Article 4 of the Indian Constitution
The Constitution of India is the supreme law of the land. It lays down the framework of governance, distribution of powers, and the rights of citizens. One of the unique aspects of the Indian Constitution is that it provides detailed provisions for the reorganization of states and changes to the territorial boundaries of the country. These provisions are included in Part I of the Constitution, which deals with the Union and its territory. Within this part, Article 4 plays an important role.
Article 4 is connected to Articles 2 and 3 of the Constitution, which deal with the admission, establishment, and formation of new states and the alteration of areas, boundaries, or names of existing states. Article 4 ensures that when Parliament exercises its power under Articles 2 and 3, it can make supplemental, incidental, and consequential provisions necessary to implement such laws. This Article also clarifies that laws made under Articles 2 and 3 will not be considered constitutional amendments, even though they may involve changes in the First Schedule or the Fourth Schedule of the Constitution.
The framers of the Constitution included Article 4 to maintain flexibility in managing the vast and diverse territory of India. Since independence, India has gone through multiple reorganizations of states and changes in boundaries, and Article 4 has made this process smoother by reducing the procedural complexities. In this blog, we will examine Article 4 in detail, its meaning, scope, historical background, judicial interpretations, and its importance in the functioning of Indian democracy.
Text of Article 4
The actual wording of Article 4 is very significant. It reads:
-
Any law referred to in Article 2 or Article 3 shall contain such provisions for the amendment of the First Schedule and the Fourth Schedule as may be necessary to give effect to the provisions of the law, and may also contain such supplemental, incidental, and consequential provisions as Parliament may deem necessary.
-
No such law as mentioned in Article 2 or Article 3 shall be deemed to be an amendment of this Constitution for the purposes of Article 368.
From this, it is clear that Article 4 has two major components. First, it allows Parliament to make changes in the First Schedule, which contains the list of states and union territories, and the Fourth Schedule, which allocates seats in the Rajya Sabha to states, whenever it passes a law under Articles 2 or 3. Second, it ensures that such changes are not considered constitutional amendments, which require a special procedure under Article 368. This means that Parliament has wide powers to reorganize states through a simple legislative process.
Connection with Articles 2 and 3
Article 2 gives Parliament the power to admit new states into the Union of India or to establish new states. This provision was designed keeping in mind that India could expand in the future by integrating territories. For example, when Sikkim was admitted into India in 1975, Article 2 was used.
Article 3 deals with the power of Parliament to form new states or alter the boundaries, names, or areas of existing states. This is the Article that has been used most frequently in the history of independent India, especially during the linguistic reorganization of states in 1956 and the creation of states like Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Telangana, and Uttarakhand.
Article 4 acts as a supplement to these two Articles. It clarifies that whenever laws are made under Articles 2 or 3, Parliament can also amend the First and Fourth Schedules to reflect the changes. For example, if a new state is formed, it must be added to the First Schedule and the number of seats allocated to it in the Rajya Sabha must be included in the Fourth Schedule. Article 4 ensures that this can be done within the same law without requiring a separate constitutional amendment.
Purpose and Objective of Article 4
The primary objective of Article 4 is to make the process of admitting new states or altering the boundaries of existing ones flexible and practical. If every such change required a formal constitutional amendment under Article 368, the process would have been highly complex and time-consuming. It would have involved a special majority in Parliament and, in some cases, ratification by half of the state legislatures. Considering the dynamic nature of India’s political and territorial realities, the framers of the Constitution wanted a simpler mechanism.
Article 4 therefore provides an in-built mechanism for Parliament to make consequential changes in the First and Fourth Schedules while passing a law under Articles 2 or 3. This ensures that the Constitution remains up to date with the actual political map of India without going through unnecessary formalities. It also preserves the supremacy of Parliament in matters of territorial organization of the Union.
Historical Background of Article 4
The idea of flexibility in altering state boundaries and admitting new states was present even during the debates of the Constituent Assembly. India, at the time of independence, was a newly unified country with more than 500 princely states, provinces under British rule, and regions with complex political arrangements. The framers knew that the territorial map of India would not remain static. Demands for linguistic states, cultural autonomy, and administrative convenience were already emerging.
