Special Constitutional Provisions for Indian States: Understanding Articles 371 to 371-J (Part 01)

🎯 Introduction

India, a Union of States, is characterized by its vast diversity – geographical, linguistic, cultural, and socio-economic. The architects of the Indian Constitution, recognizing this inherent diversity and the unique challenges faced by various regions, incorporated special provisions to ensure inclusive development, preserve distinct identities, and maintain national unity. Part XXI of the Indian Constitution, titled "Temporary, Transitional and Special Provisions," contains Articles 371 to 371-J, which grant special provisions to twelve states: Maharashtra, Gujarat, Nagaland, Assam, Manipur, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Sikkim, Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh, Goa, and Karnataka.

These special provisions reflect the principle of asymmetric federalism, where different states enjoy varying degrees of autonomy and relationships with the Centre, based on their unique circumstances. While Article 370 (which granted special status to Jammu and Kashmir) was abrogated in 2019, Articles 371 to 371-J continue to play a crucial role in managing regional complexities and fostering equitable growth across the Indian subcontinent.

📜 Rationale Behind Special Provisions

The primary objectives behind granting these special provisions include:

• Addressing Regional Disparities: To promote the development of historically backward or underdeveloped regions within certain states. This includes equitable allocation of funds for developmental expenditure, and facilities for technical education, vocational training, and employment.
• Protecting Cultural and Economic Interests: To safeguard the distinct cultural heritage, social practices, customary laws, and land rights of tribal and indigenous communities.
• Maintaining Law and Order: To address disturbed law and order situations, especially in states affected by insurgency or internal conflicts.
• Preserving Local Identity: To meet the aspirations of local populations and ensure their participation in governance that respects their unique socio-cultural fabric.

Originally, the Constitution did not contain special provisions for these states. They have been incorporated through subsequent constitutional amendments, often in the context of state reorganization or the conferment of statehood on Union Territories.

🏛️ Historical and Constitutional Background

The idea of special provisions emerged from the need to accommodate the diverse demands arising from the linguistic reorganization of states and the integration of princely states and tribal areas into the Indian Union. While Article 370 was a foundational "temporary" provision for Jammu & Kashmir at the time of the Constitution's adoption, Articles 371 to 371-J were introduced later through various amendments, demonstrating the Constitution's adaptability.

• Part XXI of the Constitution: This part, where Articles 371 to 371-J are located, is titled "Temporary, Transitional and Special Provisions." The "temporary" tag signifies that these provisions were intended to address specific challenges and, theoretically, could be removed once the conditions necessitating them cease. However, none of these provisions have an explicit expiry date.
• Constituent Assembly Debates (General Context): While specific debates for Articles 371A-J happened post-constitution, the broader philosophy of protecting minority rights, tribal autonomy, and regional balance was a recurring theme in the Constituent Assembly. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, in particular, advocated for provisions safeguarding Scheduled Tribes.

✍️ Key Provisions & Articles (Part 01 Focus)

This section will detail the provisions under Articles 371, 371A, 371B, 371C, 371D, and 371E.

Article 371: Maharashtra and Gujarat

This article was incorporated into the Constitution since January 26, 1950, though it has been modified over time. It primarily deals with the states of Maharashtra and Gujarat, which were formed after the bifurcation of the Bombay State in 1960.

Key Provisions:

Article 371 authorizes the President to provide that the Governors of Maharashtra and Gujarat shall have special responsibility for the following matters:

1. Establishment of Development Boards:
   • For Vidarbha, Marathwada, and the rest of Maharashtra.
   • For Saurashtra, Kutch, and the rest of Gujarat.
   • These boards are to ensure targeted development in these regions, which were historically backward.
2. Annual Report: The Governor is responsible for ensuring that a report on the working of these development boards is placed before the State Legislative Assembly every year.
3. Equitable Allocation of Funds: Ensuring equitable allocation of funds for developmental expenditure over these specified areas, balancing state-wide requirements.
4. Facilities for Technical Education and Vocational Training: Making an equitable arrangement to provide adequate facilities for technical education and vocational training in these regions.
5. Employment Opportunities: Ensuring adequate opportunities for employment in state services in respect of these areas.

