Understanding Party System in India – Part 1: Structure, Evolution, and Democratic Challenges

The political party system is the lifeblood of any vibrant democracy, serving as the primary mechanism through which citizens' aspirations are articulated, aggregated, and translated into governance. In India, a nation renowned for its unparalleled diversity, the party system is a fascinating and complex tapestry, reflecting the country's social, cultural, linguistic, and regional pluralism. From a dominant single-party era to a dynamic multi-party landscape shaped by coalitions and evolving political realignments, understanding India's party system is crucial for comprehending its democratic journey.

This comprehensive exploration delves into the structure, challenges, and evolution of the party system in India, providing a foundational understanding for students, aspirants, and researchers of Indian Polity.

Understanding Party System in India: Structure, Challenges, and Evolution – (Part 01)

Introduction: The Bedrock of Indian Democracy

Political parties are voluntary associations or organizations of individuals who share common ideological beliefs, policy preferences, and a collective desire to attain and exercise political power through constitutional means. In a democratic framework, they play a crucial role in:

• Representation: Articulating and aggregating diverse societal interests.
• Mobilization: Educating citizens, encouraging political participation, and mobilizing voters during elections.
• Policy Formulation: Developing and advocating specific policies and programs through manifestos.
• Governance: Forming governments, implementing policies, and providing stable administration.
• Accountability: Holding the government accountable (opposition parties) and providing a check on power.

India, with its vast geographical expanse and incredible socio-cultural heterogeneity, naturally adopted a multi-party system. This system allows for the representation of numerous political beliefs, regional interests, and social concerns, offering voters a wide range of choices and fostering competition.

Constitutional and Legal Framework for Political Parties in India

Unlike many other democracies, the Constitution of India does not explicitly mention political parties or their functioning. The right to form political parties is implicitly derived from Article 19(1)(c), which guarantees the right to form associations or unions. However, their registration, recognition, and regulation are primarily governed by statutory laws and rules framed by the Election Commission of India (ECI).

A. The Representation of the People Act, 1951 (RPA, 1951)

The Representation of the People Act, 1951, is the cornerstone legislation governing the conduct of elections and the regulation of political parties in India.

• Section 29A of the RPA, 1951, mandates the registration of political parties with the Election Commission of India. Any association of Indian citizens intending to contest elections must apply to the ECI within 30 days of its formation. The application requires details such as the party's constitution, its allegiance to the Constitution of India, and its commitment to the principles of socialism, secularism, democracy, and national unity and integrity.
• The ECI, under its powers conferred by Article 324 of the Constitution, supervises, directs, and controls elections, which includes regulating political parties. The ECI issues the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968, which outlines the criteria for the recognition of political parties as 'National' or 'State' parties.

B. Recognition of Political Parties by the Election Commission of India (ECI)

Recognition by the ECI as a National or State party bestows several privileges, including:

• A reserved party symbol across India (for National parties) or within the state (for State parties).
• Free broadcast time on state-owned television and radio during elections.
• Access to electoral rolls.
• The ability to nominate a larger number of 'star campaigners' (40 for recognised parties vs. 20 for unrecognised parties).
• Eligibility for subsidized land for party offices.

Criteria for Recognition:

The ECI has laid down specific criteria for a political party to be recognised as a National or State party. A party must fulfill any one of the following conditions:

I. National Party Recognition Criteria:

1. Vote Share + Seats (Lok Sabha/Assembly): The party secures at least 6% of the total valid votes polled in any four or more states in a general election to the Lok Sabha or to the State Legislative Assemblies, AND in addition, it wins at least 4 Lok Sabha seats from any state(s).
2. Lok Sabha Seats: The party wins at least 2% of the total Lok Sabha seats (currently 11 seats in a House of 543) in a General Election, AND these seats are won from at least 3 different states.
3. State Party Status: The party is recognized as a 'State Party' in at least four states.

