JUSTICE RAJAMANNAR COMMITTEE REPORT ON CENTRE-STATE RELATIONS TABLED IN TAMILNADU ASSEMBLY
The Rajamannar Committee on Centre-State Relations,
set up by the Tamil Nadu Government on May 27, 1971 recommended the
constitution of a high-power commission to redistribute powers between the
Centre and the states. The committee also suggested immediate formation of an
inter-state council as provided for under Article 263 of the Constitution;
abolition of the Planning Commission as at present constituted and its
replacement by a wholly new one to be created with a statutory basis under a
Parliamentary enactment and free from control by the Central executive;
widening of the states to include the corporation capital value of assets in
the divisible pool; repeal of the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act
of 1951, with a new Act providing for control by the Centre of only industries
of national or all-India character, and conferment of industrial licensing
powers on the states.
The committee, headed by a former Chief Justice of
Madras, Dr P.V. Rajamannar, was set up by the state government in September,
1969, to examine the entire question regarding the relationship that should
subsist between the Centre and the states in a federal set-up and to suggest
amendments to the Constitution to secure to the states the utmost autonomy. The
three-member committee consisted of, besides Dr Rajamannar, the former
Vice-Chancellor of Madras University, Dr A Lakshmanaswamy Mundoar, and a former
Chief Justice of Andhra, Dr P. Chandra Reddy.The Committee submitted its report
in 1971.
The report comprises of 21 Chapters, as follows:1. Introduction11.
Territory of the State2. Federal Set Up12. Representation of States in
Parliament3. Administrative relations13. Language4. Legislative Field14. Trade
and Commerce5. Financial Relations15. Public Order6. Central Planning and
Planning Commission16. Machinery for Conducting Elections to State
Legislatures7. Judiciary17. Inter-State Water Disputes8. Governor18. Sea-bed
under Territorial Waters9. Emergency Provisions19. Union Executives10. Jammu
and Kashmir20. Amendment of the Constitution21. Summary of RecommendationsThe
committee’s recommendations, most of which were obviously drastic and
far-reaching, stemmed from its conviction that though the Constitution set up a
federal system, there were admittedly several provisions that were clearly inconsistent
with the principles of federation. There were unitary trends and in the
allocation of powers there was a strong bias in favour of the Centre. In an
ideal federation the national and state governments existed on a basis of
equality and neither had the power to make inroads on the definite authority
and functions of the other unilaterally — whereas in India the national
government was vested with powers on certain occasions to invade the
legislative and executive domains of the states.
The committee summed up that “there is a theme of
subordination of the State running right through the Constitution.”Quite apart
from some provisions of the Constitution conferring special powers on the
Centre, factors like one-party rule, both at the Centre and in the states,
inadequacy of the states’ own fiscal resources and consequent dependence on the
Centre for financial assistance and the institution of Central planning and the
role of the Planning Commission had, in the committee’s view, contributed to
the “perpetuation and growth” of unitary trends.Inter-state council proposed:
Following this line of argument, the committee asked for the “omission” of
Articles 256, 257 and 339 (2), which empower the Central executive to issue
directions to the state governments — or, alternatively, to ensure that no
direction under any of these Articles is issued except in consultation with
“and with the approval of” the inter-state council.The committee said that the
inter-state council should be composed of the Chief Ministers of states or
their nominees, “all States having equal representation,” with the Prime
Minister as the chairman; and no other Minister of the Central Cabinet should
be a member of the council. Every Bill of national importance and likely to
affect the interests of one or more states should be placed before Parliament
at the time of introduction of the Bill. Also it “should be definitely
provided” that before the Central government takes any decision of national
importance or affecting one or more states, the council would be consulted.
Exceptions may be made “probably” in regard to subjects like defence and
foreign relations, but even in such matters the Central government’s decision
should be placed before the council without delay.
Financial relations: The committee’s recommendations on financial
relations between the Centre and the states — “and these are the most important
part of our report,’ according to Dr Rajamannar — were designed “to secure for
the States a larger devolution of taxes than at present so that in actual
practice the need for grants-in-aid under Article 275 either disappears or is
minimised.”The committee sought to widen the base of devolution of resources to
the states by adding corporation tax, customs and export duties and the tax on the
capital value of assets in the divisible pool. Even in regard to the grants by
the Centre to the states, the committee wanted an independent and impartial
body such as the Finance Commission to be in charge of the distribution.To
ensure real autonomy for the states and what the committee’s chairman described
as ideal federalism, the committee also suggested the transfer of a number of
items not only from the Concurrent to the State List in the Seventh Schedule
but also from the Central to the State List.
No comments:
Post a Comment