Significance:

Article 371 addresses regional imbalances that existed in these states post-reorganization. It empowers the Governors to ensure focused development, equitable resource allocation, and employment opportunities in the identified backward regions, thereby promoting balanced growth and preventing regional resentment.

Article 371A: Nagaland

Inserted by the 13th Constitutional Amendment Act of 1962, Article 371A grants significant special provisions to Nagaland. This was a result of the 16-Point Agreement reached in 1960 between the Government of India and the Naga People's Convention, leading to the creation of Nagaland as a full-fledged state in 1963. The objective is to protect the unique cultural identity, social practices, and customary laws of the Naga people.

Key Provisions:

1. Non-Applicability of Parliamentary Acts: No Act of Parliament regarding the following matters shall apply to the State of Nagaland unless the Legislative Assembly of Nagaland by a resolution so decides:
   • Religious or social practices of the Nagas.
   • Naga customary law and procedure.
   • Administration of civil and criminal justice involving decisions according to Naga customary law.
   • Ownership and transfer of land and its resources.
   • This provision is crucial for preserving the distinct cultural and social fabric of the Nagas and their traditional land rights.
2. Governor's Special Responsibility for Law and Order: The Governor of Nagaland has a special responsibility for law and order in the state.
   • This responsibility continues "so long as in his opinion internal disturbances occurring in the Naga Hills-Tuensang Area immediately before the formation of that State continue therein or in any part thereof."
   • In discharging this responsibility, the Governor, after consulting the Council of Ministers, exercises his individual judgment, and his decision is final.
   • This special responsibility of the Governor ceases when the President so directs.
3. Financial Safeguards (Tuensang District): The Governor has to ensure that money provided by the Central Government for any specific purpose is included in the demand for a grant relating to that purpose and not in any other demand moved in the State Legislative Assembly. The Governor also ensures equitable distribution of funds between the Tuensang district and the rest of Nagaland.
4. Regional Council for Tuensang District: A regional council consisting of 35 members is to be established for the Tuensang district. The Governor makes rules for its composition, choosing members, qualifications, term, salaries, allowances, and procedure.
5. Tuensang Administration: For a period of ten years from the formation of Nagaland, or for such further period as the Governor may, on the recommendation of the Regional Council, specify, the administration of the Tuensang district is to be carried out by the Governor. (Note: The Tuensang district has since undergone administrative changes).

Significance and Impact:

Article 371A is a powerful embodiment of asymmetrical federalism, granting Nagaland legislative autonomy over crucial aspects of its cultural and social life, land, and resources. It acknowledges the Naga people's unique historical context and aims to integrate them into the Indian mainstream while respecting their distinct identity. For instance, Nagaland has rejected the applicability of central laws like the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, demonstrating the practical application of this article.

Article 371B: Assam

Inserted by the 22nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1969, Article 371B makes special provisions for the state of Assam. This amendment was primarily enacted in the context of the reorganization of Assam and the creation of the autonomous state of Meghalaya.

Key Provisions:

The President is empowered to provide for the constitution and functions of a committee of the Legislative Assembly of the State of Assam.

• This committee consists of members of that Assembly elected from the Tribal Areas specified in Part I of the table appended to paragraph 20 of the Sixth Schedule (e.g., North Cachar Hills District, Karbi Anglong District, Bodoland Territorial Areas District).
• It also includes such number of other members of that Assembly as may be specified in the President's order.
• The President's order can also specify modifications to be made in the rules of procedure of the Assembly for the constitution and proper functioning of such a committee.

Significance:

Article 371B aims to ensure better representation and protection of the interests of the tribal populations within Assam. The special committee facilitates focused discussions and decision-making on matters affecting the tribal regions, thus promoting inclusive governance and addressing their specific needs, such as land rights and cultural preservation.

Article 371C: Manipur

Inserted by the 27th Constitutional Amendment Act of 1971, Article 371C provides special provisions with respect to the State of Manipur. Similar to Assam, these provisions address the unique situation of Manipur, particularly the distinction between its hill and valley areas and the protection of tribal interests.

