Constitution: Meaning, Types and Importance of Constitution

Constitution is the supreme law of each State. It lays down rules regarding the
organisation, powers and functions of government. It also defines the basic features
of the State and the relation between the citizens and the State.
Constitution: Meaning and Definition:
In simple words, we can say a Constitution is the constitutional law of the state.
Constitutional law enjoys the position of being the supreme and fundamental law of
the state. It lays down the organisation and functions of the government of state. The
Government can use only those powers which the Constitution grants to it.

1. “Constitution is the collection of principles according to which the powers of the

government, the rights of the governed and the relations between the two are
adjusted. -Woolsey
2. “Constitution is a body of judicial rules which determine the supreme organs of
state, prescribes their modes of creation, their mutual relations, their spheres of
action and the fundamental place of each of them in relation to state.” -Jellinek
3. ” Constitution of a state is that body of rules or laws, written or unwritten which
determine the organisation of government, the distribution of powers to the various
organs of government and the general principles on which these powers are to be
exercised.” -Gilchrist
On the basis of these definitions it can be said that the Constitution is the sum total
of the constitutional laws of the state.

It lies down:
(1) Organisation and powers of the government;
(2) Principles and rules governing the political process;
(3) Relations between the people and their government; and
(4) Rights and duties of the people.
The government of state gets organised and works in accordance with the provisions
of the Constitution. People get their rights protected from the constitution. No one,
not even the government, can violate the Constitution.
Types of Constitution:
1. Written Constitution:
A written constitution means a constitution written in the form of a book or a series of
documents combined in the form of a book. It is a consciously framed and enacted
constitution. It is formulated and adopted by a constituent assembly or a council or a
legislature.
1.Written constitution- A written constitution is a consciously planned constitution,
formulated and adopted by deliberate actions of a constituent assembly or a
convention. It provides for a definite design of government institutions, their
organisations, powers, functions and inter-relationships.
It embodies the constitutional law of the state. It enjoys the place of supremacy. The
government is fully bound by its provisions and works strictly in accordance with its
provisions. A written constitution can be amended only in accordance with a settled
process of amendment written in the constitution itself. It is a duly passed and
enacted Constitution. The Constitutions of India, the USA, Germany, Japan, Canada,
France, Switzerland and several other states, are written constitutions.
2. Unwritten Constitution:
An unwritten constitution is one which is neither drafted nor enacted by a Constituent
Assembly and nor even written in the form of a book. It is found in several historical
charters, laws and conventions. It is a product of slow and gradual evolution. The
government is organised and it functions in accordance with several well settled, but
not wholly written rules and conventions. The people know their Constitution. They
accept and obey it, but do not possess it in a written form. An unwritten constitution
cannot be produced in the form of a book.
However, an unwritten constitution is not totally unwritten. Some of its parts are
available in written forms but these do not stand codified in the form of a legal
document or a code or a book. According to Garner, “an unwritten constitution is one
in which most and not all, rules are unwritten and these are not found in any one
charter or document.”
The Constitution of the United Kingdom is an unwritten constitution.
Difference between Written and Unwritten Constitutions:
(1) A written constitution is written in the form of a book or document, whereas an
unwritten constitution is not written in such a form.
(2) A written constitution is a made and enacted by a constituent assembly of the
people. An unwritten constitution is the result of a gradual process of constitutional
evolution. It is never written by any assembly.
(3) A written constitution is usually less flexible than an unwritten constitution. An
unwritten constitution depends mostly on unwritten rules or conventions which do not
require any formal amendment.
(4) A written constitution is definite. Its provisions can be quoted in support or against
any power exercised by the government. An unwritten constitution cannot be
produced in evidence. It has to be proved by quoting its sources and practices.
However, the difference between written and unwritten constitutions is not organic. A
written constitution has written parts in majority. Along with these, it also has some
unwritten parts in the form of conventions. In an unwritten constitution, most of the
parts are unwritten and are not written in the form of a book. However some of its
parts are also found written in some charters and other documents.
3. Flexible Constitution:
A Flexible Constitution is one which can be easily amended. Several political
scientists advocate the view that a flexible constitution is one in which the
constitutional law can be amended in the same way as an ordinary law.
Constitutional amendments are passed in the same manner by which an ordinary
law is passed.
British Constitution presents a classic example of a most flexible constitution. The
British Parliament is a sovereign parliament which can make or amend any law or
constitutional law by a simple majority. Laws aiming to affect changes in a
constitutional law or in any ordinary law are passed through the same legislative
procedure i.e., by a simple majority of votes in the legislature. Similarly, a
Constitution is flexible when the procedure of amending it is simple and the changes
can be made easily.
(A) Merits of a Flexible Constitution:
(i) First, a major merit of the flexible constitution is its ability to change easily in
accordance with the changes in the social and political environment of the society
and state.
(ii) Secondly, it is very helpful in meeting emergencies because it can be easily
amended.
(iii) Thirdly, because of its dynamic nature, there are less opportunities for revolt. The
constitution has the ability to keep pace with the changing times. The people do not
feel the need for revolutionary changes.
(iv) Finally, since the flexible constitution keeps on developing with times, it always
