Union and Its Territory (Articles 1-4): Union of States, Reorganisation & Berubari (UPSC Polity)
Article 1 — India as a 'Union of States'
🎯 Exam priority: Foundational. Short but exam-favourite — why India is a "Union of States" not a "Federation", the difference between Article 2 and Article 3, the fact that Parliament can redraw states by a simple majority (not the Article 368 amendment route — linked to the 2025 Prelims question on ratification), and the Berubari rule that ceding territory needs an amendment. Learn Articles 1 to 4 cleanly.
Articles 1 to 4, in Part I of the Constitution, deal with the Union and its territory — the name of the country, the kind of polity, and how its internal map can be changed.
Article 1 — India as a 'Union of States'
Article 1 describes "India, that is Bharat, as a Union of States" — deliberately a "Union" not a "Federation". Dr B.R. Ambedkar gave two reasons: (i) the Indian federation is not the result of an agreement among the states (unlike the American one); and (ii) the states have no right to secede. The Union is indestructible — one integral whole, divided into states only for administrative convenience.
The "Territory of India" has three categories: (1) territories of the States; (2) the Union Territories; and (3) territories that may be acquired by the Government of India. At present there are 28 States and 8 Union Territories (listed in the First Schedule). Note: "Territory of India" is wider than "Union of India" — the Union of India includes only the States (the members of the federal system), while the Territory of India also covers UTs and acquired territories.
Integration of the princely states: at independence there were about 552 princely states; 549 acceded to India (largely through Sardar Patel and V.P. Menon and the Instrument of Accession). The three hold-outs were integrated separately — Junagarh by referendum, Hyderabad by police action (Operation Polo) and Kashmir by the Instrument of Accession.
Acquiring Territory, and Article 2 vs Article 3
India can also grow — and the Constitution gives Parliament two different tools, often confused in the exam.
Acquiring Territory, and Article 2 vs Article 3
India may acquire foreign territory by the modes recognised in international law — cession (by treaty, purchase, gift, lease or plebiscite), occupation, or conquest/subjugation. It has done so with Dadra and Nagar Haveli, Goa, Daman and Diu, Puducherry and Sikkim.
Article 2 empowers Parliament to "admit into, or establish, new States" that are NOT part of the Union of India (i.e., external — bringing in a territory like Sikkim). Article 3, by contrast, deals with the internal re-arrangement of the existing States of the Union. The clean distinction: Article 2 = new states from outside; Article 3 = re-organising states already inside.
Article 3 — Reorganising the Existing States
Article 3 is the one that has redrawn India's map a dozen times — and it does so with surprisingly little say for the states.
Article 3 — Reorganising the Existing States
Article 3 authorises Parliament to: (1) form a new State (by separating territory, uniting states/parts, or adding territory); (2) increase or diminish the area of any State; (3) alter the boundaries of any State; and (4) alter the name of any State.
Two conditions apply: (i) a bill for these changes can be introduced only on the prior recommendation of the President; and (ii) the President must refer the bill to the concerned State Legislature for its views — but those views are NOT binding on Parliament (and for a Union Territory, no such reference is needed).
So Parliament can form new states or alter the areas, boundaries or names of existing states WITHOUT their consent. This is why India is called an "indestructible Union of destructible States" — the Union can redraw the states at will — in contrast to the USA, "an indestructible Union of indestructible States", where state boundaries cannot be changed without the states' consent.
Article 4 — a Simple-Majority Power, and Reorganisation
A common exam trap: changing the map of India is NOT a constitutional amendment.
Article 4 — a Simple-Majority Power, and the Story of Reorganisation
Article 4 declares that laws made under Articles 2 and 3 are NOT to be treated as amendments under Article 368. They can therefore be passed by a simple majority and the ordinary legislative process — no special majority, no ratification by states. (This is the distinction the 2025 Prelims tested against Article 368's special-plus-state-ratification route.)
The first linguistic state: agitation for a Telugu-speaking state, and the death of Potti Sriramulu after a 56-day hunger strike, forced the creation of Andhra (the first linguistic state) in October 1953. This led to the Fazl Ali Commission (States Reorganisation Commission, 1953) — a three-member body of Fazl Ali, K.M. Panikkar and H.N. Kunzru, which reported in 1955 and (while rejecting "one language–one state" as the sole basis) produced the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, reorganising India largely on a linguistic basis into 14 States and 6 Union Territories.
New states have since been carved out — Telangana (2014) being the most recent created. Sikkim's path is a Prelims favourite: it became an "associate state" by the 35th Amendment (1974) and then the 22nd full state by the 36th Amendment (1975). Most recently, the Jammu & Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019 abrogated Article 370's special status and split the state into two Union Territories, Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh.