Key Provisions:

1. Hill Areas Committee (HAC): The President is authorized to provide for the creation of a committee of the Manipur Legislative Assembly consisting of members elected from the Hill Areas of the State.
   • The term "Hill Areas" means such areas as the President may, by order, declare to be Hill Areas.
   • This committee oversees and advises on matters related to the administration and development of the Hill Areas.
   • Any bill or legislation affecting the Hill Areas must be referred to the HAC for its consideration and recommendations before being passed.
2. Governor's Special Responsibility: The President can direct that the Governor shall have a special responsibility to secure the proper functioning of the Hill Areas Committee.
3. Annual Report by Governor: The Governor is required to submit an annual report to the President regarding the administration of the Hill Areas.
4. Directions from Union Government: The executive power of the Union extends to giving directions to the State Government as to the administration of the said Hill Areas.

Significance:

Article 371C aims to safeguard the interests of tribal communities predominantly residing in Manipur's Hill Districts. The Hill Areas Committee ensures that their unique socio-economic needs, cultural identity, and land rights are considered in legislative and administrative processes, addressing historical concerns of marginalization and underdevelopment.

Article 371D: Andhra Pradesh and Telangana

Inserted by the 32nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1973, Article 371D provides special provisions for Andhra Pradesh. Following the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act of 2014, these provisions were also extended to the newly formed state of Telangana. This article primarily addresses issues of equitable opportunities in public employment and education, stemming from regional disparities and the 'Mulki Rules' controversies.

Key Provisions:

1. Equitable Opportunities: The President is empowered to provide for equitable opportunities and facilities for people belonging to different parts of the state (Andhra Pradesh and Telangana) in matters of public employment and education.
   • Different provisions can be made for various parts of the state to achieve this.
2. Local Cadres: For this purpose, the President may require the State Government to organize civil posts into different local cadres for different parts of the state and provide for direct recruitment to posts in any local cadre.
3. Administrative Tribunal: The President may provide for the establishment of an Administrative Tribunal in the state to deal with disputes and grievances relating to appointment, allotment, or promotion to civil posts in the state.
   • This tribunal is empowered to function outside the purview of the State High Court, though appeals can lie to the Supreme Court.
4. President's Orders: The President's orders under this article may contain provisions modifying existing laws relating to public employment and education.

Significance and Judicial Interpretations:

Article 371D is unique in its focus on safeguarding employment and educational opportunities based on regional factors, aiming to prevent discrimination and foster inclusive growth. It was enacted to address the 'Mulki Rules' agitation in Andhra Pradesh, which arose from concerns over job reservations for locals.

• P. Sambamurthy vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (1987): A significant case related to Article 371D. The Supreme Court, while upholding the overall spirit of Article 371D, struck down a part of clause 5 of the article. This clause stated that any order made by the President under this article could not be questioned in any court. The Supreme Court declared this unconstitutional as it violated the basic structure of the Constitution, particularly the principle of judicial review. The Court held that excluding judicial review for such orders was an infringement on the powers of the High Courts and the Supreme Court. This ruling reinforced the Basic Structure Doctrine established in the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973), which limits Parliament's amending power by stating that the basic features of the Constitution cannot be altered or destroyed.

Article 371E: Establishment of a Central University in Andhra Pradesh

This article was also inserted by the 32nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1973.

Key Provisions:

• Parliamentary Power: Article 371E states that Parliament may by law provide for the establishment of a University in the State of Andhra Pradesh.
• This is not a "special provision" in the same sense as others in Part XXI, but rather an enabling provision.

Significance:

This provision allowed for the establishment of a Central University in Andhra Pradesh, specifically leading to the formation of the University of Hyderabad in 1974. It aims to enhance higher education facilities and promote educational development in the state.

📊 Diagrams, Tables & Conceptual Visuals

Table 1: Comparative Glance at Special Provisions (Articles 371 to 371E)

Flowchart: Governor's Special Responsibility (Articles 371A & 371C)

Explanation: This flowchart illustrates the distinct nature of the Governor's 'special responsibility' under Articles 371A and 371C. While in Nagaland (Art. 371A), it pertains to law and order, involving the Governor's "individual judgment" which is final, in Manipur (Art. 371C), it relates to securing the proper functioning of the Hill Areas Committee and reporting on its administration to the President. This highlights the varying degrees of discretionary power and accountability inherent in these special provisions.