continues to be popular and remains up-to-date.
(B) Demerits of a Flexible Constitution:
(i) First, a flexible constitution is often, a source of instability. Flexibility enables the
government in power to give it a desired dress and content.
(ii) Secondly, it is not suitable for a federation. In a federation, a flexible constitution
can lead to undesirable changes in the constitution by the federal government or by
the governments of federating units.
4. Rigid Constitution:
The Rigid Constitution is one which cannot be easily amended. Its method of
amendment is difficult. For amending it, the legislature has to pass an amendment
bill by a specific, usually big, majority of 2/3rd or 3/4th. For passing or amending an
ordinary law, the legislature usually passes the law by a simple majority of its
members.
A rigid constitution is considered to be the most fundamental law of the land. It is
regarded as the basic will of the sovereign people. That is why it can be amended
only by a special procedure requiring the passing of the amendment proposal by a
big majority of votes which is often followed by ratification by the people in a
referendum.
The Constitution of United States of America is a very rigid constitution.
(A) Merits of a Rigid Constitution:
(i) First, a rigid constitution is a source of stability in administration.
(ii) Secondly, it maintains continuity in administration.
(iii) Thirdly, it cannot become a tool in the hands of the party exercising the power of
the state at a particular time.
(iv) Fourthly it prevents autocratic exercise of the powers by the government.
(v) Finally a rigid constitution is ideal for a federation.
(B) Demerits of a Rigid Constitution:
(i) First, the chief demerit of a rigid constitution is that it fails to keep pace with fast
changing social environment.
(ii) Secondly, because of its inability to change easily, at times, it hinders the process
of social development.
(iii) Thirdly, it can be a source of hindrance during emergencies.
(iv) Fourthly, its inability to easily change can lead to revolts against the government.
(v) Fifthly, a rigid constitution can be a source of conservativeness. It can grow
becomes old very soon because it cannot Keep pace with times.
Thus, there are both merits and demerits of Flexible and Rigid Constitutions. The
decision whether a state should have a flexible or a rigid constitution, should be
taken on the basis of the needs and wishes of society. No hard and fast rule can be
laid down as to whether a state should have a flexible or a rigid constitution.
In fact, a constitution must have both a certain degree of rigidity as well as an ability
to change for keeping pace with the changing times. An excessive rigidity or
excessive flexibility should be avoided. The Constitution of India is partly rigid and
partly flexible. In several respects, it is a rigid constitution but in practice it has mostly
worked as a flexible constitution.
5. Evolved Constitution:
An evolved constitution is one which is not made at any time by any assembly of
persons or an institution. It is the result of slow and gradual process of evolution. Its
rules and principles draw binding force from the fact of their being recognised as
ancient, historical, time-tested and respected customs and conventions.
Some of these conventions get recognised by law and hence become enforceable
while others are followed because these are supported by public opinion, their
practical utility and moral commitment in their favour. Evolved Constitutions is the
product of historical evolution and of political needs and practical wisdom of the
people. The Constitution of Great Britain presents a key example of an evolved
constitution.
6. Enacted Constitution:
An Enacted Constitution is a man-made constitution. It is made, enacted and
adopted by an assembly or council called a Constituent Assembly or Constitutional
Council. It is duly passed after a thorough discussion over its objectives, principles
and provisions. It is written in the form of a book or as a series of documents and in a
systematic and formal manner. The Constitutions of India the USA, Japan, China
and most of other states are enacted constitutions.
Qualities of a Good Constitution:
1. Constitution must be systematically written.
2. It should incorporate the constitutional law of the state and enjoy supremacy.
3. It should have the ability to develop and change in accordance with the changes in
the environment and needs of the people.
4. It should be neither unduly rigid nor unduly flexible.
5. It must provide for Fundamental Rights and Freedoms of the people.
6. It should clearly define the organisation, powers, functions inter-relations of the
government of the state and its three organs.
7. It must provide for the organisation of a representative, responsible, limited and
accountable government.
8. It must provide for:
(i) Rule of Law
(ii) De-centralisation of powers
(iii) Independent and powerful Judiciary
(iv) A system of Local self-government
(v) A Sound Method of Amendment of the Constitution
(vi) Process and Machinery for the conduct of free and elections
9. The Constitution must clearly reflect the sovereignty of the people.
10. The language of the constitution should be simple, clear and unambiguous
The Constitution must empower the judiciary with the power to interpret, protect and
defend the Constitution and the fundamental rights and freedoms of the people
against the possible legislative and executive excesses. These are the basic
features which must be present in every good Constitution.
Importance of Constitution:
Each state has a Constitution which lays down the organisation, powers and
functions of the Government of the State. The government always works according
to the Constitution, no law or order of the government can violate the Constitution.
Constitution is the supreme law and all government institutions and members are
bound by it.
Constitution enjoys supreme importance in the state because:
1. It reflects the sovereign will of the people.
2. It lies down of the aims, objectives, values and goals which the people want to
secure. .
3. It contains description and guarantee of the fundamental rights of the people.
4. It gives a detailed account of the organisation of the government. The
organisation, powers and functions of its three organs of the and their inter-
relationship.
5. In a federation, the Constitution lays down the division of powers between the
central government and the governments of the federating states/provinces. It is
binding upon both the centre and the state governments.
6. It specifies the power and method of amendment of the Constitution.
7. It l
Nature of the constitution
