jbp123/hello · Datasets at Hugging Face

instruction stringlengths 1 84	input stringlengths 1 85	output stringlengths 1 83
Centre can impose customs duty on goods imported or exported by a	state, or an excise duty on goods produced or manufactured by a	state.
Effects of Emergencies	The Centre-state financial relations in normal times (described above)	undergo changes during emergencies. These are as follows:
National Emergency	While the proclamation of national emergency (under Article 352) is in	operation, the president can modify the constitutional distribution of
revenues between the Centre and the states. This means that the	president can either reduce or cancel the transfer of finances (both tax	sharing and grants-in-aid) from the Centre to the states. Such
modification continues till the end of the financial year in which the	emergency ceases to operate.	Financial Emergency
While the proclamation of financial emergency (under Article 360) is in	operation, the Centre can give directions to the states: (i) to observe	the specified canons of financial propriety; (ii) to reduce the salaries
and allowances of all class of persons serving in the state; and (iii) to	reserve all money bills and other financial bills for the consideration of	the President.
Table 14.3 Articles Related to Centre-State Financial Relations at a	Glance	Article No. Subject Matter
Distribution of Revenues between the Union and the States	268. Duties levied by the Union but collected and	appropriated by the states
268A. Service tax levied by Union and collected and	appropriated by the Union and the states	(Repealed)
269. Taxes levied and collected by the Union but	assigned to the states	269A. Levy and collection of goods and services tax in
course of inter-state trade or commerce	270. Taxes levied and distributed between the Union	and the states
271. Surcharge on certain duties and taxes for	purposes of the Union	272. Taxes which are levied and collected by the Union
and may be distributed between the Union and the	states (Repealed)	273. Grants in lieu of export duty on jute and jute
products	274. Prior recommendation of President required to bills	affecting taxation in which states are interested
275. Grants from the Union to certain states	276. Taxes on professions, trades, callings and	employments
277. Savings	278. Agreement with states in Part B of the First	Schedule with regard to certain financial matters
(Repealed)	279. Calculation of “net proceeds”, etc.	279A. Goods and Services Tax Council
281. Recommendations of the Finance Commission	Miscellaneous Financial Provisions	282. Expenditure defrayable by the Union or a state out
of its revenues	283. Custody, etc., of Consolidated Funds, Contingency	Funds and moneys credited to the public accounts
284. Custody of suitors’ deposits and other moneys	received by public servants and courts	285. Exemption of property of the Union from state
taxation	286. Restrictions as to imposition of tax on the sale or	purchase of goods
287. Exemption from taxes on electricity	288. Exemption from taxation by states in respect of	water or electricity in certain cases
289. Exemption of property and income of a state from	Union taxation	290. Adjustment in respect of certain expenses and
pensions	290A. Annual payment to certain Devaswom Funds	291. Privy purse sums of Rulers (Repealed)
Borrowing	292. Borrowing by the Government of India	293. Borrowing by states
TRENDS IN CENTRE-STATE RELATIONS	Till 1967, the centre-state relations by and large were smooth due to	one-party rule at the Centre and in most of the states. In 1967
elections, the Congress party was defeated in nine states and its	position at the Centre became weak. This changed political scenario	heralded a new era in the Centre-state relations. The non-Congress
Governments in the states opposed the increasing centralisation and	intervention of the Central government. They raised the issue of state	autonomy and demanded more powers and financial resources to the
states. This caused tensions and conflicts in Centre-state relations.	Tension Areas in Centre-State Relations	The issues which created tensions and conflicts between the Centre
and states are: (1) Mode of appointment and dismissal of governor;	(2) Discriminatory and partisan role of governors; (3) Imposition of	President’s Rule for partisan interests; (4) Deployment of Central
forces in the states to maintain law and order; (5) Reservation of state	bills for the consideration of the President; (6) Discrimination in	financial allocations to the states; (7) Role of Planning Commission in
approving state projects; (8) Management of All-India Services (IAS,	IPS, and IFS); (9) Use of electronic media for political purposes; (10)	Appointment of enquiry commissions against the chief ministers; (11)
Sharing of finances (between Centre and states); and (12)	Encroachment by the Centre on the State List.	The issues in Centre-State relations have been under consideration
since the mid 1960s. In this direction, the following developments	have taken place:	Administrative Reforms Commission
The Central government appointed a six-member Administrative	Reforms Commission (ARC) in 1966 under the chairmanship of	Morarji Desai (followed by K Hanumanthayya). Its terms of references
included, among others, the examination of Centre-State relations. In	order to examine thoroughly the various issues in Centre-state	relations, the ARC constituted a study team under M.C. Setalvad. On