II. State Party Recognition Criteria:

1. Vote Share + Assembly Seats: The party secures at least 6% of the total valid votes polled in a General Election to the State Legislative Assembly of that state, AND it wins at least 2 seats in that State Assembly.
2. Vote Share + Lok Sabha Seat (from State): The party secures at least 6% of the total valid votes polled in a General Election to the Lok Sabha from that state, AND it wins at least 1 Lok Sabha seat from that state.
3. Assembly Seats: The party wins at least 3% of the total number of seats in the State Legislative Assembly, OR at least 3 seats, whichever is more.
4. Lok Sabha Seats (Proportional): The party wins at least 1 Lok Sabha seat for every 25 members (or any fraction thereof) allotted to that state in the Lok Sabha.
5. Higher Vote Threshold: The party secures at least 8% of the total valid votes polled in a General Election to the Legislative Assembly or the Lok Sabha from that state (this is a liberalized criterion added later).

Diagram: Paths to Party Recognition (Simplified)

graph TD
    A[Start: Registered Party] --> B{Contest Elections};
    B --> C{Meet National Party Criteria?};
    C -- Yes --> D[National Party Status];
    C -- No --> E{Meet State Party Criteria?};
    E -- Yes --> F[State Party Status (in relevant state)];
    E -- No --> G[Registered Unrecognized Party];

    subgraph National Party Criteria
        C1[6% votes in 4+ states + 4 Lok Sabha seats] -- OR --> C;
        C2[2% of Lok Sabha seats (11 seats) from 3+ states] -- OR --> C;
        C3[Recognized as State Party in 4+ states] -- OR --> C;
    end

    subgraph State Party Criteria
        E1[6% votes in State Assembly + 2 Assembly seats] -- OR --> E;
        E2[6% votes in Lok Sabha (from state) + 1 Lok Sabha seat (from state)] -- OR --> E;
        E3[3% of Assembly seats OR 3 seats (whichever is more)] -- OR --> E;
        E4[1 Lok Sabha seat for every 25 from state] -- OR --> E;
        E5[8% total valid votes in Assembly/Lok Sabha (from state)] -- OR --> E;
    end

Explanation of Diagram: This flowchart illustrates the main pathways for a registered political party to gain recognition as either a National or State Party by the Election Commission of India. A party first registers, then contests elections. Depending on its performance against the specified vote share and seat criteria, it can achieve National Party status (if meeting any of the three conditions for national recognition) or State Party status (if meeting any of the five conditions for state recognition). If it meets neither, it remains a 'Registered Unrecognized Party'.

C. The Anti-Defection Law (Tenth Schedule)

The Anti-Defection Law, enshrined in the Tenth Schedule of the Indian Constitution, was inserted by the 52nd Amendment Act of 1985. It was a response to the prevalent practice of "Aaya Ram Gaya Ram" (a phrase signifying frequent political defections), which led to significant political instability, particularly at the state level. The law was further strengthened by the 91st Amendment Act of 2003, which removed the provision for 'splits' within a party as a defense against defection.

Purpose: To prevent legislators from changing political affiliations (defections) for personal gain, office, or other extraneous considerations, and to ensure stable governments.

Grounds for Disqualification (under Tenth Schedule):

1. Voluntarily giving up membership: If an elected member of a political party voluntarily gives up their membership of such political party. The Supreme Court has interpreted "voluntarily giving up membership" broadly to include actions both inside and outside the legislature that indicate a separation from the party.
2. Voting/Abstaining against Party Whip: If an elected member votes or abstains from voting in the House contrary to any direction (whip) issued by their political party, without obtaining prior permission from the party. The legislator is disqualified unless such act is condoned by the party within 15 days.
3. Independent Members Joining a Party: If an independently elected member joins any political party after the election.
4. Nominated Members Joining a Party: If a nominated member joins any political party after the expiry of six months from the date on which they take their seat in the House.

Exceptions:

• Merger: If two-thirds or more members of a legislative party agree to merge with another political party, they are not disqualified.
• Presiding Officer: The Speaker/Chairman of a House is exempt if they resign from their party after being elected to the post.