There is a huge difference of opinion when it comes to the nature of the Indian
Constitution. Some jurist like Kenneth C Wheare, said that India is quasi-federal i.e.
“similar to a federal system” because it has some features of federal and some of the
unitary Constitution. However, according to the makers of the Constitution, it is
federal in nature. Even Dr. B. R. Ambedkar defined it as a federal Constitution,
although the centre has certain powers to override the provinces.
The question of whether the Indian Constitution could be actually called a federal
Constitution could not be answered without looking into the meaning of federalism
and the essential features that are evident in a federal state.
Is the Constitution of India Federal?
There are certain features which are essential to be present in the federal
Constitution. Some of them are discussed below:
Federal Principle
The basic principle of federalism is the “division of power”. The centre and the state
are not subordinate but coordinate with each other. They work independently in their
own sphere. In other words, it seeks to bring unity in diversity and the achievement
of common national goals. Prevention, as well as the settlement of conflict of the
interests of the Centre and the States, is an important part of federalism. This is the
reason why the Indian federalism was devised with a strong Centre. The Indian
Constitution has adopted federal features, though it is not a complete federal nation.
Essential characteristics of a federal Constitution
There are various characteristics which are quintessential for a Constitution to be
termed as a federal Constitution.
Supremacy of law
The Constitution is the supreme law. The term “law” involves rules, regulations,
bylaws, notifications, orders, ordinances and even the customs having a force of law.
A federal-state derives its existence from the Constitution. Every type of power; be it
legislative, administrative or judicial, irrespective of it being at the centre or the state
level, is controlled by or is subordinated to the Constitution. Article 13(2) provided
that the State shall not make any law which takes away any of the rights guaranteed
under Part III of the Indian Constitution and to the extent of such contravention, the
law is considered void.
Distribution of Power
In federalism, distribution of power forms an important and integral part. Distribution
of power between the centre and the state and other coordinate bodies present in
the Constitution.
This division of governmental powers into national and regional governments is done
by way of 3 lists which are the Union, State and the Concurrent lists. These lists
provided in the 7th Schedule to the Constitution. Only the Central government deals
with the issues mentioned in the Union List. State government legislates on the
areas mentioned in the State List while the Concurrent List contains subjects where
both the Center and the State can function. This concept is borrowed from the
Canadian Constitution. However, there are certain items which do not present in any
of these three lists. These are called residuary powers and lie primarily with the
Centre as per the Entry 97 of Article 248. The reason behind this is to make the
Parliament competent enough to legislate on any subject which is not identifiable at
present. Thus, the principle of division of powers, which the concept under context,
promotes, highlights the federal structure of the Indian Constitution.
Written Constitution
A federal Constitution must be written. Since the federal nature of the Constitution
involves a lot of contracts hence it would be impractical not to have these written.
Moreover to maintain the supremacy of the Constitution it is imperative to have a
written Constitution.
The United Kingdom does not have a written Constitution and therefore it is not
regarded as a federal country. The States in a federal system, come together and
enter into a treaty and the terms of the treaty are required to be in writing in the form
of a written Constitution. There is no denial of the fact that a written Constitution
brings stability in the overall governance of the country. If there were no written
Constitution defining the scope of the powers of Centre and the States, there will be
chaos and confusion. Moreover, misunderstandings and conflicts will arise between
the Centre and the States who would seek to cross over each other’s authority.
Rigidity
The Constitution should be rigid and permanent. A lousy set of the document cannot
be said to a federal Constitution. The method of the amendment should be rigid,
otherwise, the basic principles of the Constitution would be under threat. However,
the rigidness of the Constitution should not be confused with inflexibility. The
Constitution is an organic document and should be flexible enough to accommodate
according to the changing times.
Rigidity in a Constitution also means that it cannot be amended unilaterally without
the participation of the states. In the United States, that is an example of classical
federalism, it is an established rule that no part of the Constitution can be amended
without the ratification of at least 3/4th of the individual States. Another example is
Switzerland, where no amendment can be brought into force unless it is ratified by a
majority of votes i.e. referendum. Same is the case with Germany, where the states
do have a major role to play in the amendment of the Constitution but even the
German parliament cannot amend as far as the federal features are concerned like
division of the federation into States or the participation of the States in making
amendments in the legislature, these features are exclusively made non-amendable
because Germany is also a federal country.
These examples justify that the rigidity of the Constitution is a primary feature of any
federal form of government and the same has been imbibed in India too. In India,
any provisions which deal with the centre and state relations could be amended only
after all the states have ratified the amendment which is proposed. It is also
important to note that the ratification must come from at least 50% of the states. For
example, in the case of Kihoto Hollohan vs Zachilhu & Ors where the court rejected
the addition of Para 7, which affected the jurisdiction of the high courts present in the
State, in the 10th Schedule by way of 52nd Constitutional Amendment. This
amendment was passed by both the houses of parliament and was not sent for the
ratification of the states, so it was ultra vires and the Supreme Court declared the
52nd Amendment and the 10th Schedule to be unconstitutional and void. The
doctrine of Severability was applied and only Para 7 was removed and the remaining
part of it was held to be valid.

