Constitutional Framework for Inter-State Comity
The success of India's federal system hinges on more than just harmonious ties between the Centre and the states; it equally demands cooperation among the states themselves. To foster this essential inter-state comity, the Constitution incorporates targeted provisions that address potential friction points and promote unity.
Foremost among these is the mechanism for adjudication of inter-state water disputes, which ensures impartial resolution of conflicts over shared rivers through dedicated tribunals. Complementing this, inter-state councils facilitate coordination on common issues, enabling states to collaborate effectively under constitutional guidance. The Constitution also mandates mutual recognition of public acts, records, and judicial proceedings across states (Article 261), guaranteeing that decisions from one state's authorities hold validity elsewhere, thus streamlining administration. Finally, it upholds freedom of inter-state trade, commerce, and intercourse (Articles 301–307), removing barriers to economic integration and mobility.
Beyond these constitutional safeguards, Parliament has established zonal councils to further bolster cooperation. These bodies bring together neighboring states within designated zones, encouraging dialogue and joint initiatives on regional challenges like development and resource sharing. Together, these measures weave a robust framework for federal harmony.
Inter-State Water Disputes
Article 262 of the Indian Constitution empowers Parliament to address disputes over the use, distribution, and control of water from inter-state rivers and river valleys. It includes two key provisions: first, Parliament may enact laws to adjudicate such disputes; second, it can bar the Supreme Court and other courts from exercising jurisdiction over them. This framework ensures specialized handling of these sensitive issues, reflecting the unique challenges of water sharing across state boundaries.
Pursuant to Article 262, Parliament passed two landmark laws in 1956: the River Boards Act and the Inter-State Water Disputes Act. The River Boards Act allows the Central government to establish river boards at the request of concerned state governments. These boards provide expert advice on the regulation and development of inter-state rivers and valleys, fostering cooperative planning rather than confrontation.
In contrast, the Inter-State Water Disputes Act provides a more formal mechanism for resolving conflicts. It authorizes the Central government to constitute ad hoc tribunals whenever two or more states raise a dispute over inter-state river waters. Tribunal decisions are final and binding on the parties involved, with no appeal possible to the Supreme Court or any other court. This exclusion of judicial oversight underscores the Act's aim to deliver swift, expert resolutions tailored to complex hydrological and economic realities.
The rationale for this extra-judicial approach lies in the limitations of traditional court adjudication. As observed during the Constitution's framing, "the Supreme Court would indeed have jurisdiction to decide any dispute between states in connection with water supplies, if legal rights or interests are concerned; but the experience of most countries has shown that rules of law based upon the analogy of private proprietary interests in water do not afford a satisfactory basis for settling disputes between the states where the interests of the public at large in the proper use of water supplies are involved." Tribunals, staffed with technical experts, better balance public welfare, equitable distribution, and sustainable development.
As of 2019, the Central government had established nine such tribunals. Details on their names, constitution years, and the disputing states appear in Table 15.1.
Inter-State Council under Article 263
Article 263 empowers the President to establish an Inter-State Council whenever it serves the public interest, fostering coordination between states and between the Centre and the states. The President holds the authority to outline the council's duties, organization, and procedures, ensuring it addresses key federal challenges effectively.
While the President defines these duties, Article 263 outlines three core functions: inquiring into and advising on disputes between states; investigating and discussing subjects of common interest to states or between the Centre and states; and making recommendations to enhance policy coordination and action in those areas. Notably, the council's advisory role on inter-state disputes complements the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction under Article 131, which resolves legal controversies with binding decisions. The council, by contrast, can tackle both legal and non-legal issues but offers only recommendations.
Pursuant to these provisions, the President has set up several councils, including the Central Council of Health and Family Welfare, the Central Council of Local Government, and four Regional Councils for Sales Tax covering the Northern, Eastern, Western, and Southern zones. These bodies promote better alignment of policies and actions across federal lines.
Establishment of the Inter-State Council
The Sarkaria Commission on Centre-State Relations, which deliberated from 1983 to 1988, strongly advocated for a permanent Inter-State Council under Article 263 of the Constitution. To distinguish it from other bodies created under the same provision, the Commission suggested naming it the Inter-Governmental Council. It envisioned the Council focusing specifically on the duties outlined in clauses (b) and (c) of the Article: investigating subjects of common interest to the Centre and states, recommending measures for better policy coordination, and addressing other matters referred by the Chairman.
Acting on these recommendations, the Janata Dal government under Prime Minister V. P. Singh formally established the Inter-State Council in 1990. The Chairman is the Prime Minister, with members including Chief Ministers of all states, Chief Ministers of Union Territories with legislative assemblies, Administrators of Union Territories without such assemblies, Governors of states under President's Rule, and six Central Cabinet Ministers—including the Home Minister—nominated by the Prime Minister. Additionally, five Ministers of Cabinet rank or Ministers of State (with independent charge), nominated by the Chairman, serve as permanent invitees.
As a recommendatory body, the Council fosters coordination on matters involving inter-state relations, Centre-state ties, and Centre-Union Territory interactions. It examines, discusses, and deliberates these issues through three core functions: investigating subjects of mutual interest to states or the Centre; proposing recommendations to enhance policy and action coordination; and considering other matters of general interest referred by the Chairman.