In the Constituent Assembly debates, members emphasized that Parliament should have wide powers to manage these demands without being tied down by rigid constitutional procedures. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, Chairman of the Drafting Committee, clarified that provisions relating to the formation of new states or alteration of boundaries were purely legislative functions and did not require the same procedure as constitutional amendments. Article 4 was thus introduced to distinguish between ordinary territorial adjustments and major constitutional changes.
This foresight proved correct, as soon after independence, India witnessed strong movements for the reorganization of states on linguistic lines. The States Reorganisation Act of 1956 was one of the first major legislations passed under Articles 3 and 4, which drastically changed the boundaries of several states and created new ones. Since then, Article 4 has been used multiple times to reorganize the Union of India.
First Schedule and Article 4
The First Schedule of the Constitution contains the names of all states and union territories and their territorial extent. Whenever a new state is formed or boundaries of existing states are altered, the First Schedule must be updated. Article 4 empowers Parliament to make these amendments directly through the law passed under Articles 2 or 3. For example, when the state of Telangana was created in 2014 by separating it from Andhra Pradesh, the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act automatically amended the First Schedule to insert Telangana as a new state. Similarly, when Jammu and Kashmir was reorganized into two union territories in 2019, the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act amended the First Schedule accordingly.
Without Article 4, each such change would have required a constitutional amendment, which would have been cumbersome and politically challenging.
Fourth Schedule and Article 4
The Fourth Schedule of the Constitution deals with the allocation of seats in the Rajya Sabha, or the Council of States, to different states and union territories. Whenever a new state is admitted or an existing state is altered, the distribution of seats in the Rajya Sabha may also change. Article 4 ensures that such amendments can be made directly in the law passed under Articles 2 or 3.
For example, when Chhattisgarh was created from Madhya Pradesh in 2000, the Madhya Pradesh Reorganisation Act provided for the allocation of Rajya Sabha seats to Chhattisgarh, and the Fourth Schedule was amended accordingly. This shows the practical importance of Article 4 in maintaining the smooth functioning of the federal structure.
Supplemental, Incidental, and Consequential Provisions
Article 4 also gives Parliament the authority to include supplemental, incidental, and consequential provisions in any law passed under Articles 2 or 3. This is important because the creation of a new state or alteration of boundaries often involves several administrative and legal consequences. Parliament may need to decide issues like the distribution of assets and liabilities, the jurisdiction of courts, representation in Parliament and state legislatures, the allocation of employees, and continuation of existing laws.
By including such powers in Article 4, the Constitution ensures that Parliament can deal with all these matters comprehensively within the same law. This avoids the need for multiple legislations or amendments and makes the process of reorganization efficient.
Why Laws under Article 4 are Not Constitutional Amendments
One of the most significant features of Article 4 is that it declares that any law made under Articles 2 or 3 shall not be deemed to be a constitutional amendment, even though it may involve changes in the First or Fourth Schedules. This provision was inserted to simplify the process. Constitutional amendments under Article 368 require a special majority in both Houses of Parliament and, in certain cases, ratification by half of the states. If every territorial adjustment required such a procedure, it would have made the reorganization of states extremely difficult.
Therefore, Article 4 treats these changes as legislative rather than constitutional. This does not mean that the Constitution is being undermined. Instead, it reflects the principle that the Union Parliament has supreme authority over the territorial organization of India. This provision has been upheld by the judiciary, which has consistently ruled that laws under Articles 2, 3, and 4 are not constitutional amendments.
Judicial Interpretation of Article 4
The judiciary has played a key role in interpreting Article 4 and affirming the wide powers of Parliament. Courts have repeatedly held that the creation of new states or alteration of boundaries is a legislative function and not subject to the rigid amendment procedure.
In various cases, the Supreme Court has clarified that Parliament is competent to include incidental provisions relating to representation, administration, and jurisdiction when passing a law under Articles 2 or 3. For example, during challenges to the States Reorganisation Act, the courts upheld the authority of Parliament under Article 4 to amend the First and Fourth Schedules without following Article 368.
Judicial interpretation has also stressed that Article 4 cannot be misused to make changes that are unrelated to territorial adjustments. In other words, Parliament cannot use Article 4 to bypass the amendment procedure for subjects that require Article 368. Its application is limited to matters arising out of Articles 2 and 3.