Authority of Courts
The judiciary has the final authority to interpret the Constitution. The rationale for this
provision is that only an independent tribunal which is authorized to resolve disputes
between the Centre and the States could impartially resolve all the disputes between
the Centre and the State government. As regards to India, the Supreme Court is that
federal tribunal which has such powers and competency. The Supreme Court is
authorised, to exercise such power, by way of the Article 131 of the Indian
Constitution. However, for solving the Inter-State Water Disputes the parliament has
to create an ad-hoc tribunal to resolve a specific water dispute between two states,
for instance, the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal which is dealing with the water
dispute between Kerala, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. This power given to the Central
Government to create a separate tribunal is although small but significant unitary
feature, the Bedgaon Border dispute case pending in Supreme Court. It is between
Maharashtra and Karnataka in which Maharashtra claims that the majority of the
people in that region are Marathi speaking so the region should belong to them while
the Karnataka demands just the opposite. Thus, an independent judicial court is a
very necessary federal feature of the Constitution
Provisions of the Constitution not supporting the federal principle
Indian Constitution lays down a double polity system, where the Central Government
is neither merely the league of States nor the States that are the administrative units
or agencies of the Central Government because they have their own Constitutional
identity. However, there are some strong centralizing tendencies present in the
Indian Constitution which confer maximum power on the Central Government. The
reason for this centralisation dates back in history at the time when the Constitution
was made. At the time of the partition of the country, the framers thought that if the
Central government is not strong, then the country would get fragmented. The
Philadelphia Convention which resulted in the formation of the US Constitution also
mentioned the term “union”. This term was mentioned there in order to make it a
more perfect Union and in the express terms. It is highly probable that the intention
of the Constituent Assembly behind adding the expression Union was that they
wanted to give an impression that it was an indestructible Union. They must have
been feared about the potential Balkanization of the Indian Union. The policy so
adopted by the Constituent Assembly was to have an intrinsic partiality in the favour
of Centralization i.e. a unitary in spirit.
Union of States
Article 1 of the Indian Constitution states that India i.e. Bharat shall be a Union of
States. It is to be examined here whether the use of the word ‘Union’ was intentional
or not. Because the word ‘Federation’ has nowhere been mentioned in the Indian
Constitution. It was there in the draft Constitution but was later removed. It was,
however, a purposeful omission on the part of the drafting committee, its Chairman
Dr. Ambedkar, justified this removal by mentioning that the addition of the word
“Federation” was added after the ratification of the States.
Appointment of Governors
Appointment of the Governors of various States is done by the Central government.
Governor is the Constitutional Head of the State simultaneously he is also the
representative of the Centre. The Central government, under Article 355 has to
ensure that there is no failure of Constitutional machinery in the State and the states
are protected from internal and external disturbance. So, to carry out that mandate,
the Central government has the authority under Article 356 of the Indian Constitution,
to impose President’s rule in the state, and it is the duty of the governor who has to
inform the Centre about the failure of the Constitutional machinery of the State.
Governor, unlike President, enjoys some discretionary powers i.e. he can keep a bill
for the consideration of the President. The Sarkaria Commission which studied the
Centre-State Relations made certain suggestions regarding the appointment of the
governor in the state because there was no effective consultation by the central
government to the Chief Ministers of the States during such appointments. It was
thus recommended that the Governors should be some eminent person from any
sphere of life.
In the case of Rameshwar Prasad v Union of India, popularly known as Bihar
Assembly Dissolution Case. the Supreme Court put up questions as to the
unbiasedness of the Governor as there was a President’s Rule imposed in Bihar
after the elections. The reason for this imposition was that no political party was in
the position to form the government but when there was a possibility of formation of
a government by a political party, the Governor sent a report to the Centre that the
Assembly should be dissolved due to the inability of the party to prove its majority.
The Centre did not further investigate the report sent by the governor, and on that
recommendation, the Assembly was dissolved. the very next day, the Supreme
Court said that the Governor did not act according to his duties. Moreover, the
Governor is not supposed to be an agent of the ruling party at the Centre. Supreme
Court pronounced the judgement in which it was held that the dissolution of the Bihar
Legislative Assembly as unconstitutional.
In the case of B.P. Singhal v Union of India, Supreme Court held that a Governor
cannot be removed by the Central government on the grounds that he is not in
accordance with the policies of the Central government. This cannot be the reason
behind the Central government to remove the Governor from his office. If they did, it
would be considered as arbitrary.
Thus, this power to appoint Governors that would be the head of the respective
States is an essential unitary feature of the Indian Constitution.
Single Citizenship
The Constitution of India has proposed a Single Citizenship for the whole country. In
a federal country like the United States of America, there is dual citizenship where a
citizen firstly owes loyalty to the respective States and then to the Centre. But in
case of India although it is a Federal-State there is still a provision of single
citizenship. It implies that all Indian citizens to have allegiance to the Indian Union.
Every citizen, irrespective of his birth or residence, is entitled to enjoy civil and
political rights throughout India. The Indian Constitution does not recognize State
citizenship. In fact, after the abolition of Article 35A and Article 370 of the Indian
Constitution, the State of Jammu and Kashmir are also integrated as a part of the
Indian Union. Moreover, the claim of Fundamental Rights is common to all citizens.
Parliament’s power to legislate in the national interest
Under Article 249, Parliament is empowered to make laws with respect to every
matter enumerated in the state list only if the Rajya Sabha passes the resolution by a
two-thirds majority that it is necessary for the national interest.
The Parliament makes law and it remains in force for 1 and 1/2 years i.e. the law will
cease to have any effect, 6 months after the resolution comes to an end because the
resolution remains in force for 1 year. The Centre can also make law if there is a
request or consent by 2 or 3 States and such law could be adopted by other States.
When the national emergency is declared, the Central government gets concurrent
legislative power to make certain laws under the state list and if there is a conflict
between the two, the central law would preceed.
Parliament’s power to form new States and alter the boundaries of existing States
Article 2 and Article 3 of the Indian Constitution, give the power to the Parliament to
redraw the political map of India; to create and abolish the name of the states,
alteration of the boundaries of the States or even change their names all this can be
achieved by way of a simple majority in the Parliament. Moreover, the Constitution
only provides for consultation by the Centre of the concerned State. For example–
when Andhra Pradesh was divided into Telangana, then Andhra Pradesh Assembly
had passed a resolution opposing the step, irrespective of the opposition the Central
Government continued with the separation. The provision, therefore, provides the
consultation with the State Assemblies. The President can only prescribe a time
frame within which the State Assembly has to take a decision on the proposal of
separation of the State or to a merger of States. Examples such as Uttarakhand,
Jharkhand and Chattisgarh are also present. In 2007 too, the name of Uttaranchal
was changed to Uttarakhand, this too was done without amending the Constitution.
Hence, the Central government has an upper hand as far as the creation or abolition
of the States is concerned.
Appointment at key positions
Under the 7th schedule of the Constitution, there is a provision mentioned which
makes it necessary for the centre to deploy the armed forces of the union to hold the
civil powers of the state. Under the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA)
which is currently active in some of the regions. This Act is invoked when the Centre
declares a specified area as a ‘disturbed area’, and then the martial law is declared
in that region. The members of the armed forces of the Union are now deployed in
that state without the consent of the State government. The act empowers the armed
forces to open fire on the people or to exert force to the extent of causing death, in
the case, there is a breach of any order. These actions of the armed forces are
completely indemnified which means that no suit or criminal proceeding can be filed
against them without the prior sanction of the Central Government.
Moreover, a commission was set up by the Supreme Court to look after the misuse
of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act in Manipur. This Commission was headed
by former judge Santosh Hegde with former Chief Election Commission J.M.
Lyngdoh and retired IPS officer A.K. Singh as its members. On many occasions, the
Extrajudicial Execution Victim Families’ Association (EEVFAM) with the Human
Rights Alert (HRA) submitted a list of cases of killings in Manipur since 1979 before
the Supreme Court and demanded an investigation into these extrajudicial deaths.
Unified judiciary
In India, we have centralised Judiciary with the Supreme Court at the top position as
opposed to the federal system having a dual system of courts. The Supreme Court
holds the apex position in our unitary judicial system. An endeavour has been made,
as far as possible, to ensure its independence and to achieve the goal of ensuring
justice. By merit of its place at the apex of the judicial system, the Supreme Court
acts as a great uniting force. We have seen that its decisions and verdicts are
binding on every court in India. As a result, there is a great possibility of consistency
in the whole judicial system present in the country.