Adjudicating Authority: The Speaker (Lok Sabha/Assembly) or Chairman (Rajya Sabha/Legislative Council) is the final authority to decide on questions of disqualification under the Anti-Defection Law.

Landmark Judgment - Kihoto Hollohon vs. Zachillhu & Others (1992): The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the Tenth Schedule but declared paragraph 7 (which barred judicial review of the Speaker's decision) as unconstitutional. This means the Speaker's decision is subject to judicial review, though the scope of review is limited to procedural impropriety or perversity, not the merits of the decision itself, until the Speaker has taken a decision.

Challenges and Criticisms of the Anti-Defection Law:

• Curbs internal dissent: The law effectively stifles the voice and conscience of individual legislators, making them primarily accountable to their party leadership rather than their constituents.
• Speaker's partisan role: The Speaker, who is often a member of the ruling party, sometimes delays or acts in a partisan manner in deciding defection cases.
• Promotes 'Horse-Trading': While aimed at curbing defections, it has, at times, led to more sophisticated forms of 'horse-trading' and manipulation, especially through the provision of large-scale mergers.
• Undermines representative democracy: It breaks the chain of accountability by making legislators subservient to the party whip, even on non-confidence motions, thus limiting their ability to vote according to their judgment or constituents' interests.

Evolution of the Party System in India

The Indian party system has undergone significant transformations since independence, evolving through distinct phases reflecting changes in political dynamics, societal needs, and electoral outcomes.

Timeline: Evolution of Indian Party System

timeline
    title Evolution of Indian Party System
    section Early Years (Post-Independence)
        1947: Independence of India
        1952-1967: 'Congress System' / One-Party Dominance (Nehruvian Era)
    section Transition & Decline
        1967: Congress loses majority in several states (beginning of decline)
        1975-1977: Emergency Period
        1977: First Non-Congress Government (Janata Party Coalition)
    section Coalition Era
        1980: Return of Congress (brief resurgence)
        1989-1996: National Front Government & Instability
        1996-2014: Era of Multi-Party Coalitions (United Front, NDA, UPA)
    section Modern Era
        2014-Present: BJP Dominance (Resurgence of single-party majority at Centre, but coalitions at state level continue)

Explanation of Timeline: This timeline visually charts the key phases in the evolution of India's party system, from the initial dominance of the Indian National Congress to the rise of coalition politics and the more recent era of BJP dominance. It highlights significant years marking shifts in political landscapes.

Phase 1: The 'Congress System' / One-Party Dominance (1952-1967/1977)

Political scientist Rajni Kothari famously termed the period from India's first general election in 1952 until the mid-1960s/early 1970s as the 'Congress System' or 'One-Party Dominance System'.

• Dominance: The Indian National Congress, having spearheaded the independence movement, enjoyed overwhelming dominance at both the national and state levels, securing massive majorities in the first three general elections (1952, 1957, 1962).
• Nature of Congress: The Congress was not a monolithic party but an "ideological and social coalition" or an "umbrella party." It encompassed diverse groups, ideologies (from revolutionary to pacifist, conservative to radical, left to right), and interests, effectively internalizing political competition within its own structure through various 'factions'. This allowed it to act both as the ruling party and, in a sense, as the opposition.
• Weak Opposition: While other parties existed, they were fragmented, ideologically diverse, and lacked a broad national base, primarily acting as pressure groups.

Phase 2: Decline of Congress Dominance and Emergence of Multi-Party System (Post-1967 to 1989)

The 1967 general elections marked a significant turning point, often considered the beginning of the decline of the 'Congress System'.

