Discuss the composition and functions of the Inter-State Council. To what extent has this body been successful in achieving its objectives? (2022, 15 Marks)
The Inter-State Council (ISC) is the permanent forum that Article 263 allows the President to create by order. After a forty-year wait it was constituted on 28 May 1990 on the Sarkaria Commission‘s advice, as a body of shared rule in Daniel J. Elazar‘s sense, where the Union and the states deliberate together. Measured against its purposes, its success is limited.
Composition
- Chairman: the Prime Minister.
- Members: Chief Ministers of all states; Chief Ministers of Union Territories with legislatures and Administrators of the others; Governors of states under President’s Rule; and six Union Cabinet ministers, including the Home Minister, nominated by the Prime Minister.
- Permanent invitees: other Union ministers nominated by the Chairman.
- Standing Committee (since 1996): the Home Minister in the chair, with five Union ministers and nine Chief Ministers. It was last reconstituted on 19 May 2022 and prepares matters for the full Council.
- Secretariat: created in 1991, merged with the Zonal Council Secretariat in 2018.
Functions
Article 263 lists three possible duties: (a) inquiring into and advising on inter-state disputes; (b) investigating subjects of common interest to the Union and the states; and (c) recommending better coordination of policy and action. The 1990 Order conferred only (b) and (c), plus deliberation on matters the Chairman refers. It asks for at least three meetings a year, held in camera, with decisions by consensus, and its recommendations are advisory.
Extent of success
| Objective | Record |
|---|---|
| Regular consultation | Eleven meetings in thirty-six years; a decade’s gap from 2006 to 2016; none since 16 July 2016 |
| Reviewing Centre–state relations | Processed the Sarkaria report’s 247 recommendations, many adopted in some form, and the Punchhi Commission‘s 273 through its Standing Committee (2017–18) |
| Policy coordination | The 2016 meeting discussed Aadhaar-based transfers, school education and internal security |
| Inter-state disputes | None ever referred; clause (a) left unused |
Achievements. The ISC gave the Sarkaria agenda an institutional home, and several of its administrative proposals were absorbed. It also embodies Granville Austin‘s cooperative federalism as a standing forum rather than an occasional conference.
Shortfalls.
- The Punchhi Commission wanted Concurrent List bills and gubernatorial panels routed through the Council; neither has happened.
- The Prime Minister convenes and chairs it, so the Union decides whether to be questioned. Under majority governments it has fallen silent, which confirms W. H. Morris-Jones‘s point that federal bargaining depends on the states’ leverage.
- Its work has migrated to the GST Council, the NITI Aayog Governing Council and the revived Zonal Councils.
- Unresolved friction now goes to court: Kerala’s Article 131 borrowing suit, Tamil Nadu’s NEET suit and the 2025 Presidential Reference on assent to bills.
Conclusion
The ISC has succeeded as a deliberative archive of reform and failed as a working institution of federal consultation. It needs no constitutional amendment to become effective, only a statutory calendar, an independent secretariat and use of clause (a). Its weakness has been a political choice, not a constitutional limit.