Emergency provisions
When the proclamation of an emergency takes place, the division of power between
the centre and the state takes a vital change. Under Article 356 of the Constitution of
India, if the President deems right that the condition of governance of the state can’t
take place according to the principles of the Constitution, then the President can
dissolve the legislature and other state machinery and he can himself assume all the
state’s functions.
When a proclamation made under Article 356 of the Indian Constitution, the State
government can be either dismissed or the Assembly can be kept in suspended.
moreover, during the making of the Constitution, the Chairman of the Drafting
Committee, Dr. Ambedkar said that power vested under Article 356 has to be rarely
invoked. However, this was not the case. Until the Supreme Court judgment of S.R.
Bommai v Union of India, the power under Article 356 was already used 90 times.
Supreme Court, in this case, restored the federalism by stating that if the decision is
found to be passed with a bad intention, then the court can reinstate the government
that is removed or if the Assembly is dissolved, the court can restore it. Now
Supreme Court has stated that once the President rule is imposed, the Assembly
should be immediately dissolved. It should be kept in suspended motion until the
proclamation is approved by both the houses of the Parliament. Article 352 and 356
have been adopted from the Weimar Constitution of Germany.
Representation
Representation in the Legislature, which is similar in the case of an actual federation
such as the United States of America, is not applicable in the case of India. States in
India have differing representation in the Upper House of the Parliament.
Representation of States in the Rajya Sabha are not equal. According to Schedule 4
of the Constitution, the representation of the States fluctuates heavily. The largest
representation is that of Uttar Pradesh which is 31 whereas the many North-Eastern
States have only 1 representation. The members of the Upper House are elected by
the provincial legislatures. Even the value of the vote that is casted by the members
in the Presidential Elections changes from State to State and is based on the
population. The representation of the States in the Upper House is not equal and
varies from State to State, which is regulated by the Centre, this is basically a unitary
feature, which gives an upper hand to the Centre.
Residuary Powers
Residuary Power refers to the authority of the central government to legislate on the
subjects which do not find any mention in the unitary, state or concurrent lists of the
7th Schedule. For example, the laws like Prevention Of Terrorism Act,
2002 and Terrorism And Disruptive Activities 1987, which are now included in
the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, National Investigation Agency Act under
which NIA was set up on the lines of FBI in the US, to investigate crimes like
terrorism. So although public order is a state entry, terrorism is a problem which has
an intensity beyond public order, it concerns more with the security of India. When
the Lokpal Bill was passed by the Parliament, the States opposed, they said that in
one legislation you cannot provide both Lokpal and Lokayukta therefore now the
Lokayukta is removed and there is one provision which states that the States are
supposed to make Lokayuktas within 2 years of passage of this Bill because Central
Legislation creating Lokayuktas for the States has not been in consonance with the
federal scheme of the country.
In the past, several states have demanded that the residuary powers, like those of
taxation, should be vested in the States. In the contradiction of this demand, the
Centre has time and again pointed to a strong centralised bias of the country’s
federal structure. The Sarkaria Commission, which in its report also reasoned the
transfer of the residuary powers to the Concurrent List because it felt that the
exercise of such powers by the States would ultimately be subjected to the rules of
the Union Supremacy which would be in synchronisation with the unitary spirit of the
Indian Constitution, especially with Article 256 and Article 254 of the Indian
Constitution.
Conclusion
The Indian Constitution empowers the Centre to interfere in the State matter and
thus places the State in a subordinate position which violates the federal principles,
therefore Indian Constitution is neither purely federal nor purely unitary but it is a
combination of both, It is quasi-federal Constitution i,e, “unitary with federal features”
or “federal with unitary features”.
The most remarkable achievement of the Indian Constitution is to confer upon a
federal system and to strengthen the unitary government. Though normally the
system of government is federal, the Constitution enables the federation to transform
itself into a unitary state in an emergency. So writers like K.C. Wheare called it
“Quasi-Federal, Jennings called it as an “A Federation with a strong centralising
tendency, McWhinney called it “Essentially unitary,” but on the other side writers,
like, Sawer and Neumann called it ‘a Federal Constitution’. D.D. Basu’s conclusion
on this point is that “The Constitutional system of India is basically federal, but of
course, with striking unitary features.”
The Supreme Court has time and again reiterated that the kind of federalism
practised in the United States of America is not a part of the basic structure of the
Indian Constitution. The federalism in India is unique and is made according to the
need of the Indian milieu.
Dr. B.R. Ambedkar had thus rightly said that the Indian Constitution would be both
unitary as well as federal according to the requirements of the time. The Drafting
Committee wanted to elucidate that though India was a federation, it was not as per
any voluntary agreement between the States. The division of the country into states
is only to facilitate the administration and does not affect the functioning as an
integrated unit.
Moreover, on analysis, it was found that at the core of every federal principle, which
is functional in our country, the ultimate force is unitary in nature. Therefore it would
be appropriate to say that India has a federal structure but it is unitary in spirit.
The salient features of the Indian Constitution are listed and briefed below:
1. Lengthiest Written Constitution
 Constitutions are classified into written, like the American Constitution, or
unwritten, like the British Constitution.
 The Constitution of India has the distinction of being the lengthiest and
detailed Constitutional document the world has so far produced. In other
words, the Constitution of India is the lengthiest of all the written constitutions
of the world.
 It is a very comprehensive, elaborate and detailed document.
 The factors that contributed to the elephantine size of the Indian Constitution
are:
o Geographical factors, that is, the vastness of the country and its
diversity.
o Historical factors, for instance, the influence of the Government of India
Act of 1935, which was bulky.
o Single constitution for both the Centre and the states.
o The dominance of legal luminaries in the Constituent Assembly.
 The Constitution of India contains not only the fundamental principles of
governance but also detailed administrative provisions.
 Both justiciable and non-justiciable rights are included in the Constitution.
2. Drawn from Various Sources
 The Constitution of India has borrowed most of its provisions from the
constitutions of various other countries as well as from the Government of
India Act of 1935 [About 250 provisions of the 1935 Act have been included in
the Constitution].
 Dr B R Ambedkar proudly acclaimed that the Constitution of India has been
framed after ‘ransacking all the known Constitutions of the world’.
 The structural part of the Constitution is, to a large extent, derived from the
Government of India Act of 1935.
 The philosophical part of the Constitution (Fundamental Rights and the
Directive Principles of State Policy) derive their inspiration from the American
and Irish Constitutions respectively.
 The political part of the Constitution (the principle of Cabinet government and
the relations between the executive and the legislature) have been largely
drawn from the British Constitution.
3. Blend of Rigidity and Flexibility
 Constitutions are classified into rigid and flexible.
 A rigid constitution is one that requires a special procedure for its amendment,
as for example, the American Constitution.
 A flexible constitution is one that can be amended in the same manner as the
ordinary laws are made, as for example, the British Constitution.
 The Indian Constitution is a unique example of the combination of rigidity and
flexibility.
 A constitution may be called rigid or flexible on the basis of its amending
procedure.
 The Indian Constitution provides for three types of amendments ranging from
simple to most difficult procedures depending on the
nature of the amendment.