recommendations for improving the Centre-state relations. The	important recommendations are:	• Establishment of an Inter-State Council under Article 263 of the
Constitution.	• Appointment of persons having long experience in public life and	administration and non-partisan attitude as governors.
• Delegation of powers to the maximum extent to the states.	• Transferring of more financial resources to the states to reduce	their dependency upon the Centre.
• Deployment of Central armed forces in the states either on their	request or otherwise.	No action was taken by the Central government on the
recommendations of the ARC.	Rajamannar Committee	In 1969, the Tamil Nadu Government (DMK) appointed a three-
member committee under the chairmanship of Dr. P.V. Rajamannar to	examine the entire question of Centre-state relations and to suggest	amendments to the Constitution so as to secure utmost autonomy to
the states.25 The committee submitted its report to the Tamil Nadu	Government in 1971.	The Committee identified the reasons for the prevailing unitary
trends (tendencies of centralisation) in the country. They include: (i)	certain provisions in the Constitution which confer special powers on	the Centre; (ii) one-party rule both at the Centre and in the states; (iii)
inadequacy of states’ fiscal resources and consequent dependence	on the Centre for financial assistance; and (iv) the institution of Central	planning and the role of the Planning Commission.
The important recommendations of the committee are as follows: (i)	An Inter-State Council should be set up immediately; (ii) Finance	Commission should be made a permanent body; (iii) Planning
Commission should be disbanded and its place should be taken by a	statutory body; (iv) Articles 356, 357 and 365 (dealing with President’s	Rule) should be totally omitted; (v) The provision that the state
ministry holds office during the pleasure of the governor should be	omitted; (vi) Certain subjects of the Union List and the Concurrent List	should be transferred to the State List; (vii) the residuary powers
The Central government completely ignored the recommendations	of the Rajamannar Committee.	Anandpur Sahib Resolution
In 1973, the Akali Dal adopted a resolution containing both political	and religious demands in a meeting held at Anandpur Sahib in	Punjab. The resolution, generally known as Anandpur Sahib
Resolution, demanded that the Centre’s jurisdiction should be	restricted only to defence, foreign affairs, communications, and	currency and the entire residuary powers should be vested in the
states. It stated that the Constitution should be made federal in the	real sense and should ensure equal authority and representation to all	the states at the Centre.
West Bengal Memorandum	In 1977, the West Bengal Government (led by the Communists)	published a memorandum on Centre-state relations and sent to the
Central government. The memorandum inter alia suggested the	following: (i) The word ‘union’ in the Constitution should be replaced	by the word ‘federal’; (ii) The jurisdiction of the Centre should be
confined to defence, foreign affairs, currency, communications and	economic co-ordination; (iii) All other subjects including the residuary	should be vested in the states; (iv) Articles 356 and 357 (President’s
Rule) and 360 (financial emergency) should be repealed; (v) State’s	consent should be made obligatory for formation of new states or	reorganisation of existing states; (vi) Of the total revenue raised by the
Centre from all sources, 75 per cent should be allocated to the states;	(vii) Rajya Sabha should have equal powers with that of the Lok	Sabha; and (viii) There should be only Central and state services and
the allIndia services should be abolished.	The Central government did not accept the demands made in the	memorandum.
Sarkaria Commission	In 1983, the Central government appointed a three-member	Commission on Centrestate relations under the chairmanship of R.S.
arrangements between the Centre and states in all spheres and	recommend appropriate changes and measures. It was initially given	one year to complete its work, but its term was extended four times. It
submitted it’s report in 1988.	The Commission did not favour structural changes and regarded	the existing constitutional arrangements and principles relating to the
institutions basically sound. But, it emphasised on the need for	changes in the functional or operational aspects. It observed that	federalism is more a functional arrangement for co-operative action
than a static institutional concept. It outrightly rejected the demand for	curtailing the powers of the Centre and stated that a strong Centre is	essential to safeguard the national unity and integrity which is being
threatened by the fissiparious tendencies in the body politic. However,	it did not equate strong Centre with centralisation of powers. It	observed that over-centralisation leads to blood pressure at the centre
and anaemia at the periphery.	The Commission made 247 recommendations to improve Centre-	state relations. The important recommendations are mentioned below:
1. A permanent Inter-State Council called the Inter-Governmental	Council should be set up under Article 263.	2. Article 356 (President’s Rule) should be used very sparingly, in