❓ Practice Questions & Answers

To reinforce your understanding of Articles 371 to 371E, attempt the following questions.

✅ Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQs)

1. Which of the following Constitutional Amendment Acts inserted Article 371A, granting special provisions to Nagaland? a) 10th Amendment Act, 1961 b) 13th Amendment Act, 1962 c) 16th Amendment Act, 1963 d) 22nd Amendment Act, 1969

2. Under Article 371 of the Constitution, the Governor of Maharashtra has a special responsibility for the establishment of separate development boards for which of the following regions? I. Vidarbha II. Marathwada III. Saurashtra IV. Kutch a) I and II only b) III and IV only c) I, II, III and IV d) I, II, III, and IV for Maharashtra, only I and II for Gujarat.

3. Consider the following statements regarding Article 371C: I. It was inserted by the 27th Constitutional Amendment Act of 1971. II. It provides for a Hill Areas Committee in the Manipur Legislative Assembly. III. The Governor of Manipur has a special responsibility to secure the proper functioning of this committee. IV. Any Act of Parliament relating to land ownership in Manipur would not apply unless the State Assembly decides by a resolution. Which of the statements given above are correct? a) I, II and III only b) II, III and IV only c) I, III and IV only d) I, II, III and IV

4. The Administrative Tribunal established under Article 371D for Andhra Pradesh and Telangana is designed to deal with disputes related to: a) Inter-state river water sharing b) Public employment and education c) Land reforms and tenancy d) Law and order issues

5. Article 371E enables Parliament to establish a Central University in which of the following states? a) Nagaland b) Assam c) Manipur d) Andhra Pradesh

🔑 Answer Key with Explanations

1. b) 13th Amendment Act, 1962

   • Explanation: Article 371A, which grants special provisions to Nagaland, was inserted into the Constitution by the 13th Constitutional Amendment Act of 1962.

2. a) I and II only

   • Explanation: Article 371 provides for the Governor of Maharashtra to have special responsibility for the establishment of separate development boards for Vidarbha, Marathwada, and the rest of Maharashtra. Saurashtra and Kutch fall under the special responsibility of the Governor of Gujarat.

3. a) I, II and III only

   • Explanation: Statements I, II, and III are correct. Article 371C was indeed inserted by the 27th Amendment Act of 1971, provides for a Hill Areas Committee, and assigns a special responsibility to the Governor for its proper functioning. Statement IV is incorrect; the provision regarding non-application of Parliamentary Acts on land ownership (unless the State Assembly decides) is found under Article 371A for Nagaland, not 371C for Manipur.

4. b) Public employment and education

   • Explanation: Article 371D specifically empowers the President to establish an Administrative Tribunal in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana to address disputes and grievances related to matters of public employment and education, ensuring equitable opportunities.

5. d) Andhra Pradesh

   • Explanation: Article 371E is a specific enabling provision that states "Parliament may by law provide for the establishment of a University in the State of Andhra Pradesh." This led to the establishment of the University of Hyderabad.

🔍 Scenario-Based Question

Scenario: The Governor of a particular state, covered under Articles 371-371J, decides to exercise his "special responsibility" concerning law and order in the state. He consults the Council of Ministers but ultimately takes a decision based on his individual judgment, overriding the advice of the Council. A political party in the opposition challenges this action, arguing that the Governor, as a constitutional head, must always act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers.

Question:

1. Under which specific Article (from 371-371E) could this scenario most likely occur? Justify your answer with constitutional provisions.
2. What is the constitutional validity of the Governor's action in such a scenario, and how might it be different from other states not covered by such special provisions?
3. Could the Governor's decision be challenged in a court of law on the grounds of violating the basic structure of the Constitution? Explain with reference to relevant judicial precedents.

💡 Detailed Answer to Scenario-Based Question

1. Under which specific Article (from 371-371E) could this scenario most likely occur? Justify your answer with constitutional provisions.