Use of Article 4 in State Reorganization
India has seen several major and minor reorganizations of states since independence. Each of these reorganizations relied on Article 4 for consequential amendments. The States Reorganisation Act, 1956 was the most significant, as it reorganized Indian states largely on linguistic lines. Article 4 allowed Parliament to update the First Schedule with new states like Kerala, Karnataka, and Andhra Pradesh without passing a separate constitutional amendment.
Later, the creation of states like Haryana (1966), Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Uttarakhand (2000), and Telangana (2014) all involved the use of Article 4. In each case, Parliament passed reorganization laws under Article 3, and Article 4 enabled automatic amendments to the First and Fourth Schedules. Similarly, the reorganization of Jammu and Kashmir in 2019 into two union territories was also done using Article 4.
These examples show how Article 4 has been an essential tool in keeping the Constitution aligned with the changing political and territorial realities of India.
Importance of Article 4 in Indian Federalism
India is described as a union of states, and Article 4 reinforces this concept by giving Parliament the authority to shape and reshape state boundaries as necessary. Unlike many federal constitutions, such as that of the United States, where states have significant autonomy and cannot easily be reorganized, the Indian Constitution makes the Union Parliament the ultimate authority in matters of territory. Article 4 strengthens the unity and integrity of India by ensuring that the Union has the final say in admitting new states or altering boundaries.
At the same time, Article 4 balances federal principles by requiring that any bill under Article 3 be referred to the state legislature concerned for its views. However, Parliament is not bound by the opinion of the state legislature. This shows that the Constitution prioritizes national unity while still giving states an opportunity to express their views.
Thus, Article 4 plays a vital role in maintaining the flexibility of Indian federalism, allowing adjustments to be made peacefully and legally as political, cultural, or administrative needs evolve.
Criticism and Concerns about Article 4
Despite its usefulness, Article 4 has also attracted criticism. Some argue that giving Parliament such sweeping powers undermines the federal spirit of the Constitution. Since state legislatures’ opinions are not binding, states may feel sidelined in decisions affecting their territory and identity. For example, the creation of Telangana in 2014 was strongly opposed by a section of people in Andhra Pradesh, but Parliament proceeded with the reorganization using its powers under Articles 3 and 4.
Another concern is that Article 4 has been used to centralize power, with little regard for local sentiments. The reorganization of Jammu and Kashmir in 2019 into two union territories was criticized by some as an example of Parliament exercising its powers without adequate consultation. Critics argue that this undermines the spirit of cooperative federalism.
However, supporters of Article 4 argue that such flexibility is necessary to maintain the unity and integrity of India. Without it, demands for new states or boundary adjustments could lead to prolonged political conflicts or even violence.
Relevance of Article 4 Today
Even today, Article 4 remains highly relevant. Demands for new states continue to arise in India, whether based on linguistic identity, cultural differences, or administrative convenience. Movements for states like Gorkhaland, Vidarbha, or Bodoland are examples. If Parliament decides to address these demands, Article 4 will once again play a crucial role in implementing the necessary changes smoothly.
The Article also ensures that India’s Constitution remains a living document, capable of adapting to new realities without becoming overly rigid. In a country as diverse and dynamic as India, this flexibility is essential. Article 4 ensures that the Constitution remains practical, effective, and responsive to the needs of the people.
Conclusion
Article 4 of the Indian Constitution is one of those provisions that often remain unnoticed by the general public but carry immense importance in the governance of the country. It provides Parliament with the power to make supplemental, incidental, and consequential provisions when admitting new states or altering boundaries under Articles 2 and 3. It also allows automatic amendments to the First and Fourth Schedules without going through the complex procedure of Article 368.
Over the years, Article 4 has played a key role in the reorganization of Indian states and has ensured that the Constitution remains aligned with the changing map of the country. From the linguistic reorganization in 1956 to the creation of new states in the 2000s and the recent changes in Jammu and Kashmir, Article 4 has been indispensable.
While it has faced criticism for centralizing power in Parliament, it remains a cornerstone of India’s flexible federal system. It allows India to evolve peacefully and legally in response to the aspirations of its people. In essence, Article 4 is not just a technical provision but a reflection of the adaptability, unity, and resilience of the Indian Constitution.
COMMENTS