Cession of Territory, Berubari & Why This Matters
One sharp limit remains on Parliament's territorial power — and it is a favourite Prelims point.
Articles 1 to 4 at a glance — and which route needs what
Article | What it does | The fact UPSC asks |
Art 1 | 'India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States' | The word federation is never used; states have no right to secede |
Art 2 | Admit or establish NEW states not already part of India | Looks OUTWARD — e.g. Sikkim |
Art 3 | Form new states, or alter the area, boundaries or names of existing ones | Looks INWARD; state's views sought but NOT binding |
Art 4 | Declares such laws are not amendments under Art 368 | Passed by SIMPLE majority — no state ratification |
Amendment route | Ceding territory to a foreign state | Needs a constitutional amendment (Berubari, 1960) — not Art 3 |
Milestone | Year | What happened |
Dhar Commission | 1948 | Rejected language as the basis; preferred administrative convenience |
JVP Committee | 1949 | Nehru, Patel and Pattabhi Sitaramayya — also rejected language |
Andhra created | 1953 | First linguistic state, after Potti Sriramulu's 56-day fast |
Fazl Ali Commission | 1953-55 | Accepted language, but rejected 'one language, one state' |
States Reorganisation Act | 1956 | 14 states and 6 Union Territories; abolished Parts A/B/C/D |
Sikkim | 1974-75 | Associate state by the 35th Amendment, then 22nd full state by the 36th |
Telangana | 2014 | Most recent state created — by an ordinary Act |
J&K Reorganisation | 2019 | Split into two Union Territories, J&K and Ladakh |
100th Amendment | 2015 | India-Bangladesh land boundary — enclaves exchanged |
Cession of Territory, Berubari & Why This Matters
Does Article 3's power to "diminish the area of a State" let Parliament cede Indian territory to a foreign country? In the Berubari Union case (1960), the Supreme Court held NO — ceding territory to a foreign state is not covered by Article 3 and requires a constitutional amendment under Article 368. Accordingly, the transfer of Berubari to Pakistan needed the 9th Constitutional Amendment Act (1960); and the India–Bangladesh Land Boundary Agreement was given effect by the 100th Amendment (2015). (However, settling a boundary dispute can be done by the executive, without an amendment.)
Why this matters for UPSC: Prelims tests "Union of States", Article 2 vs Article 3, the Art 3 procedure (President's recommendation, non-binding state views), the simple-majority point (Art 4 vs Art 368), and the Berubari cession rule. Tie each Article to its exact power and its limit — that precision is where the marks are.
Further Reading
Standard NCERT-level texts and reference books on modern Indian history (any UPSC reading list).
Test Yourself: Practice Questions & PYQs
Test yourself on Articles 1 to 4 — Union of States, Article 2 vs Article 3, the reorganisation procedure, Article 4's simple-majority rule and the Berubari cession ruling. Attempt each before revealing the answer.
Practice Questions
Q1. Article 1 of the Constitution describes India as a:
(a) Federation of States
(b) Confederation of States
(c) Quasi-federal State
(d) Union of States
Show answer
Answer: (d) — Article 1 calls India a 'Union of States'. Ambedkar preferred 'Union' over 'Federation' because the federation is not an agreement among states and the states cannot secede — the Union is indestructible.
Q2. Which Article empowers Parliament to admit or establish NEW states that are not already part of the Union?
(a) Article 1
(b) Article 3
(c) Article 2
(d) Article 4
Show answer
Answer: (c) — Article 2 deals with admission/establishment of new states from OUTSIDE the Union (e.g. Sikkim). Article 3 deals with internal re-arrangement of states already in the Union.
Q3. Under Article 3, the views of the State Legislature on a bill to alter its area or name are:
(a) binding and must be accepted by Parliament
(b) not required to be sought at all
(c) sought but NOT binding on Parliament
(d) decided by the Supreme Court
Show answer
Answer: (c) — The President must refer the bill to the State Legislature for its views, but those views are not binding on Parliament. For a Union Territory, no reference is even needed.
Q4. India is described as an 'indestructible Union of destructible States' because:
(a) Parliament can alter states' areas and names without their consent
(b) states can redraw their own boundaries
(c) states can secede from the Union
(d) the Union itself can be dissolved
Show answer
Answer: (a) — Parliament can form, merge, rename or resize states without their consent (Art 3), so the states are 'destructible', while the Union itself is indestructible — unlike the USA's 'indestructible Union of indestructible States'.