extreme cases as a last resort when all the available alternatives	fail.	3. The institution of All-India Services should be further
strengthened and some more such services should be created.	4. The residuary powers of taxation should continue to remain with	the Parliament, while the other residuary powers should be
placed in the Concurrent List.	5. When the president withholds his assent to the state bills, the	reasons should be communicated to the state government.
6. The National Development Council (NDC) should be renamed	and reconstituted as the National Economic and Development	Council (NEDC).
7. The zonal councils should be constituted afresh and reactivated	to promote the spirit of federalism.	8. The Centre should have powers to deploy its armed forces, even
without the consent of states. However, it is desirable that the	states should be consulted.	9. The Centre should consult the states before making a law on a
10. The procedure of consulting the chief minister in the	appointment of the state governor should be prescribed in the	Constitution itself.
11. The net proceeds of the corporation tax may be made	permissibly shareable with the states.	12. The governor cannot dismiss the council of ministers so long as
it commands a majority in the assembly.	13. The governor’s term of five years in a state should not be	disturbed except for some extremely compelling reasons.
14. No commission of enquiry should be set up against a state	minister unless a demand is made by the Parliament.	15. The surcharge on income tax should not be levied by the Centre
except for a specific purpose and for a strictly limited period.	16. The present division of functions between the Finance	Commission and the Planning Commission is reasonable and
should continue.	17. Steps should be taken to uniformly implement the three	language formula in its true spirit.
18. No autonomy for radio and television but decentralisation in their	operations.	19. No change in the role of Rajya Sabha and Centre’s power to
reorganise the states.	20. The commissioner for linguistic minorities should be activated.	The Central government has implemented 180 (out of 247)
recommendations of the Sarkaria Commission. The most important is	the establishment of the Inter-State Council in 1990.	Punchhi Commission
The Second commission on Centre-State Relations was set-up by the	Government of India in April 2007 under the Chairmanship of Madan	Mohan Punchhi, former Chief Justice of India.27 It was required to look
into the issues of Centre-State relations keeping in view the sea-	changes that have taken place in the polity and economy of India	since the Sarkaria Commission had last looked at the issue of Centre-
State relations over two decades ago.	The terms of reference of the Commission were as follows:	(i) The Commission was required to examine and review the working
of the existing arrangements between the Union and States as	per the Constitution of India, the healthy precedents being	followed, various pronouncements of the Courts in regard to
powers, functions and responsibilities in all spheres including	legislative relations, administrative relations, role of governors,	emergency provisions, financial relations, economic and social
planning, Panchayati Raj institutions, sharing of resources	including inter-state river water and recommend such changes or	other measures as may be appropriate keeping in view the
practical difficulties.	(ii) In examining and reviewing the working of the existing	arrangements between the Union and States and making
recommendations as to the changes and measures needed, the	Commission was required to keep in view the social and	economic developments that have taken place over the years,
particularly over the last two decades and have due regard to the	scheme and framework of the Constitution. Such	recommendations were also needed to address the growing
challenges of ensuring good governance for promoting the	welfare of the people whilst strengthening the unity and integrity of	the country, and of availing emerging opportunities for sustained
and rapid economic growth for alleviating poverty and illiteracy in	the early decades of the new millennium.	(iii) While examining and making its recommendations on the above,
the Commission was required to have particular regard, but not	limit its mandate to the following:-	(a) The role, responsibility and jurisdiction of the Centre vis-a-vis
States during major and prolonged outbreaks of communal	violence, caste violence or any other social conflict leading to	prolonged and escalated violence.
(b) The role, responsibility and jurisdiction of the Centre vis-a-vis	States in the planning and implementation of the mega	projects like the inter-linking of rivers, that would normally
take 15–20 years for completion and hinge vitally on the	support of the States.	(c) The role, responsibility and jurisdiction of the Centre vis-a-vis
States in promoting effective devolution of powers and	autonomy to Panchayati Raj Institutions and Local Bodies	including the Autonomous Bodies under the sixth Schedule of
the Constitution within a specified period of time.	(d) The role, responsibility and jurisdiction of the Centre vis-a-vis	States in promoting the concept and practice of independent
(e) The role, responsibility and jurisdiction of the Centre vis-a-vis	States in linking Central assistance of various kinds with the	performance of the States.