• Congress Weakens: For the first time, the Congress lost its majority in several states, and its majority at the Centre was significantly reduced. This was attributed to internal splits (e.g., 1969, 1977), the rise of regional parties, and growing public discontent.
• First Coalition Experiment (1977): The Emergency (1975-77) period intensified public opposition. In 1977, for the first time, a non-Congress government, the Janata Party, a coalition of various opposition parties, came to power at the Centre. Although short-lived due to internal conflicts, it marked the initial experience with coalition politics at the national level.
• Resurgence and further decline: The Congress briefly regained power in 1980 under Indira Gandhi but continued to face challenges, with regional parties gaining more influence in states. The 1989 elections saw the Congress losing its majority, signaling the definitive end of the 'Congress System'.

Phase 3: The Era of Coalition Politics (1989-2014)

The post-1989 period, particularly the 1990s, is characterized as the era of coalition politics in India.

• No Clear Majority: No single party was consistently able to secure an absolute majority in Lok Sabha elections. This necessitated the formation of governments by alliances of multiple parties.
• Rise of Regional Parties: This era saw a significant rise in the number and influence of regional parties. They became crucial players in national politics, often holding the balance of power in coalition governments.
• Major Coalitions: Prominent national-level coalitions included:
  • National Front (1989-91): Led by V.P. Singh, supported by BJP and Left Front.
  • United Front (1996-98): An alliance of several regional parties, supported by Congress.
  • National Democratic Alliance (NDA) (1998-2004, 2014-Present): Led by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The NDA formed the first non-Congress government to complete a full five-year term (1999-2004).
  • United Progressive Alliance (UPA) (2004-2014): Led by the Indian National Congress, formed after no single party gained a majority in 2004.
• Impact: Coalition politics fostered a more federalized political landscape, empowering regional aspirations and leading to greater power-sharing between national and regional parties. However, it also brought challenges of instability and policy paralysis due to internal tensions and compromises.

Phase 4: Resurgence of One-Party Dominance / Bipolarity (Post-2014)

The 2014 and 2019 general elections marked a significant shift, often referred to as the 'Fourth Party System' or a return to a form of single-party dominance, this time by the BJP.

• BJP's Absolute Majority: In 2014, the BJP secured an absolute majority on its own (282 seats), leading the NDA to a historic mandate. This was repeated in 2019 (303 seats for BJP). This marked a departure from the persistent coalition governments at the Centre seen since 1989.
• Continued Coalitions at State Level: Despite the strong majority at the Centre, coalition-building and the influence of regional parties remain crucial at the state level.
• Bipolarity at National Level: The national political arena has largely become bipolar, primarily featuring the BJP and the Indian National Congress (now leading the INDIA alliance formed in 2023).

Structure of the Indian Party System

India's party system is characterized by its multi-party nature, stemming from its immense diversity.

Organogram: General Party Hierarchy (Conceptual)

graph TD
    A[National Leadership] --> B[Central Working Committee/National Executive];
    B --> C[State Units (Pradesh Committees)];
    C --> D[District Units (Zila Committees)];
    D --> E[Block/Mandal Units];
    E --> F[Booth-level Committees/Grassroots Cadre];

Explanation of Organogram: This diagram presents a simplified, generalized hierarchy common to many political parties in India. It typically shows a top-down structure, with national leadership overseeing central decision-making bodies, which then cascade down to state, district, block, and booth-level units for organization and mobilization.

Types of Political Parties in India:

1. National Parties: These parties have a significant presence and influence across multiple states and contest elections for both the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies nationwide. As of recent data, there are 6 national parties in India.
   • Examples (as of early 2024): Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), Indian National Congress (INC), Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI(M)), Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), National People's Party (NPP).
2. State/Regional Parties: These parties primarily operate within a specific state or region, focusing on state-specific issues and representing regional interests or identities. While their influence is concentrated regionally, they often play a critical role in coalition governments at the Centre.
   • Examples: Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK), Trinamool Congress (TMC), Samajwadi Party (SP), Biju Janata Dal (BJD), Janata Dal (United) (JD(U)), Shiv Sena (various factions), Telugu Desam Party (TDP).
3. Registered Unrecognized Parties: These are parties that are registered with the ECI but have not fulfilled the criteria for recognition as National or State parties. They cannot avail the privileges of recognised parties. In 2019, there were over 2,354 such parties.

