Part 7 of Indian Constitution, Article 238, Repealed, Amendment

The Constitution of India is the supreme legal document that governs the country. It is divided into several Parts, each dealing with specific subjects such as the Union, States, Judiciary and Administration. Originally, the Constitution contained different classifications of States under the First Schedule. Part 7 of Indian Constitution was one such Part, specially created to deal with the States placed in Part B of the First Schedule. Although it is no longer in force today, Part VII played an important historical role in shaping India’s early federal structure after the Constitution came into effect in 1950.

Part 7 of Indian Constitution

Part 7 of Indian Constitution was titled as “The States in Part B of the First Schedule.” It contained only one Article, i.e. Article 238. This Part was included to regulate the governance of Part B States, which were mainly former Princely States integrated into India after independence. Article 238 extended the provisions of Part 6 of the Constitution (which dealt with State Governments) to these Part B States with specific modifications and omissions. However, this entire Part was omitted by the Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act 1956, with effect from 1 November 1956, after the reorganisation of States.

Article 238 of Part 7 of Indian Constitution

Article 238 of the Part 7 of Indian Constitution applied Part 6 provisions to Part B States with several modifications and special administrative arrangements.

• It provided that the provisions of Part VI, which governed States, would also apply to the States listed in Part B of the First Schedule, but with specific changes and exceptions suited to their unique background.
• Under Article 238, wherever the word “Governor” appeared in Part VI, it was replaced by “Rajpramukh,” except in one specific reference in Article 232. This reflected the administrative position of former princely rulers.
• Articles 155, 156 and 157 were omitted in their application to Part B States. This showed that the appointment and conditions of Governors under Part VI did not apply in the same way to Rajpramukhs.
• Changes were made in Articles 158 and 202, including provisions regarding allowances, residence and expenditure of the Rajpramukh. For example, allowances were to be determined by the President by general or special order.
• Article 164 was modified to require that in the State of Madhya Bharat there would be a Minister in charge of tribal welfare, who could also handle welfare of Scheduled Castes and backward classes.
• In Article 168, it was provided that every Part B State would have a Legislature consisting of the Rajpramukh. Mysore had two Houses, while other Part B States had only one House.
• Article 221 was substituted to provide that salaries of High Court Judges in Part B States would be determined by the President after consultation with the Rajpramukh, with safeguards against disadvantage after appointment.
• Article 238 was not part of the Draft Constitution of 1948. It was introduced later as Draft Article 211A in October 1949 and adopted with minor amendments.
• However, it was later repealed through the Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act, 1956.

‹ ›

Amendments related to Part 7 of Indian Constitution

Part 7 of Indian Constitution and Article 238 were omitted by the Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act, 1956. The major features of the amendment are:

• Section 29 and the Schedule of the Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act, 1956 deleted Part VII entirely. This change came into effect on 1 November 1956 after the reorganisation of States.
• The Seventh Amendment removed the earlier classification of States into Part A, Part B, Part C and Part D categories. Part B States ceased to exist as a separate constitutional class.
• The 7th Amendment followed the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, which restructured Indian States. After this change, the earlier distinction between Part A and Part B States became unnecessary.
• After the repeal of Article 238, Part VI applied only to States. Union Territories were placed under Part VIII, specifically Articles 239 to 241, creating a distinct administrative framework.
• With the deletion of Article 238, the constitutional position of Rajpramukh ended. A uniform system of governance was established across all States under the same constitutional provisions.

Case Laws related to Part 7 of Indian Constitution

Few Landmark Case Laws related to the Part 7 of the Indian Constitution and the Article 238 include:

• T.M. Kanniyan v. I.T.O. (AIR 1968 SC 637): The Supreme Court held that Union Territories are governed by the President under Article 239 and are not covered by Part VI. This reflected the post-repeal position after Article 238 was removed.
• New Delhi Municipal Council v. State of Punjab (1997) 7 SCC 339: The Court observed that Union Territories do not enjoy the same constitutional status as States. This judgment reinforced that Part VI applies only to States, not to Union Territories.
• G.V. Ramanaiah v. Superintendent of Central Jail (1974) 3 SCC 531: The Court clarified that Union Territories cannot claim privileges available to States unless expressly provided. This interpretation reflected the legal consequences after Article 238 ceased to operate.
• State of Rajasthan v. Union of India (1977): Although not directly about Article 238, this case discussed Union-State relations and presidential powers, reflecting the broader constitutional changes after the Seventh Amendment streamlined state classifications.
• Berubari Union Case (1960): This case interpreted territorial changes under the First Schedule and emphasized constitutional procedures for cession of territory, reflecting the restructuring environment following the Seventh Amendment and omission of Part VII.