   • This scenario most likely occurs under Article 371A (Nagaland).
   • Justification: Article 371A(1)(b) explicitly states that "the Governor of Nagaland shall have special responsibility with respect to law and order in the State of Nagaland... and in the discharge of his functions in relation thereto the Governor shall, after consulting the Council of Ministers, exercise his individual judgment as to the action to be taken." This unique provision grants the Governor discretionary power in matters of law and order, even allowing him to act against the advice of the Council of Ministers after consultation. While Article 371C for Manipur also mentions a Governor's special responsibility, it is primarily related to the functioning of the Hill Areas Committee, not law and order with individual judgment.

2. What is the constitutional validity of the Governor's action in such a scenario, and how might it be different from other states not covered by such special provisions?

   • Constitutional Validity: The Governor's action, in this specific scenario under Article 371A, holds constitutional validity because the Article itself empowers the Governor to exercise "individual judgment" after consulting the Council of Ministers, and explicitly states that his decision shall be final and "shall not be called in question on the ground that he ought or ought not to have acted in the exercise of his individual judgment." This is a direct constitutional mandate.
   • Difference from Other States: In other states not covered by such special provisions (or even in states like Maharashtra/Gujarat under Article 371, or Manipur under 371C where individual judgment for law and order is not specified), the Governor, as the constitutional head, is generally bound by the "aid and advice" of the Council of Ministers as per Article 163 of the Constitution. While the Governor has certain discretionary powers (e.g., regarding the appointment of a Chief Minister in a hung assembly, or reserving bills for the President), acting against the explicit advice of the Council of Ministers on a substantive policy matter like law and order would typically be unconstitutional and invite legal challenge. The provision in Article 371A for Nagaland is an exception to the general principle of parliamentary democracy and ministerial responsibility at the state level.

3. Could the Governor's decision be challenged in a court of law on the grounds of violating the basic structure of the Constitution? Explain with reference to relevant judicial precedents.

   • The Governor's decision itself, specifically the act of exercising individual judgment as mandated by Article 371A, generally cannot be challenged in court on the ground that he ought or ought not to have acted in the exercise of his individual judgment due to the explicit wording of the proviso to Article 371A(1)(b).
   • However, the President's direction for this special responsibility to cease could potentially be subject to judicial review, as could the validity of the Article itself if it were argued to violate the Basic Structure.
   • Reference to Judicial Precedents (Basic Structure Doctrine): The Kesavananda Bharati case (1973) established the Basic Structure Doctrine, stating that while Parliament can amend the Constitution, it cannot alter its fundamental framework. Principles like judicial review, federalism, democracy, and the rule of law are considered part of this basic structure.
   • While specific provisions like Article 371A grant unique powers, the Supreme Court in cases like S.R. Bommai vs. Union of India (1994) (though primarily dealing with Article 356) emphasized that constitutional powers must be exercised judiciously and not arbitrarily, and even Presidential proclamations are subject to judicial review. In the P. Sambamurthy vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (1987) case, a provision in Article 371D which sought to exclude judicial review of the President's orders was struck down as violating the basic structure.
   • Therefore, while the Governor's exercise of individual judgment under the special power of Article 371A might be protected from direct challenge, any action taken under this power that is manifestly arbitrary, mala fide, or demonstrably violates other fundamental rights or a clearer aspect of the basic structure of the Constitution (e.g., by undermining democratic processes or rule of law beyond the scope intended by the special provision) could potentially open the door for judicial scrutiny. The courts would likely focus on the intent and consequences of the action rather than merely the exercise of the power itself, especially if it leads to an erosion of constitutional principles.

This concludes Part 01 of the comprehensive notes on Special Constitutional Provisions for Indian States. Part 02 will delve into Articles 371F to 371J.

Recommended Books

You can explore these highly recommended resources for a deeper understanding.

• Indian Polity (English) by M Laxmikanth for UPSC CSE 2025 | 7th edition (latest) | Civil Services Exam - Prelims, Mains and Interview | State PSCs exams/ PCS exams - by M Laxmikanth
• Oswaal NCERT One For All Book for UPSC & State PSCs | Indian Polity Classes 6-12 - by Oswaal Editorial Board
• Bharat Ki Rajvyavastha (भारत की राजव्यवस्था) - M Laxmikanth for UPSC CSE