Former Prime Minister of India - Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee

Inter-State Council Meeting concludes

The Eighth meeting of the Inter-State Council was held on 27-28 august, 2003 in Srinagar. The Prime Minister chaired the meeting. Besides the Deputy PM, Union Ministers of Defence, Power, Law & Justice and Labour, the Chief Ministers of many States and Union Territories, Lt Governor and Administrators of other Union Territories were present in the meeting. Some of the Chief Ministers who could not attend the meeting were represented by their senior Ministers.

This is for the first time that a meeting of the Inter-State Council has been held outside Delhi since its inception in May, 1990.

The meeting began with introductory remarks by Deputy Prime Minister. He mentioned that now that the task of consideration of the Sarkaria commission’s recommendations has almost come to an end, the forum of Inter-State Council can be utilised for discussing larger issues of common and general interest among the States and between the Union and the States. This stands endorsed in the meeting.

The Prime Minister, in his inaugural address, emphasised that dynamics of social, economic and political forces has undergone substantive change since the Sarkaria Commission submitted its report way back in 1988. Centre-state relations have improved and a sense of partnership has emerged. He, therefore, urged all the members to bring the discussion on Sarkaria Commission’s recommendations to a final and consensual conclusion at the Srinagar meeting.

Mentioning about ‘Good Governance’, the Prime Minister remarked that people were demanding a higher level of performance by the governments they have elected. He wanted Inter-State Council Secretariat to focus on monitoring of the ‘Action Plan on Good Governance’ both in quantitative and qualitative aspects.

The Prime Minister called upon the Chief Ministers and the Union Ministers to place fresh issues and ideas for deliberations in this forum. In this direction, the task and reach of the Council needs to be widened with provision of adequate manpower and funds at its disposal.

The agenda items were then taken up for discussion. The recommendation of Sarkaria Commission for adoption of cautious approach in respect of power of the union to give directions to the States under Articles 256 and 257 of the constitution and application of sanctions under Article 365 in the event of non-compliance of such directions was discussed. One view expressed was that since Article 356 already existed, Article 365 in its present form seemed redundant. The Council, however, took note of the fact that till date, Union Government has never issued directions under Articles 256 and 257 and no proclamation under Article 356 has been issued based on Article 365. The scheme of the Constitution suggests that before rushing to issue a proclamation under Article 356, all other possible avenues should be explored. It should be first ensured that Union had done all that it could do in discharge of its duty under Article 355. The Council also took note of the observations of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar in the Constituent assembly, who had supported the incorporation of Article 365 as it conferred power to the Union to take action when there was failure to carry out directions under Articles 256 & 257. Every right has to be followed by a remedy. If there is no remedy, the right is reduced to a paper right having no meaning.

The Council observed that the remedy provided in Article 365 is less harsh than that in Article 356. Retention of Article 365 is necessary as it acts as a screen to prevent any hasty resort to drastic action under Article 356. It was decided to retain Article 365 and to accept Commission’s recommendation for a cautious approach before its application.

Regarding ‘Emergency Provisions’, the Council observed that the safeguards contained in the Bommai Judgement, which has already become part of the law of the land, are adequate to prevent misuse of Article 356. It was decided that the Union Government could consider incorporating suitably the essential features of the Bommai judgement in the Constitution.

Based on the views of the Standing Committee, the Council took the following decisions in regard to the Commission’s recommendations on ‘Emergency Provisions’:-

1. The Commission’s recommendation that Article 356, should be used as a measure of last resort was accepted.

2. The Council was of the opinion that where the imposition of Article 356 was necessitated by certain facts for which the State Government was accountable, these facts be brought to the notice of the state Government and its response obtained where the context so required.

3. As regards the Commission’s recommendation relating to appointment of caretaker government, the Council noted that the practice in India so far was that if a government was defeated on the floor of the house, it should not continue in office. On this ground, the council did not accept the Commission’s recommendation.

4. The Commission’s recommendation that the Legislative Assembly should not be dissolved before the Proclamation has been laid before the parliament and the Parliament has had an opportunity to consider it was accepted.

5. The Council decided to accept Commission’s recommendations that material facts and ground on which Article 356 is invoked should be made an integral part of the Proclamation issued under that Article.

6. The Commission’s recommendation that Governor’s report be in the nature of a ‘speaking document’ was accepted.

In the context of the provisions in Article 355 laying down the duty of the Union to protect every State against ‘external aggression’ and ‘internal disturbance’, the council observed that in an emergency situation threatening the security of the country prior consultation with the State Government before deploying Union Armed Forces in that State suo motu, would not be possible. However, in other circumstances, it would be desirable to have consultation with the State Government, as recommended by the Commission, wherever feasible, even though it is not obligatory. The Council decided to accept the Commission’s recommendation for introduction of a system of interchange of the officers among the Union and State Armed Police Forces. It was however, of the opinion that large-scale transfer of officers may not be feasible.

As regards the issues concerning contract Labour/Contract Appointments, the Union Labour Minister informed the Council that the Group of Ministers on Labour Reforms has arrived at a consensus on the draft Bill to amend the Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act, 1970. The draft Bill would be finalised in consultation with the Union Ministry of Law & Justice for taking further necessary action. The labour reforms suggested in the draft Bill were long overdue. These would help in consolidating the ongoing economic liberalisation process.

Summarising the discussions on the subject, the Deputy PM stated that the trend was in favour of transfer of subjects relating to labour laws from the Concurrent List to the State List and that it was a welcome move. In the meanwhile, an Inter-Ministerial Standing Committee would be established to expeditiously clear the amendments to be proposed by the State governments in various labour laws.

The Council took note of the Action Taken Report on the recommendations of Sarkaria Commission submitted by the Secretariat. Out of total 247 recommendations, the Council has so far taken decision in respect of 230 of which 170 have been implemented, 7 are at various stages of implementation and 53 have not been found acceptable. The balance 17 recommendations have been deliberated upon in this meeting. It was, therefore, decided that the work relating to Sarkaria Commission should be wrapped up and that the forum of Inter-State Council should be hereafter utilised for sorting out important issues of co-operative federalism and socio-economic concerns.

In pursuance of the recommendation of the Group of Ministers constituted in the year 2000 to look into the ‘Reforming the National Security System’, the Council considered a draft ‘Action Plan on Good Governance’ having certain broad parameters including issue of Multi-purpose National Identity Card (MNIC). It was decided to appoint a Sub-committee of select Chief Ministers to deliberate further on the issue and come out with a blue print of Action Plan which could be discussed in the next meeting of the Council.