Comparison Table: National vs. State Parties

Challenges of the Indian Party System

Despite its vital role in sustaining Indian democracy, the party system faces several significant challenges:

1. Lack of Internal Democracy: Many political parties in India suffer from a lack of internal democracy. Decisions are often centralized, with power concentrated in the hands of a few top leaders or a 'high command'. Regular organizational elections are often not held, or if held, they are not genuinely competitive. This leads to:

   • Dynastic Politics: Leadership positions often become hereditary, with power passed down within families, stifling meritocracy and grassroots leadership. Parties like the INC, Shiv Sena, and Samajwadi Party have been cited as examples.
   • Limited Accountability: Lack of internal checks and balances makes parties less accountable to their own members and the wider public.
   • Opaque Candidate Selection: Candidate selection for elections is often opaque, leading to the nomination of individuals with questionable backgrounds or based on personal loyalties rather than merit.

2. Money Power and Opaque Funding: The high cost of elections in India often leads to the excessive influence of money.

   • Lack of Transparency in Funding: A significant portion of political party funding comes from unknown sources. Parties receive 100% tax exemption on their income under Section 13A of the Income Tax Act. This opacity raises concerns about corruption and quid pro quo arrangements with donors.
   • Electoral Bonds: While introduced to bring transparency, electoral bonds have also faced criticism for potentially benefiting ruling parties disproportionately and maintaining anonymity of donors from the public.

3. Criminalization of Politics: The increasing nexus between politics and crime is a grave concern.

   • Candidates with Criminal Records: A significant number of elected representatives at both national and state levels have declared criminal cases against them, including serious charges. This erodes public trust and compromises legislative integrity.
   • Vote Bank Politics: Parties sometimes nominate candidates with criminal backgrounds for their "winnability," often relying on their ability to intimidate voters or leverage local muscle power.

4. Defections and Political Instability: Despite the Anti-Defection Law, political defections, driven by the lure of office or other benefits, continue to destabilize governments, especially at the state level. The law's provisions, particularly the Speaker's discretion, have been criticized for their potential for partisan misuse.

5. Identity Politics (Caste, Religion, Regionalism): While India's diversity naturally leads to parties representing various identities, the excessive use of caste, religion, and regionalism for electoral mobilization can lead to:

   • Polarization and Divisiveness: Promoting identity-based politics can exacerbate social divisions and communal tensions, often at the expense of broader national issues.
   • Clientelism: Focus on securing votes from specific community blocs rather than promoting universal policies or good governance.

6. Ideological Vagueness and Opportunistic Alliances: Except for a few parties (like the BJP or the Communist parties), many Indian political parties lack a clear-cut ideology. Their policies and programs often closely resemble each other.

   • Power Capture: This ideological fluidity often leads to opportunistic alliances and frequent shifts in allegiance, where the primary objective becomes power capture rather than adherence to principles.
   • Coalition Instability: Ideological differences within coalitions can lead to internal tensions and unstable governments, hindering effective policy implementation.

7. Excessive Centralization and High Command Culture: Many parties, especially national ones, exhibit a strong "high command" culture where decisions are dictated by a central leadership, limiting the autonomy and initiative of state and local units. This often leads to factionalism and splits.

8. Populist Tendencies: Many parties resort to populist promises and short-term electoral gains rather than focusing on long-term sustainable development and structural reforms. This can strain public finances and hinder genuine progress.

9. Lack of Accountability to RTI: Political parties have largely resisted being brought under the ambit of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, despite a Central Information Commission (CIC) ruling in 2013 that declared six national parties as public authorities under the Act. This resistance undermines transparency and public trust.