Centre can impose customs duty on goods imported or exported by a

state, or an excise duty on goods produced or manufactured by a

state.

Effects of Emergencies

The Centre-state financial relations in normal times (described above)

undergo changes during emergencies. These are as follows:

National Emergency

While the proclamation of national emergency (under Article 352) is in

operation, the president can modify the constitutional distribution of

revenues between the Centre and the states. This means that the

president can either reduce or cancel the transfer of finances (both tax

sharing and grants-in-aid) from the Centre to the states. Such

modification continues till the end of the financial year in which the

emergency ceases to operate.

Financial Emergency

While the proclamation of financial emergency (under Article 360) is in

operation, the Centre can give directions to the states: (i) to observe

the specified canons of financial propriety; (ii) to reduce the salaries

and allowances of all class of persons serving in the state; and (iii) to

reserve all money bills and other financial bills for the consideration of

the President.

Table 14.3 Articles Related to Centre-State Financial Relations at a

Glance

Article No. Subject Matter

Distribution of Revenues between the Union and the States

268. Duties levied by the Union but collected and

appropriated by the states

268A. Service tax levied by Union and collected and

appropriated by the Union and the states

(Repealed)

269. Taxes levied and collected by the Union but

assigned to the states

269A. Levy and collection of goods and services tax in

course of inter-state trade or commerce

270. Taxes levied and distributed between the Union

and the states

271. Surcharge on certain duties and taxes for

purposes of the Union

272. Taxes which are levied and collected by the Union

and may be distributed between the Union and the

states (Repealed)

273. Grants in lieu of export duty on jute and jute

products

274. Prior recommendation of President required to bills

affecting taxation in which states are interested

275. Grants from the Union to certain states

276. Taxes on professions, trades, callings and

employments

277. Savings

278. Agreement with states in Part B of the First

Schedule with regard to certain financial matters

(Repealed)

279. Calculation of “net proceeds”, etc.

279A. Goods and Services Tax Council

281. Recommendations of the Finance Commission

Miscellaneous Financial Provisions

282. Expenditure defrayable by the Union or a state out

of its revenues

283. Custody, etc., of Consolidated Funds, Contingency

Funds and moneys credited to the public accounts

284. Custody of suitors’ deposits and other moneys

received by public servants and courts

285. Exemption of property of the Union from state

taxation

286. Restrictions as to imposition of tax on the sale or

purchase of goods

287. Exemption from taxes on electricity

288. Exemption from taxation by states in respect of

water or electricity in certain cases

289. Exemption of property and income of a state from

Union taxation

290. Adjustment in respect of certain expenses and

pensions

290A. Annual payment to certain Devaswom Funds

291. Privy purse sums of Rulers (Repealed)

Borrowing

292. Borrowing by the Government of India

293. Borrowing by states

TRENDS IN CENTRE-STATE RELATIONS

Till 1967, the centre-state relations by and large were smooth due to

one-party rule at the Centre and in most of the states. In 1967

elections, the Congress party was defeated in nine states and its

position at the Centre became weak. This changed political scenario

heralded a new era in the Centre-state relations. The non-Congress

Governments in the states opposed the increasing centralisation and

intervention of the Central government. They raised the issue of state

autonomy and demanded more powers and financial resources to the

states. This caused tensions and conflicts in Centre-state relations.

Tension Areas in Centre-State Relations

The issues which created tensions and conflicts between the Centre

and states are: (1) Mode of appointment and dismissal of governor;

(2) Discriminatory and partisan role of governors; (3) Imposition of

President’s Rule for partisan interests; (4) Deployment of Central

forces in the states to maintain law and order; (5) Reservation of state

bills for the consideration of the President; (6) Discrimination in

financial allocations to the states; (7) Role of Planning Commission in

approving state projects; (8) Management of All-India Services (IAS,

IPS, and IFS); (9) Use of electronic media for political purposes; (10)

Appointment of enquiry commissions against the chief ministers; (11)

Sharing of finances (between Centre and states); and (12)

Encroachment by the Centre on the State List.

The issues in Centre-State relations have been under consideration

since the mid 1960s. In this direction, the following developments

have taken place:

Administrative Reforms Commission

The Central government appointed a six-member Administrative

Reforms Commission (ARC) in 1966 under the chairmanship of

Morarji Desai (followed by K Hanumanthayya). Its terms of references

included, among others, the examination of Centre-State relations. In

order to examine thoroughly the various issues in Centre-state

relations, the ARC constituted a study team under M.C. Setalvad. On

recommendations for improving the Centre-state relations. The

important recommendations are:

• Establishment of an Inter-State Council under Article 263 of the

Constitution.