Q5. A law made under Article 3 to form a new state requires, for its passage:
(a) a referendum in the affected state
(b) ratification by half the state legislatures
(c) a simple majority in Parliament
(d) a special majority under Article 368
Show answer
Answer: (c) — Article 4 says laws under Articles 2 and 3 are not amendments under Article 368, so they pass by a simple majority and the ordinary process — no special majority or state ratification.
Q6. The States Reorganisation Act, 1956 reorganised the states mainly on the basis of:
(a) religion
(b) language
(c) river basins
(d) administrative convenience alone
Show answer
Answer: (b) — Following the Fazl Ali Commission (1953), the States Reorganisation Act, 1956 reorganised India largely on a linguistic basis into 14 states and 6 union territories.
Q7. In the Berubari Union case (1960), the Supreme Court held that ceding Indian territory to a foreign country:
(a) requires a constitutional amendment under Article 368
(b) is never permissible
(c) can be done by the executive alone
(d) can be done by Parliament under Article 3
Show answer
Answer: (a) — Ceding territory to a foreign state is not covered by Article 3's power to diminish a state's area; it needs a constitutional amendment under Article 368 (e.g. the 9th Amendment for Berubari, the 100th for the India–Bangladesh boundary).
Q8. The expression 'Territory of India' is wider than 'Union of India' because it ALSO includes:
(a) foreign embassies in India
(b) the territorial waters only
(c) Union Territories and acquired territories
(d) only the States
Show answer
Answer: (c) — 'Union of India' includes only the States (members of the federal system); 'Territory of India' additionally covers the Union Territories and any territories acquired by the Government of India.
Q9. The first state to be created on a linguistic basis (1953) was:
(a) Gujarat
(b) Andhra
(c) Maharashtra
(d) Telangana
Show answer
Answer: (b) — Andhra was the first linguistic state (October 1953), created after the death of Potti Sriramulu following a 56-day hunger strike. This led to the Fazl Ali Commission and the States Reorganisation Act, 1956.
Q10. The States Reorganisation Commission (1953) was a three-member body headed by Fazl Ali, with:
(a) B.R. Ambedkar and K.M. Munshi
(b) K.M. Panikkar and H.N. Kunzru
(c) Nehru and Rajendra Prasad
(d) Sardar Patel and V.P. Menon
Show answer
Answer: (b) — The Fazl Ali Commission comprised Fazl Ali (chairman), K.M. Panikkar and H.N. Kunzru; it reported in 1955 and led to the States Reorganisation Act, 1956.
Q11. Sikkim was made a full-fledged (22nd) state of the Indian Union by which amendment?
(a) 7th Amendment (1956)
(b) 36th Amendment (1975)
(c) 35th Amendment (1974)
(d) 42nd Amendment (1976)
Show answer
Answer: (b) — The 35th Amendment (1974) made Sikkim an 'associate state'; the 36th Amendment (1975), after a referendum, made it the 22nd full state of the Union.
UPSC Previous Year Questions (PYQs)
Eight questions UPSC has actually asked on Articles 1 to 4. The two that decide most marks are the Article 2 versus Article 3 distinction, and the Berubari rule that ceding territory needs an AMENDMENT, not an ordinary law.
Q12. In the Berubari Union case (1960), the Supreme Court held that ceding Indian territory to a foreign state requires: (UPSC PYQ)
(a) an ordinary law of Parliament under Article 3
(b) an amendment of the Constitution under Article 368
(c) a resolution of the concerned State Legislature
(d) only an executive agreement by the Union Government
Show answer
Answer: (b) — Article 3 permits Parliament to redraw internal boundaries, but CEDING territory to another country is different — it needs a constitutional amendment. That is exactly why the India-Bangladesh land boundary exchange required the 100th Amendment in 2015. Settling a mere boundary DISPUTE, by contrast, needs no amendment.
Q13. Under Article 3, when Parliament proposes to form a new State or alter an existing State's boundaries, the views of the concerned State Legislature are: (UPSC PYQ)
(a) required only if the State objects to the proposal
(b) binding on Parliament, which cannot proceed without consent
(c) sought by referring the Bill to it, but are not binding on Parliament
(d) not required at all in any circumstance
Show answer
Answer: (c) — The President must refer the Bill to the state legislature for its views and may fix a time limit — but Parliament is free to disregard them, and need not make a fresh reference if it later amends the Bill. Article 3 also requires the President's prior recommendation, and passes by a SIMPLE majority.
Q14. What is the distinction between Article 2 and Article 3 of the Constitution? (UPSC PYQ)
(a) There is no substantive difference between them
(b) Article 2 reorganises existing States; Article 3 admits new ones
(c) