Page 1 of 10
European Journal of Business &
Social Sciences
Available at https://ejbss.org/
ISSN: 2235-767X
Volume 06 Issue 11
November 2018
Available online:https://ejbss.org/ P a g e | 122
A REVIEW OF SARKARIA COMMISSION
Kusum
M.A. (Political Science)
H. No 66, Sector – 28, Faridabad – 121008
E-mail: kusum.06sharma@gmail.com
Abstract: The fact is that there have been many irritants in centre-state
relations in India. Therefore, a great deal of controversy has centered on the
question of inter governmental relations how federal system in India should
operates keeping the fact in view Prime Minister Indira Gandhi constituted the
Sarkaria Commission with two other members to review the existing
framework of federal relations between the centre and states. The Commission
gave its report in 1987. It is noteworthy that it gave 247 recommendations. The
commission stressed on the role of governor and Article 356 to review in the
perspective of the changes scenario in Indian federalism. It also recommended
to set up an inter governmental council under Article 263 comprising the PM,
all Chief Ministers and Union Cabinet Ministers to deal with all major
problems. It also suggested that economic and development council should be
constituted. The present research paper highlights some major
recommendations and makes a review of the Commission.
Keywords: Inter Governmental Council, Zonal Councils, Governor, Article
356, State Bills, Chief Minister, EDC.
Introduction: Actually the Sarkaria Commission was constituted in 1983
which gave its report in 1987 under the chairmanship of former justice R.S.
Sarkaria. The commission offered suggestions as regards the appointment and
function of the governor in order to make the institution acceptable to all
irrespective of party. According to the commission, only an eminent person and
not the politician is eligible for such an appointment. Before accepting
Page 2 of 10
European Journal of Business &
Social Sciences
Available at https://ejbss.org/
ISSN: 2235-767X
Volume 06 Issue 11
November 2018
Available online:https://ejbss.org/ P a g e | 123
someone as the leader of the majority party, the Commission insists, the
governor should test the claim of majority on the floor of the assembly. This
will provide each claimant with an opportunity to justify his claim and it will
also save the governor from embarrassment and error of judgment. Although
the commission has suggested steps to counter the opposition parties ‘criticism
against the governor, not a single sentence is there regarding the withdrawal of
discretionary powers.
Furthermore, the Commission identified some major irritants in federal
relations and it gave 247 recommendations. It provided that over-centralization
in legislative, administrative and financial spheres, thus reducing the states to
mere administrative agencies. The recommendations, however, are classified
along the various areas of relationship, viz., legislative relations, administrative
relations, role of the Governor, reservation of bills by the Governors for
President’s consideration and promulgation of ordinances, emergency
provisions, deployment of Union armed forces in a State for public order
duties, all-India services, inter-governmental Council, financial relations,
economic and social planning, industries, mines and minerals, agriculture,
forests, food and civil supplies, inter-state river water disputes, trade,
commerce and intercourse within the territory of India, mass media, and
miscellaneous matters including language, union territories, and high court
judges.
The Commission has observed that it is not necessary to make any
drastic changes in the basic character of the Constitution but there is scope for
improvement and reform in a number of aspects. The actual working of the
Constitution leaves much to be desires. Enough attention has not been paid to
the evolution and observance of the right codes of conduct and conventions.
Expediency has sometimes been given precedence over wisdom and short term
advantages over long term benefits. Narrow personal or parochial interests
Page 3 of 10
European Journal of Business &
Social Sciences
Available at https://ejbss.org/
ISSN: 2235-767X
Volume 06 Issue 11
November 2018
Available online:https://ejbss.org/ P a g e | 124
have been given priority over larger national interests. One unwise action has
provoked an equally unwise reaction and triggered off a whole chain of
adversary relationships. There is an increasing tendency to resort to violence
and extra Constitution methods to force settlement of political or economic
issues–imagined or real. Politics of confrontation has been pushed very much
beyond reasonable limits. While there was inadequate territorial and functional
decentralisation in India when the country became independent, there has been
a pervasive trend towards greater centralisation of powers since then, much
beyond what the framers of the Constitution contemplated. Undue
centralisation has led to blood pressure at the centre and anemia at the
periphery, resulting in morbidity and inefficiency. The Commission has made a
large number of recommendations which need to be considered as a package.
The more important of these recommendations relate to:
Role of Governor: The commission recommended that only eminent persons,
who are not active politicians, should be appointed as governors, the selection
should be made in consolation with the Vice President of India, Speaker of the
Lok Sabha and Chief Minister of the state concerned, the Governor should test
the majority support for a Chief Minister only on the floor of the Legislative
Assembly. Under Article 154 (1) of the Constitution, the executive powers of
the state are vested in the Governor. The Constitution provides for the
appointment of the Governor of each state by the President on the advice of the
Union Council of Ministers. The role of Governor is vital in the smooth
conduct of the relations between the Centre and the States. In actual practice,
however, the Governor is appointed by the Central Government to act as its
representative at the state capital. In normal times, the Governor is the nominal
head of the state. However, in exceptional conditions, he can exercise his
discretionary authority and even recommend to the President the dismissal of
the government. The power of declare a state of Emergency is the most