• Appointment of persons having long experience in public life and

administration and non-partisan attitude as governors.

• Delegation of powers to the maximum extent to the states.

• Transferring of more financial resources to the states to reduce

their dependency upon the Centre.

• Deployment of Central armed forces in the states either on their

request or otherwise.

No action was taken by the Central government on the

recommendations of the ARC.

Rajamannar Committee

In 1969, the Tamil Nadu Government (DMK) appointed a three-

member committee under the chairmanship of Dr. P.V. Rajamannar to

examine the entire question of Centre-state relations and to suggest

amendments to the Constitution so as to secure utmost autonomy to

the states.25 The committee submitted its report to the Tamil Nadu

Government in 1971.

The Committee identified the reasons for the prevailing unitary

trends (tendencies of centralisation) in the country. They include: (i)

certain provisions in the Constitution which confer special powers on

the Centre; (ii) one-party rule both at the Centre and in the states; (iii)

inadequacy of states’ fiscal resources and consequent dependence

on the Centre for financial assistance; and (iv) the institution of Central

planning and the role of the Planning Commission.

The important recommendations of the committee are as follows: (i)

An Inter-State Council should be set up immediately; (ii) Finance

Commission should be made a permanent body; (iii) Planning

Commission should be disbanded and its place should be taken by a

statutory body; (iv) Articles 356, 357 and 365 (dealing with President’s

Rule) should be totally omitted; (v) The provision that the state

ministry holds office during the pleasure of the governor should be

omitted; (vi) Certain subjects of the Union List and the Concurrent List

should be transferred to the State List; (vii) the residuary powers

The Central government completely ignored the recommendations

of the Rajamannar Committee.

Anandpur Sahib Resolution

In 1973, the Akali Dal adopted a resolution containing both political

and religious demands in a meeting held at Anandpur Sahib in

Punjab. The resolution, generally known as Anandpur Sahib

Resolution, demanded that the Centre’s jurisdiction should be

restricted only to defence, foreign affairs, communications, and

currency and the entire residuary powers should be vested in the

states. It stated that the Constitution should be made federal in the

real sense and should ensure equal authority and representation to all

the states at the Centre.

West Bengal Memorandum

In 1977, the West Bengal Government (led by the Communists)

published a memorandum on Centre-state relations and sent to the

Central government. The memorandum inter alia suggested the

following: (i) The word ‘union’ in the Constitution should be replaced

by the word ‘federal’; (ii) The jurisdiction of the Centre should be

confined to defence, foreign affairs, currency, communications and

economic co-ordination; (iii) All other subjects including the residuary

should be vested in the states; (iv) Articles 356 and 357 (President’s

Rule) and 360 (financial emergency) should be repealed; (v) State’s

consent should be made obligatory for formation of new states or

reorganisation of existing states; (vi) Of the total revenue raised by the

Centre from all sources, 75 per cent should be allocated to the states;

(vii) Rajya Sabha should have equal powers with that of the Lok

Sabha; and (viii) There should be only Central and state services and

the allIndia services should be abolished.

The Central government did not accept the demands made in the

memorandum.

Sarkaria Commission

In 1983, the Central government appointed a three-member

Commission on Centrestate relations under the chairmanship of R.S.

arrangements between the Centre and states in all spheres and

recommend appropriate changes and measures. It was initially given

one year to complete its work, but its term was extended four times. It

submitted it’s report in 1988.

The Commission did not favour structural changes and regarded

the existing constitutional arrangements and principles relating to the

institutions basically sound. But, it emphasised on the need for

changes in the functional or operational aspects. It observed that

federalism is more a functional arrangement for co-operative action

than a static institutional concept. It outrightly rejected the demand for

curtailing the powers of the Centre and stated that a strong Centre is

essential to safeguard the national unity and integrity which is being

threatened by the fissiparious tendencies in the body politic. However,

it did not equate strong Centre with centralisation of powers. It

observed that over-centralisation leads to blood pressure at the centre

and anaemia at the periphery.

The Commission made 247 recommendations to improve Centre-

state relations. The important recommendations are mentioned below:

1. A permanent Inter-State Council called the Inter-Governmental

Council should be set up under Article 263.