Constitutional Article Map: Party System in India

This map illustrates how various Articles and Schedules of the Indian Constitution, directly or indirectly, influence or interact with the political party system.

graph TD
    A[Constitution of India]

    subgraph Fundamental Rights
        A -- Article 19(1)(c) --> B[Right to form Associations/Unions (Basis for Political Parties)];
    end

    subgraph Election Commission
        A -- Article 324 --> C[Election Commission of India (ECI)];
        C -- Powers --> D[Superintendence, Direction & Control of Elections];
        D -- Regulates Parties via RPA, 1951 --> E[Registration & Recognition of Political Parties (Section 29A, RPA, 1951)];
        E -- Recognition Criteria --> F[National & State Party Status];
    end

    subgraph Disqualification of MPs/MLAs
        A -- Articles 102(2) & 191(2) --> G[Disqualification Provisions];
        G -- Read with --> H[Tenth Schedule (Anti-Defection Law)];
        H -- 52nd Amendment (1985) --> I[Prevents Defections];
        H -- 91st Amendment (2003) --> J[Removes Split Clause (Strengthens Anti-Defection)];
    end

    subgraph Impact
        B & E & F & I --> K[Structure & Functioning of Indian Party System];
    end

    style C fill:#f9f,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px
    style H fill:#bbf,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px

Explanation of Constitutional Article Map: This visual map highlights the constitutional foundations and statutory provisions that underpin the Indian political party system. It shows how the fundamental right to association (Article 19(1)(c)) forms the basis, while the Election Commission's mandate (Article 324) and the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (especially Section 29A), govern party registration and recognition. Crucially, Articles 102(2) and 191(2), combined with the Tenth Schedule (Anti-Defection Law), are pivotal in regulating the conduct of elected members within the party system.

Interactive Q&A / Practice Exercises

I. Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs)

1. Which of the following constitutional articles forms the implicit basis for the formation of political parties in India? a) Article 14 b) Article 21 c) Article 19(1)(c) d) Article 324

Explanation:

• Correct Answer: c) Article 19(1)(c). This article guarantees the fundamental right to form associations or unions, which is the implicit constitutional basis for the formation of political parties.
• a) Article 14 relates to equality before the law.
• b) Article 21 protects the right to life and personal liberty.
• d) Article 324 deals with the powers of the Election Commission of India.

2. The Anti-Defection Law was incorporated into the Indian Constitution through which amendment? a) 42nd Amendment Act b) 52nd Amendment Act c) 61st Amendment Act d) 73rd Amendment Act

Explanation:

• Correct Answer: b) 52nd Amendment Act. The 52nd Amendment Act of 1985 added the Tenth Schedule to the Constitution, which contains the provisions of the Anti-Defection Law.
• a) 42nd Amendment Act (1976) is known as the 'Mini-Constitution'.
• c) 61st Amendment Act (1989) reduced the voting age from 21 to 18 years.
• d) 73rd Amendment Act (1992) introduced Panchayati Raj Institutions.

3. Which of the following conditions is NOT a criterion for a political party to be recognized as a 'National Party' by the Election Commission of India? a) It wins at least 2% of the total Lok Sabha seats from at least 3 different states. b) It secures at least 6% of the total valid votes polled in 4 or more states in a General Election to the Lok Sabha or State Legislative Assemblies, AND it wins at least 4 Lok Sabha seats. c) It wins at least 3% of the total seats in the State Legislative Assembly, or at least 3 seats, whichever is more, in any four states. d) It is recognized as a 'State Party' in at least four states.

Explanation:

• Correct Answer: c) It wins at least 3% of the total seats in the State Legislative Assembly, or at least 3 seats, whichever is more, in any four states. This is a criterion for State Party recognition (specifically criterion 3 for state parties), not National Party recognition.
• a), b), and d) are all valid criteria for National Party recognition.

4. The 'Congress System' in Indian politics, characterized by one-party dominance, is a concept primarily associated with which political scientist? a) Myron Weiner b) Granville Austin c) Rajni Kothari d) Paul Brass

Explanation:

• Correct Answer: c) Rajni Kothari. Rajni Kothari is widely credited with coining and elaborating the concept of the 'Congress System' to describe the period of one-party dominance by the Indian National Congress in the initial decades after independence.

