Tussle Between Union and Union Territory

Indian Polity Union Territories

Recently,the Centre told the Supreme Court that Union Territory of Puducherry is the “property” of the Union and there is no need for the Centre to consult the incumbent Congress government in Puducherry before making nominations to the Puducherry Assembly.

According to Article 1 of the constitution, territory of India comprises states, union territories and territories acquired by the government.
The states are the members of the federal system in India and share a distribution of power with the Centre. The union territories, on the other hand, are those areas which are under the direct control and administration of the Central government. Hence, they are also known as ‘centrally administered territories’.
The union territories have been created for a variety of reasons- political, cultural, strategic etc.

The territory of Puducherry comprises the former French establishments in India known as Puducherry, Karaikal, Mahe and Yanam.
The French handed over this territory to India in 1954. Subsequently, it was administered as an ‘acquired territory’, till 1962 when it was made a union territory by the 14th Constitutional Amendment Act.

Even though all the union territories belong to one category, there is no uniformity in their administrative system. Every union territory is administered by the President acting through an administrator appointed by him.
An administrator of a union territory is an agent of the President and not head of state like a governor.
The Union Territories of Puducherry (in 1963) and Delhi (in 1992) are provided with a legislative assembly and a council of ministers headed by a chief minister. The remaining five union territories do not have such popular political institutions.
But, the establishment of such institutions in the union territories does not diminish the supreme control of the president and Parliament over them.

The Parliament can make laws on any subject of the three lists (including the State List) for the union territories. This power of Parliament also extends to Puducherry and Delhi, which have their own local legislatures.
This means that, the legislative power of Parliament for the union territories on subjects of the State List remain unaffected even after establishing a local legislature for them. But, the legislative assembly of Puducherry can also make laws on any subject of the State List and the Concurrent List.
Similarly, the legislative assembly of Delhi can make laws on any subject of the State List (except public order, police and land) and the Concurrent List.
The President can make regulations for the peace, progress and good government of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Lakshadweep, Dadra and Nagar Haveli, and Daman and Diu.
In the case of Puducherry also, the President can legislate by making regulations but only when the assembly is suspended or dissolved. A regulation made by the President has the same force and effect as an act of Parliament and can also repeal or amend any act of Parliament in relation to these union territories.

The representatives of each union territory in the Rajya Sabha are indirectly elected by members of an electoral college specially constituted for the purpose. This election is also held in accordance with the system of proportional representation by means of the single transferable vote. Out of the seven union territories, only two (Delhi and Puducherry) have representation in Rajya Sabha. The populations of other five union territories are too small to have any representative in the Rajya Sabha.

Central government can nominate 3 members to the legislature of Puducherry. The Madras High Court had upheld the nomination of the three members to the assembly by the Centre and their swearing-in by Lt Governor, over which the Puducherry government had protested. UT Government said the Centre cannot have “untrammelled power to nominate and the local government State should be consulted. Neither the Union is a stranger nor the State. Centre is the final authority, but the names should emanate from the State. The law is silent about any process of consultation.

The administration of Union Territories is by the Central government but that does not mean the Union Territories become merged with the Central government. They are centrally administered but retain their independent entity.

Nobody can disagree that the goal of the drafters of our Constitution was to create a democratic republic that confers equal rights to all citizens. This extends to the equal right of people for representation and self-governance.
Even when the Union Territories were first created, the idea was to provide a flexible yet transitional status to several territories that joined the Indian Union under different circumstances. With time, Goa, Manipur, Himachal Pradesh and Tripura have been granted statehood.
The first stage of Delhi’s evolution took place in 1991, when the Assembly was created. The time has come to enter the second and final stage to create the full State of Delhi.
This is no longer about a political party or a leader. It is about the democratic rights and aspirations of nearly two crore citizens. The sooner the union government understands this, the better it would be for Delhi and other UTs and the project to make India a better, greater democracy.

Union government plays a great role in the administration and legislation of Union territories. Parliament can legislate on any matters related to UTs thus undermining their separate identity.Elected government in UTs of Delhi and Puducherry cannot take important decisions or cannot make laws on crucial subjects, involvement of union government is high.