4. Federal System with Unitary Bias

 The Constitution of India establishes a federal system of government.
 It contains all the usual features of a federation, such as two governments,
division of powers, written constitution, the supremacy of the constitution, the
rigidity of the Constitution, independent judiciary and bicameralism.
 However, the Indian Constitution also contains a large number of unitary or
non-federal features, such as a strong Centre, single Constitution,
appointment of state governor by the Centre, all-India services, integrated
judiciary, and so on.
 Moreover, the term ‘Federation’ has nowhere been used in the Constitution.
 Article 1, describes India as a ‘Union of States’ which implies two things:
o Indian Federation is not the result of an agreement by the states.
o No state has the right to secede from the federation.
 Hence, the Indian Constitution has been variously described as ‘federal in
form but unitary in spirit’, ‘quasi-federal’ by K C Wheare.
5. Parliamentary Form of Government
 The Constitution of India has opted for the British Parliamentary System of
Government rather than the American Presidential system of government.
 The parliamentary system is based on the principle of cooperation and
coordination between the legislative and executive organs while the
presidential system is based on the doctrine of separation of powers between
the two organs.
 The parliamentary system is also known as the ‘Westminster’ model of
government, responsible government and cabinet government.
 The Constitution establishes the parliamentary system not only at the Centre
but also in the States.
 In a parliamentary system, the role of the Prime Minister has become so
significant, and therefore it is called a ‘Prime Ministerial Government’.
What are the features of parliamentary government in India?
The features of parliamentary government in India are as follows:
 Presence of real and nominal executives
 Majority party rule
 Collective responsibility of the executive to the legislature
 Membership of the ministers in the legislature
 The leadership of the prime minister or the chief minister
 Dissolution of the lower house (Lok Sabha or Assembly)
 Indian Parliament is not a sovereign body like the British Parliament.
 Parliamentary Government combined with an elected President at the head
(Republic).
6. Synthesis of Parliamentary Sovereignty and Judicial Supremacy
 The doctrine of the sovereignty of Parliament is associated with the British
Parliament while the principle of judicial supremacy with that of the American
Supreme Court.
 Just as the Indian parliamentary system differs from the British system, the
scope of judicial review power of the Supreme court in India is narrower than
that of what exists in the US.
 This is because the American Constitution provides for ‘due process of law’
against that of ‘procedure established by law’ contained in the Indian
Constitution (Article 21).
 Therefore, the framers of the Indian Constitution have preferred a proper
synthesis between the British principle of parliamentary sovereignty and the
American principle of Judicial supremacy.
 The Supreme Court can declare the parliamentary laws as unconstitutional
through its power of judicial review.
 The Parliament can amend the major portion of the Constitution through its
constituent power.
7. Rule Of Law
 According to this axiom, people are ruled by law but not by men, that is, the
basic truism that no man is infallible. The axiom is vital to a democracy.
 More important is the meaning that law is the sovereign in democracy.
 The chief ingredient of law is custom which is nothing but the habitual
practices and beliefs of common people over a long number of years.
 In the final analysis, rule of law means the sovereignty of the common man’s
collective wisdom.
 Apart from this crucial meaning, rule of law means a few more things like
o There is no room for arbitrariness
o Each individual enjoys some fundamental rights, and
o The highest judiciary is the final authority in maintaining the sanctity of
the law of the land.
 The Constitution of India has incorporated this principle in Part III and in order
to provide meaning to Article 14 (all are equal before the law and all enjoy
equal protection of laws), promotion of Lok Adalats and the venture of the
Supreme court known as “public interest litigation” have been implemented.
 Also, as per today’s law of the land, any litigant can appeal to the presiding
judicial authority to argue the case by himself or seek legal assistance with
the help of the judiciary.
8. Integrated and Independent Judiciary
 India has a single integrated judicial system.
 Also, the Indian Constitution establishes Independent Judiciary by enabling
the Indian judiciary to be free from the influence of the executive and the
legislature.
 The Supreme Court stands as the apex court of the judicial system. Below the
Supreme Court are the High Courts at the state level.
 Under a high court, there is a hierarchy of subordinate courts, that is district
courts and the other lower courts.
 The Supreme Court is a federal court, the highest court of appeal, the
guarantor of the fundamental rights of the citizens and the guardian of the
Constitution. Hence, the Constitution has made various provisions to ensure
its independence.
9. Fundamental Rights
 Part III of the Indian Constitution guarantees six fundamental rights to all
Citizens.
 Fundamental Rights are one of the important features of the Indian
Constitution.
 The Constitution contains the basic principle that every individual is entitled to
enjoy certain rights as a human being and the enjoyment of such rights does
not depend upon the will of any majority or minority.
 No majority has the right to abrogate such rights.
 The fundamental rights are meant for promoting the idea of political
democracy.
 They operate as limitations on the tyranny of the executive and arbitrary laws