5. Which of the following is the final adjudicating authority in case of disqualification of a member of the Lok Sabha under the Anti-Defection Law? a) The President of India b) The Supreme Court of India c) The Speaker of the Lok Sabha d) The Election Commission of India

Explanation:

• Correct Answer: c) The Speaker of the Lok Sabha. Under the Tenth Schedule, the Chairman or the Speaker of the respective legislative house is the ultimate decision-making authority in defection cases. Their decision is subject to judicial review, but they are the initial adjudicating authority.

II. Scenario-Based Question

Scenario: During a crucial no-confidence motion against the government in the Lok Sabha, an elected Member of Parliament (MP) from Party 'X' decides to vote against the directive (whip) issued by their party. The MP states their vote was based on their conscience and the interests of their constituency, which differed from the party line.

Questions:

1. What immediate action can Party 'X' take against this MP under the Anti-Defection Law?
2. Who will be the authority to decide on the MP's disqualification, and what is the extent of judicial review over this decision?
3. Discuss the tension between the Anti-Defection Law and the concept of a legislator's 'conscience vote' in parliamentary democracy.

Detailed Explanation:

1. Immediate action by Party 'X': Under the Anti-Defection Law (Tenth Schedule), if an elected member votes or abstains from voting in the House contrary to any direction (whip) issued by their political party, they are liable for disqualification. Party 'X' can initiate disqualification proceedings against the MP. The MP would be disqualified unless the party condones their action within 15 days of such voting or abstention.
2. Authority to decide disqualification and judicial review: The Speaker of the Lok Sabha is the final adjudicating authority on questions of disqualification under the Anti-Defection Law. However, the Supreme Court, in the landmark Kihoto Hollohon vs. Zachillhu (1992) judgment, ruled that the Speaker's decision is subject to judicial review. This review is generally limited to procedural irregularities, mala fide intentions, or perversity in the Speaker's decision, and courts usually do not intervene on the merits of the decision itself until the Speaker has passed an order.
3. Tension between Anti-Defection Law and 'Conscience Vote': This scenario highlights a significant tension within India's parliamentary democracy.
   • Anti-Defection Law's intent: The law aims to ensure stable governments by preventing opportunistic defections and maintaining party discipline. It makes legislators primarily accountable to their party, as they are elected on the party's symbol and manifesto.
   • Concept of 'Conscience Vote': In a parliamentary democracy, a legislator is expected to represent their constituents and, at times, vote according to their conscience, even if it differs from the party line. This promotes deliberation, dissent, and strengthens the legislature's oversight function over the executive.
   • The Conflict: The strict provisions of the Anti-Defection Law, especially the mandatory whip for crucial votes like no-confidence motions, effectively stifle the freedom of an individual legislator to vote according to their conscience or their constituents' best interests if it conflicts with the party's directive. This makes legislators accountable primarily to their party leadership rather than the electorate, potentially undermining representative democracy and hindering internal dissent within parties. This has been a long-standing criticism of the law.

III. Match the Following

Match the following political scientists with the concepts or observations related to the Indian party system:

Answer with Explanations:

• 1. Rajni Kothari - A. The 'Congress System': Rajni Kothari is famous for his analysis of India's early post-independence political landscape as the 'Congress System', signifying the overwhelming dominance of the Indian National Congress.
• 2. Morris-Jones - B. Coexistence with competition but without a trace of alternative: Morris-Jones also described the early phase of Indian politics in similar terms, highlighting the presence of other parties but the lack of a credible alternative to the Congress.
• 3. Myron Weiner - C. India has many party systems reflecting varied social divisions: Myron Weiner's work highlighted the diverse nature of Indian society, leading to the existence of multiple party systems reflecting these varied social divisions at regional levels, even while a national party system existed.

This detailed analysis of the Indian party system provides a comprehensive overview of its structural elements, the legal framework governing it, its historical evolution, and the inherent challenges it faces. Understanding these facets is critical for anyone seeking to grasp the intricacies of India's democratic functioning and its constantly evolving political landscape.

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