The Council is required to meet at least three times a year, with proceedings conducted in camera and decisions reached by consensus. To ensure ongoing consultation, a Standing Committee was established in 1996. Chaired by the Union Home Minister, it comprises five Union Cabinet Ministers and nine Chief Ministers, processing issues for the Council's consideration.
Supporting the Council's operations is the Inter-State Council Secretariat, set up in 1991 and led by a Secretary to the Government of India. Since 2011, it has also served as the secretariat for the Zonal Councils, streamlining administrative functions across these federal coordination mechanisms.
Public Acts, Records, and Judicial Proceedings
The Indian Constitution recognizes that each state's jurisdiction is strictly territorial, which could otherwise lead to one state's acts or records being ignored in another. To prevent such fragmentation, it incorporates the Full Faith and Credit clause, ensuring seamless recognition across the nation.
This clause mandates that full faith and credit be accorded throughout India to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of both the Union and every state. "Public acts" encompass legislative measures as well as executive actions by the government. Similarly, "public records" refer to any official books, registers, or documents prepared by public servants in the course of their duties.
However, the Constitution empowers Parliament to regulate how these acts, records, and proceedings are proved and what legal effect they carry. In essence, while the general principle of nationwide recognition holds, Parliament can prescribe specific procedures for authentication and enforcement across state lines.
A key application of this clause is the executability of final judgments and orders from civil courts anywhere in India, without needing a fresh lawsuit. Notably, this provision applies solely to civil judgments and excludes criminal ones, meaning courts in one state are not obligated to enforce the penal laws of another.
Inter-State Trade and Commerce
Part XIII of the Indian Constitution, spanning Articles 301 to 307, establishes a unified framework for trade, commerce, and intercourse across the entire territory of India. At its heart, Article 301 proclaims that trade, commerce, and intercourse throughout India must remain free. This foundational guarantee aims to dismantle inter-state border barriers, fostering a seamless national market that promotes the unrestricted movement of goods, services, and people. Importantly, this freedom extends beyond inter-state activities to include trade and commerce within individual states. As a result, any restrictions—whether imposed at state frontiers or at earlier or later stages—violate the provision.
However, the sweeping freedom under Article 301 is not absolute. It is tempered by specific exceptions outlined in Articles 302 to 305, which allow for reasonable regulations in the broader public interest while safeguarding against discrimination.
Under Article 302, Parliament holds the power to impose restrictions on trade, commerce, and intercourse between states or even within a state, provided they serve the public interest. Yet, Article 303 strictly prohibits Parliament from favoring one state over another or enacting discriminatory measures, except during scarcity conditions in any part of India.
States, too, have limited authority. Article 304(a) permits a state legislature to enact reasonable restrictions on trade involving or occurring within that state, but only in the public interest and with the prior sanction of the President for introducing the relevant bill. Moreover, Article 304(b) allows states to levy taxes on goods imported from other states or Union Territories, but only at rates equivalent to those applied to similar locally manufactured goods. This ensures no discriminatory taxation undermines national unity.
Article 305 further qualifies the freedom by upholding laws that authorize the Union or state governments to operate monopolies in any trade, business, industry, or service—whether fully or partially excluding private citizens. Such nationalization measures remain valid despite Article 301.
Finally, Article 307 empowers Parliament to designate an authority to enforce these provisions on trade freedom and its permissible restrictions, endowing it with suitable powers and duties. To date, no such authority has been established.
Zonal Councils: Fostering Interstate Cooperation
The Zonal Councils serve as statutory bodies—established not by the Constitution but through an Act of Parliament, specifically the States Reorganisation Act, 1956. This landmark legislation divided India into five distinct zones—Northern, Central, Eastern, Western, and Southern—and created a dedicated Zonal Council for each to promote harmony across regions.
In delineating these zones, lawmakers considered multiple interconnected factors: the country's natural geographical divisions, river systems and communication networks, shared cultural and linguistic ties, as well as the imperatives of economic progress, national security, and law enforcement. This thoughtful approach ensured the councils addressed real-world regional dynamics effectively.
Each Zonal Council comprises key stakeholders: the Union Home Minister, the Chief Ministers of all states within the zone, two additional ministers from each state, and the administrators of any Union Territories in the zone. Advisors, who participate without voting rights, include a nominee from the Planning Commission, the Chief Secretary of each state in the zone, and the Development Commissioner of each such state. The Union Home Minister chairs all five councils, while the Chief Ministers rotate as Vice-Chairman for one-year terms, ensuring balanced leadership.
At their core, these councils function as deliberative and advisory forums, encouraging cooperation among states, Union Territories, and the Centre. They deliberate on critical issues such as economic and social planning, the welfare of linguistic minorities, border disputes, and interstate transport, offering recommendations to foster unity. Their broader objectives include achieving emotional integration across the nation; curbing excessive state loyalty, regionalism, linguism, and narrow particularism; mitigating the lingering divisions from state reorganisations to align integration with economic growth; enabling the Centre and states to collaborate on social and economic policies through idea-sharing and uniform strategies; ensuring swift execution of major development projects; and maintaining political equilibrium among regions.
The North-Eastern Council
Complementing the five Zonal Councils is the North-Eastern Council, established under a dedicated statute, the North-Eastern Council Act, 1971. Encompassing Assam, Manipur, Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Tripura, and Sikkim, it mirrors the zonal councils' cooperative spirit with added emphases. Beyond general coordination, it formulates unified regional plans for shared priorities and periodically reviews security and public order measures across member states, addressing the unique challenges of this sensitive region.