A) The Indian federation is more a 'functional' than an 'institutional' concept.
B) Simple party dominant regime conflicts with the principles of federalism in India.
C) The Indian federation is not the result of an agreement between the states.
D) It is a unitary state with subsidiary federal features rather than a federal state with subsidiary unitary features.
Correct Answer: D
Solution :
The Constitution of India has not described India as a federation. On the other hand. Article 1 of the Constitution describes her as a "Union of States. This means, India is a union comprising of various States which are integral parts of it. The Indian Union is not destructible. Here, the States cannot break away from the union. They do not have the right to secede from the union. In a true federation, the constituting units or the States have the freedom to come out of the union. India is not a true federation. It combines the features of a federal government and the features of a unitary government which can also be called the non-federal features. Because of this, India is regarded as a semi-federal state. Prof. K.C. Where are describes it as "a quasi-federal state". The Supreme Court of India also describes it as "a federal structure with a strong bias towards the Centre". Let us now discuss the federal and the unitary or non-federal features of the Indian Constitution.
You need to login to perform this action.
You will be redirected in
3 sec
