument was he answering? (1)
(iii) Using the chapter, explain why many members had come to equate a strong Centre with patriotism in 1947. (2)
Try it first, then show the solutionSolution
- (i) Mysore (1 mark).
- (ii) The claim that supporters of a strong Centre were more patriotic than those wanting more provincial resources (1 mark).
- (iii) Partition and riots; need to stop communal frenzy, plan development, defend the country; Nehru's letter; end of the need to reassure the League (2 marks).
Answer: (i) Mysore. (ii) He was answering the suggestion that members who supported a strong Centre were more patriotic than those who wanted the distribution of resources between Centre and provinces examined more carefully. (iii) In 1947 Partition and the riots that followed made national unity seem fragile. Nehru argued that a weak Centre could not ensure peace or speak for the country abroad; Ambedkar wanted a Centre stronger than under the 1935 Act; others said only a strong Centre could stop communal frenzy, plan development, mobilise resources and defend the country. With the League gone, the earlier reason for provincial autonomy disappeared, so defending the states could be made to look like weakening the nation.
Example 6: Long answer: a Union-biased federation · 8 marks · Long answerHOTS / competency
"The Indian Constitution showed a distinct bias towards the Union over the states." Examine the arguments made in the Constituent Assembly on both sides and explain why the strong-Centre view prevailed. (8 marks)
Try it first, then show the solutionSolution
- Draft provisions: lists, key industries, Article 356 (1 mark).
- Fiscal federalism (1 mark).
- Santhanam's arguments (1 mark).
- Orissa member and Mudaliar (1 mark).
- Nehru's letter and Ambedkar (1 mark).
- Ayyangar and Balakrishna Sharma (1 mark).
- Why it prevailed: Partition, colonial unitary system, violence, planning (1 mark).
- Judgement (1 mark).
Answer: The Draft Constitution divided subjects into Union, State and Concurrent lists, but placed more items under exclusive Union control than other federations and more on the Concurrent list than provinces wanted. The Union controlled minerals and key industries, and Article 356 allowed it to take over a state administration on the Governor's recommendation. Fiscal federalism gave the Centre customs and Company taxes, shared income tax and excise, assigned estate duties to states, and left states land and property taxes, sales tax and the liquor tax.
The states' case was put most eloquently by K. Santhanam of Madras. He said it was a misconception that adding powers made the Centre strong; an overburdened Centre would be ineffective, and transferring functions would strengthen it. The fiscal provisions would cripple states, leaving them to beg for doles for education and roads, and he predicted a revolt of the provinces. A member from Orissa warned that the Centre was likely to break, and Sir A. Ramaswamy Mudaliar rejected the idea that supporters of a strong Centre were better patriots.
The other side was stronger. Nehru wrote that, with Partition settled, a weak Centre could not ensure peace, coordinate common concerns or speak for India abroad. Ambedkar wanted a Centre much stronger than under the 1935 Act; Gopalaswami Ayyangar wanted it as strong as possible; Balakrishna Sharma argued that only a strong Centre could plan, mobilise resources, administer and defend the country. Members repeatedly cited the riots tearing the nation apart.
This view prevailed because the context had changed. Before Partition, Congress had accepted considerable provincial autonomy to reassure the Muslim League; after Partition that pressure vanished. A unitary system inherited from colonial rule already existed, and the violence of the times made centralisation seem necessary to prevent chaos and plan development.
The statement is therefore valid: the debate was real and the states' fears were clearly expressed, but the circumstances of 1947 produced a Constitution weighted towards the Union.
Where students lose marks in Powers of the Centre and the States
The slips examiners see most often, and what to write instead.
Mistake: Describing only one side of the debate
Writing only the strong-Centre case.
Wrong working
Everyone agreed that the Centre should be strong.
Right working
Santhanam, an Orissa member and Mudaliar argued for the states; most others for a strong Centre.
Do this: Two sides, then the outcome.
Usually costs: 2-3 marks in 8-mark answers.
Mistake: Mixing up fiscal categories
Many taxes to remember.
Wrong working
Income tax went entirely to the states.
Right working
Income tax and excise were shared; customs and Company taxes went to the Centre; estate duties to the states.
Do this: Learn the four-row table.
Usually costs: 1 mark.
Mistake: Ignoring the change caused by Partition
Not explaining why views shifted.
Wrong working
The Congress always wanted a strong Centre.
Right working
Before Partition it had accepted considerable provincial autonomy to reassure the League.
Do this: Before and after Partition.
Usually costs: 1 mark.
Mistake: Misattributing quotations
Several speakers.
Wrong working
Ambedkar warned that the Centre was likely to break.
Right working
A member from Orissa said it; Ambedkar wanted a strong and united Centre.
Do this: Match each phrase to its speaker.
Usually costs: 1 mark.
Exam tips
- Asked in: 2024 board paper 61/4/1 Q30(a) (8 marks, why some members argued for a strong Centre); 2025 board paper 61/6/1 Q30(a) (8 marks, members' views on division of powers between Centre and states); sample paper 2024-25 Q30 B (8 marks, distribution of powers); 2025 board paper 61/2/1 Q27 (3 marks, Ambedkar's strong Centre); 2025 board paper 61/4/1 Q27 and 2026 board paper 61/4/1 Q27 (3 marks, federalism debates); 2024 board paper 61/5/1 Q27 (3 marks, the three lists); 2024 board paper 61/3/1 Q21 (1 mark, arguments for a strong government). Answers here are our own.
- Name speakers on both sides and the reasons each gave.