2. Article 356 (President’s Rule) should be used very sparingly, in

extreme cases as a last resort when all the available alternatives

fail.

3. The institution of All-India Services should be further

strengthened and some more such services should be created.

4. The residuary powers of taxation should continue to remain with

the Parliament, while the other residuary powers should be

placed in the Concurrent List.

5. When the president withholds his assent to the state bills, the

reasons should be communicated to the state government.

6. The National Development Council (NDC) should be renamed

and reconstituted as the National Economic and Development

Council (NEDC).

7. The zonal councils should be constituted afresh and reactivated

to promote the spirit of federalism.

8. The Centre should have powers to deploy its armed forces, even

without the consent of states. However, it is desirable that the

states should be consulted.

9. The Centre should consult the states before making a law on a

10. The procedure of consulting the chief minister in the

appointment of the state governor should be prescribed in the

Constitution itself.

11. The net proceeds of the corporation tax may be made

permissibly shareable with the states.

12. The governor cannot dismiss the council of ministers so long as

it commands a majority in the assembly.

13. The governor’s term of five years in a state should not be

disturbed except for some extremely compelling reasons.

14. No commission of enquiry should be set up against a state

minister unless a demand is made by the Parliament.

15. The surcharge on income tax should not be levied by the Centre

except for a specific purpose and for a strictly limited period.

16. The present division of functions between the Finance

Commission and the Planning Commission is reasonable and

should continue.

17. Steps should be taken to uniformly implement the three

language formula in its true spirit.

18. No autonomy for radio and television but decentralisation in their

operations.

19. No change in the role of Rajya Sabha and Centre’s power to

reorganise the states.

20. The commissioner for linguistic minorities should be activated.

The Central government has implemented 180 (out of 247)

recommendations of the Sarkaria Commission. The most important is

the establishment of the Inter-State Council in 1990.

Punchhi Commission

The Second commission on Centre-State Relations was set-up by the

Government of India in April 2007 under the Chairmanship of Madan

Mohan Punchhi, former Chief Justice of India.27 It was required to look

into the issues of Centre-State relations keeping in view the sea-

changes that have taken place in the polity and economy of India

since the Sarkaria Commission had last looked at the issue of Centre-

State relations over two decades ago.

The terms of reference of the Commission were as follows:

(i) The Commission was required to examine and review the working

of the existing arrangements between the Union and States as

per the Constitution of India, the healthy precedents being

followed, various pronouncements of the Courts in regard to

powers, functions and responsibilities in all spheres including

legislative relations, administrative relations, role of governors,

emergency provisions, financial relations, economic and social

planning, Panchayati Raj institutions, sharing of resources

including inter-state river water and recommend such changes or

other measures as may be appropriate keeping in view the

practical difficulties.

(ii) In examining and reviewing the working of the existing

arrangements between the Union and States and making

recommendations as to the changes and measures needed, the

Commission was required to keep in view the social and

economic developments that have taken place over the years,

particularly over the last two decades and have due regard to the

scheme and framework of the Constitution. Such

recommendations were also needed to address the growing

challenges of ensuring good governance for promoting the

welfare of the people whilst strengthening the unity and integrity of

the country, and of availing emerging opportunities for sustained

and rapid economic growth for alleviating poverty and illiteracy in

the early decades of the new millennium.

(iii) While examining and making its recommendations on the above,

the Commission was required to have particular regard, but not

limit its mandate to the following:-

(a) The role, responsibility and jurisdiction of the Centre vis-a-vis

States during major and prolonged outbreaks of communal

violence, caste violence or any other social conflict leading to

prolonged and escalated violence.

(b) The role, responsibility and jurisdiction of the Centre vis-a-vis

States in the planning and implementation of the mega

projects like the inter-linking of rivers, that would normally

take 15–20 years for completion and hinge vitally on the

support of the States.

(c) The role, responsibility and jurisdiction of the Centre vis-a-vis

States in promoting effective devolution of powers and

autonomy to Panchayati Raj Institutions and Local Bodies

including the Autonomous Bodies under the sixth Schedule of

the Constitution within a specified period of time.

(d) The role, responsibility and jurisdiction of the Centre vis-a-vis

States in promoting the concept and practice of independent

(e) The role, responsibility and jurisdiction of the Centre vis-a-vis

States in linking Central assistance of various kinds with the

performance of the States.