of the legislature.
 They are justiciable in nature, that is, enforceable by the courts for their
violation.
10. Directive Principles of State Policy
 According to Dr B R Ambedkar, the Directive Principles of State Policy is a
‘novel feature’ of the Indian Constitution.
 They are enumerated in Part IV of the Constitution.
 The Directive Principles were included in our Constitution in order to provide
social and economic justice to our people.
 Directive Principles aim at establishing a welfare state in India where there will
be no concentration of wealth in the hands of a few.
 They are non-justiciable in nature.
 In the Minerva Mills case (1980), the Supreme Court held that ‘the Indian
Constitution is founded on the bedrock of the balance between the
Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles’.
11. Fundamental Duties
 The original constitution did not provide for the fundamental duties of the
citizens.
 Fundamental Duties were added to our Constitution by the 42nd Amendment
Act of 1976 on the recommendation of the Swaran Singh Committee.
 It lays down a list of ten Fundamental Duties for all citizens of India.
 Later, the 86th Constitutional Amendment Act of 2002 added one more
fundamental duty.
 While the rights are given as guarantees to the people, the duties are
obligations that every citizen is expected to perform.
 However, like the Directive Principles of State Policy, the duties are also non-
justiciable in nature.
 There is a total of 11 Fundamental duties altogether.
12. Indian Secularism
 The Constitution of India stands for a secular state.
 Hence, it does not uphold any particular religion as the official religion of the
Indian State.
 The distinguishing features of a secular democracy contemplated by the
Constitution of India are:
o The State will not identify itself with or be controlled by any religion;
o While the State guarantees to everyone the right to profess whatever
religion one chooses to follow (which includes also the right to be an
antagonist or an atheist), it will not accord preferential treatment to any
of them;
o No discrimination will be shown by the State against any person on
account of his religion or faith; and
o The right of every citizen, subject to any general condition, to enter any
office under the state will be equal to that of the fellow citizens. Political
equality which entitles any Indian citizen to seek the highest office
under the State is the heart and soul of secularism as envisaged by
Constitution.
 The conception aims to establish a secular state. This does not mean that the
State in India is anti-religious.
 The western concept of secularism connotes a complete separation between
religion and the state (negative concept of secularism).
 But, the Indian constitution embodies the positive concept of secularism, i.e.,
giving equal respect to all religions or protecting all religions equally.
 Moreover, the Constitution has also abolished the old system of communal
representation. However, it provides for the temporary reservation of seats for
the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes to ensure adequate representation
to them.
13. Universal Adult Franchise
 Indian democracy functions on the basis of ‘one person one vote’.
 Every citizen of India who is 18 years of age or above is entitled to vote in the
elections irrespective of caste, sex, race, religion or status.
 The Indian Constitution establishes political equality in India through the
method of universal adult franchise.
14. Single Citizenship
 In a federal state usually, the citizens enjoy double citizenship as is the case
in the USA.
 In India, there is only single citizenship.
 It means that every Indian is a citizen of India, irrespective of the place of
his/her residence or place of birth.
 He/she is not a citizen of the Constituent State like Jharkhand, Uttaranchal or
Chattisgarh to which he/she may belong but remains a citizen of India.
 All the citizens of India can secure employment anywhere in the country and
enjoy all the rights equally in all the parts of India.
 The Constitution makers deliberately opted for single citizenship to
eliminate regionalism and other disintegrating tendencies.
 Single citizenship has undoubtedly forged a sense of unity among the people
of India.
15. Independent Bodies
 The Indian constitution not only provides for the legislative, executive and
judicial organs of the government (Central and state) but also establishes
certain independent bodies.
 They are envisaged by the Constitution as the bulwarks of the democratic
system of Government in India.
16. Emergency Provisions
 The Constitution makers also foresaw that there could be situations when the
government could not be run as in ordinary times.
 To cope with such situations, the Constitution elaborates on emergency
provisions.
 There are three types of emergency
o Emergency caused by war, external aggression or armed rebellion
[Aricle 352]
o Emergency arising out of the failure of constitutional machinery in
states [Article 356 & 365]
o Financial emergency [Article 360].
 The rationality behind the incorporation of these provisions is to safeguard the
sovereignty, unity, integrity and security of the country, the democratic political
system and the Constitution.
 During an emergency, the central government becomes all-powerful and the
states go into total control of the centre.
 This kind of transformation of the political system from federal (during normal
times) to unitary (during emergency) is a unique feature of the Indian
Constitution.
Preamble to the Indian Constitution
 A preamble is an introductory statement in a document that explains the
document’s philosophy and objectives.
 In a Constitution, it presents the intention of its framers, the history behind
its creation, and the core values and principles of the nation.
 The preamble basically gives idea of the following things/objects:

o Source of the Constitution

o Nature of Indian State
o Statement of its objectives
o Date of its adoption
History of the Preamble to Indian Constitution
 The ideals behind the Preamble to India’s Constitution were laid down
by Jawaharlal Nehru’s Objectives Resolution, adopted by the Constituent
Assembly on January 22, 1947.
 Although not enforceable in court, the Preamble states the objectives of the
Constitution, and acts as an aid during the interpretation of Articles when
language is found ambiguous.
Components of Preamble
 It is indicated by the Preamble that the source of authority of the
Constitution lies with the people of India.
 Preamble declares India to be a sovereign, socialist, secular and
democratic republic.
 The objectives stated by the Preamble are to secure justice, liberty,
equality to all citizens and promote fraternity to maintain unity and
integrity of the nation.
 The date is mentioned in the preamble when it was adopted i.e. November
26, 1949.
Key words in the Preamble
 We, the people of India: It indicates the ultimate sovereignty of the people
of India. Sovereignty means the independent authority of the State, not being
subject to the control of any other State or external power.
 Sovereign: The term means that India has its own independent authority and
it is not a dominion of any other external power. In the country, the legislature
has the power to make laws which are subject to certain limitations.
 Socialist: The term means the achievement of socialist ends through
democratic means. It holds faith in a mixed economy where both private and
public sectors co-exist side by side.

o It was added in the Preamble by 42nd Amendment, 1976.

 Secular: The term means that all the religions in India get equal respect,
protection and support from the state.

o It was incorporated in the Preamble by 42nd Constitutional Amendment,

1976.
In S.R.Bommai V Union of India(1994)SCCI- the supreme court has
held that “secularism” is the basic feature of the
constitution.
Aruna Roy V Union of India AIR2003SC3167 -the supreme court has
said that secularism has a positive meaning that is developing, understanding
and respect towards different religions.

 Democratic: The term implies that the Constitution of India has an

established form of Constitution which gets its authority from the will of the
people expressed in an election.
 Republic: The term indicates that the head of the state is elected by the
people. In India, the President of India is the elected head of the state.
Objectives of the Indian Constitution
 The Constitution is the supreme law and it helps to maintain integrity in the
society and to promote unity among the citizens to build a great nation.
o The main objective of the Indian Constitution is to promote harmony
throughout the nation.
 The factors which help in achieving this objective are:

o Justice: It is necessary to maintain order in society that is promised

through various provisions of Fundamental Rights and Directive
Principles of State Policy provided by the Constitution of India. It
comprises three elements, which is social, economic, and political.

 Social Justice – Social justice means that the Constitution

wants to create a society without discrimination on any grounds
like caste, creed, gender, religion, etc.
 Economic Justice – Economic Justice means no discrimination
can be caused by people on the basis of their wealth, income,
and economic status. Every person must be paid equally for an
equal position and all people must get opportunities to earn for
their living.
 Political Justice – Political Justice means all the people have
an equal, free and fair right without any discrimination to
participate in political opportunities.
o Equality: The term ‘Equality’ means no section of society has any
special privileges and all the people have given equal opportunities for
everything without any discriminations. Everyone is equal before the
law.
o Liberty: The term ‘Liberty’ means freedom for the people to choose
their way of life, have political views and behavior in society. Liberty
does not mean freedom to do anything, a person can do anything but
in the limit set by the law.
o Fraternity: The term ‘Fraternity’ means a feeling of brotherhood and
an emotional attachment with the country and all the people. Fraternity
helps to promote dignity and unity in the nation.
 Importance of Objectives: It provides a way of life. It includes fraternity,
liberty, and equality as the notion of a happy life and which can not be taken
from each other.

o Liberty cannot be divorced from equality, equality cannot be divorced

from liberty. Nor can liberty and equality be divorced from fraternity.
o Without equality, liberty would produce the supremacy of the few over
the many.
o Equality without liberty would kill individual initiative.
o Without fraternity, liberty would produce the supremacy of the few over
the many.
o Without fraternity, liberty and equality could not become a natural
course of things.
Status of Preamble
 The preamble being part of the Constitution is discussed several times in the
Supreme Court. It can be understood by reading the following two cases.

o Berubari Case: It was used as a reference under Article 143(1) of the

Constitution which was on the implementation of the Indo-Pakistan
Agreement related to the Berubari Union and in exchanging the
enclaves which were decided for consideration by the bench consisting
of eight judges.
o Through the Berubari case, the Court stated that ‘Preamble is the key
to open the mind of the makers’ but it can not be considered as part of
the Constitution. Therefore it is not enforceable in a court of law.
 Kesavananda Bharati Case: In this case, for the first time, a bench of 13
judges was assembled to hear a writ petition. The Court held that:

o The Preamble of the Constitution will now be considered as part of

the Constitution.
o The Preamble is not the supreme power or source of any restriction or
prohibition but it plays an important role in the interpretation of statutes
and provisions of the Constitution.
o So, it can be concluded that preamble is part of the introductory part of
the Constitution.
 In the 1995 case of Union Government Vs LIC of India also, the Supreme
Court has once again held that Preamble is the integral part of the
Constitution but is not directly enforceable in a court of justice in India.
Amendment of the Preamble
 42nd Amendment Act, 1976: After the judgment of the Kesavanand Bharati
case, it was accepted that the preamble is part of the Constitution.

o As a part of the Constitution, preamble can be amended under Article

368 of the Constitution, but the basic structure of the preamble can
not be amended.
o Because the structure of the Constitution is based on the basic
elements of the Preamble. As of now, the preamble is only amended
once through the 42nd Amendment Act, 1976.
 The term ‘Socialist’, ‘Secular’, and ‘Integrity’ were added to the preamble
through 42nd Amendment Act, 1976.

o ‘Socialist’ and ‘Secular’ were added between ‘Sovereign’ and

‘Democratic’.
o ‘Unity of the Nation’ was changed to ‘Unity and Integrity of the Nation’
Conclusion- Thus we can conclude that the preamble sets out the main
objectives which the legislature is intended to achieve. It is a sort of introduction
to the statute and many a times very helpful to understand the policy and
legislative intent. The constitution makers gives to the constitution the place of
pride. It embodies in a solemn form all the ideals and aspirations for which the
country has struggled during the British regime.