- Include the fiscal table and Article 356 for precision.
- Explain the before-and-after-Partition shift.
- Conclude with NCERT's phrase: a distinct bias towards the Union.
Practice questions on Powers of the Centre and the States
Write each answer on paper first. Open the hint only if you are stuck, and the answer only when you have finished.
Q1 · 1 mark · MCQBoard level
Which of the following taxes could the states levy and collect on their own under the Constitution?
(a) Customs duties
(b) Company taxes
(c) Sales tax
(d) Income taxHint
Also land and property taxes and the liquor tax.
Answer
(c) Sales tax.
Q2 · 2 marks · Very short answerBoard level
Give two reasons Nehru gave in his letter for not having a weak central authority. (2 marks)
Hint
Peace, coordination, international voice.
Answer
Any two: a weak Centre could not ensure peace; it could not coordinate vital matters of common concern; it could not speak effectively for the whole country internationally.
Q3 · 3 marks · Short answerHarder board level
What arguments did Balakrishna Sharma and Gopalaswami Ayyangar make for a strong Centre? (3 marks)
Hint
Plan, mobilise, administer, defend.
Answer
Reacting to demands for more provincial power, Gopalaswami Ayyangar declared that the Centre should be made as strong as possible. Balakrishna Sharma of the United Provinces held that the country's welfare could be planned only by a powerful Centre, which alone could gather economic resources, set up sound administration and guard against foreign attack. Both spoke against the background of riots and violence, which many members said required a stronger Centre to stop communal frenzy.
Q4 · 3 marks · Short answerHarder board level
How did the fiscal provisions of the Draft Constitution affect the states, according to their critics? (3 marks)
Hint
Land revenue; development; doles.
Answer
Critics such as Santhanam argued that the fiscal provisions would impoverish the provinces, because most taxes, except land revenue, had been made the preserve of the Centre; customs and Company taxes went wholly to the Centre and income tax and excise were only shared. Without adequate finances the states could not undertake development, and would have to come to the Centre asking for doles to educate their people, provide sanitation or build roads and industries. He felt that in such a case a unitary system would be more honest than a weak federation.
Q5 · 1 mark · Assertion-reasonHarder board level
Assertion (A): The Concurrent list in the Draft Constitution contained fewer items than the provinces wanted.
Reason (R): Many provincial members fought for fewer items to be placed on the Union and Concurrent lists.
(a) Both A and R are true and R is the correct explanation of A.
(b) Both A and R are true but R is not the correct explanation of A.
(c) A is true but R is false.
(d) A is false but R is true.Hint
More, not fewer.
Answer
(d) A is false but R is true: more items were placed on the Concurrent list than the provinces desired.
Q6 · 3 marks · Short answerHOTS / competency
Suppose you were a member from a province in 1947 who agreed with Santhanam. How would you answer a colleague who says that only those who want a strong Centre are true patriots? (3 marks)
Hint
Mudaliar; Santhanam's logic.
Answer
I would echo Sir A. Ramaswamy Mudaliar: proposing a strong Centre does not make anyone a better patriot than those who want resources examined carefully. A Centre overloaded with every responsibility cannot work well, while states without finances cannot educate people, provide sanitation or build roads, which also weakens the nation. Giving states adequate powers and funds would make both levels stronger. Patriotism lies in making the system work for the people, and excessive centralisation might even provoke the provinces to revolt against the Centre, as Santhanam warned.
Q7 · 4 marks · Short answerHOTS / competency
Evaluate how far the violence of 1946-47 explains the Constitution's bias towards the Union. What other factors were involved? (4 marks)
Hint
Violence plus League, colonial system, planning.
Answer
The violence was central: members repeatedly recalled the riots tearing the nation apart and argued that a strong Centre was needed to stop communal frenzy and forestall chaos; Nehru linked the need for a strong Centre to Partition being a settled fact. But other factors mattered. Before Partition, Congress had accepted provincial autonomy to reassure the Muslim League; with Partition that political pressure disappeared. A unitary system inherited from colonial rule already existed. Members also wanted a Centre able to plan economic development, mobilise resources and defend the country. So violence gave a decisive push, but structural and political factors also shaped the outcome.
Test your recall
Answer in your head or on paper first, then open the card. Pulling an answer out of memory makes it stick far better than re-reading.
1.What were the three lists in the Draft Constitution?Show answer
Union, State and Concurrent.
2.Which taxes did the Centre keep entirely?Show answer
Customs duties and Company taxes.
3.Who most eloquently defended the rights of the states?Show answer
K. Santhanam from Madras.
4.Which Act did Ambedkar compare when wanting a stronger Centre?Show answer
The Government of India Act of 1935.
5.Who said only a strong Centre could plan, mobilise resources, administer and defend the country?Show answer
Balakrishna Sharma of the United Provinces.
6.Who asked 'Who is a better patriot?'Show answer
Sir A. Ramaswamy Mudaliar of Mysore.
Powers of the Centre and the States: frequently asked questions
Why did members of the Constituent Assembly want a strong Centre?
Because of Partition and communal violence, and the need to ensure peace, coordinate common matters, plan development, mobilise resources and defend the country.
What did K. Santhanam argue?
That an overburdened Centre would be weak, that the fiscal provisions would cripple the states, and that more powers for states would strengthen the Centre too.
What was Article 356?
A provision giving the Centre power to take over a state administration on the recommendation of the Governor.
Was the Indian Constitution federal or unitary?
It created three lists of subjects and shared taxes, but NCERT says it showed a distinct bias towards the Union over the states.