introduction
‘India is a Union of states’ is the statement of Article 1 of the Indian Constitution. This means that states were created for governmental convenience and states have no right to separate from the union and hence states do not have a say in their foundation. The underdevelopment of certain regions of the country is the reason of the demand of separate states, but it is not compulsory that these demands are always acceptable. The formation of smaller states is actually for national benefit.
Before understanding the significances of the formation of smaller states, we need to know why smaller states should be formed in the first place. For the creation of a new state, there are certain parameters which can be considered as following. After the formation of a new state, a proper machinery should be set up to execute administrative tasks. An issue can arise if the regions which are taken for formation of the new state should have similarity, keeping dissimilar culture under one label. The state should have the wealth which can make it economically sustainable to survive on its own expenses. Finally, the Country belongs to its citizens, so people’s goal should be given a due share in the formation of a new state.
Demand of a separate state based on etymological terms too can be proved disaster for democracy. A question arises: When India claim about unity in diversity, how can smaller states be formed just on linguistic lines? Such creation will initiate demands for other smaller states. Formation of smaller states on the basis of linguistic is unacceptable as India has more than 700 local languages, dialects, etc. How can we divide and accept such demands?
Administrative Implications
The administrative function is easier and better in small regions and it will have a direct contact from the head of state i.e. Chief Minister. Smaller state will get better control and command on minute disputes of development, more specificity in administration is possible then.
However, India being a union of states, for smooth functioning of centre-state relations, there is a partiality of powers in the favour of centre. Such division is declared in the Constitution.
The formation of smaller states will weak the central’s mechanism, as there will be several smaller entities to monitor the progress, and later more effort for already burdened centre. This may seriously impact centralised structure of the country and at last lead to poor administration.
Always, formation of new states is not the solution to cure poor administration. For example, Jharkhand, formed in 2000, has gone worse due to political variability.
However, I am unable to understand how it will make much variances at the ground level. In fact, to administer the smaller regions within state, there is already an appropriate system including Gram Panchayat, District Collector etc. This functioning machinery at the ground level will still be the identical and at last will be at the functional end of governance. As the system of orders and stabilities is already in place, so the formation of smaller states would not improvise much.
Economic implications
Economic development need to be given its due share. Actually, liberal thinking clarifies economic development in more detail way. People expect more growth as creation of states gives more funds to a smaller region. However, there is no direct relation between development of smaller state and perfection in the economic conditions because more funds give more leakage in the system and hence exploitation.
Now, the better evaluation of natural resources is possible, which was not present prior. For example, Chhattisgarh was the energy generating source of MP as seen during the formation of the State, and it benefited a lot by selling the same electricity to M.P. which was free earlier. But mostly it depends on political will and the government that how much they want to consume them for development otherwise a state can go down in smuggling of resources and environment issues due to inappropriate regulation authority. Other resources such as handicrafts, native culture of the place also helps smaller state to get a different individuality and more attentiveness for its uniqueness.
More infrastructures will bring more opportunities for employment in the state as it has been formed recently
Developmental implications
Development will be a fusion of social, economic, political and other aspects, and it will be the end outcome. According to simple theory, it is easily concluded—smaller state—more funds—better spending—more vigilance—more development. But, reality is very far from this workflow.
Although, for me it is unbelievable that matter of development will get a cure in small states.
Development is a wide term, and it requires contribution of many performers. It could go either way, it may initiate demands across the country for creation of smaller states, hence creating unrest and disturbing society.
The smaller state may lose the advantage it was receiving from the being a part of big state, for example non-payment of certain duties, getting benefits of state schemes and getting resources unavailable within the smaller state from the bigger state. Now, it will have to buy them from other state and this may create load on already strained new economy of the small state.
But at the same time, it can be boon for the smaller region as it does not need to take burden of the entire region. Now, a small state can progress based on its own resources.
Further, it can be an irony for the nation that even after taking steps for balanced regional development, the most resource rich areas are the least developed.
It clearly shows for the development, a lot of will and other elements are required for development and not just a spree of creating smaller states.
conclusion
The central government has given ‘special status’ to the states provided them monetary help irrespective of their dimension, but still they figure low on development. Reduction of the size of states is not the remedy for all problems in relation to underdevelopment, language differences, regional identity etc. of a people. This solution will only create differences among people, but it is also not easy to overcome these differences. It will require a robust commitment on both sides; of people and the government to formulate other ways to resolve these problems and to work for welfare.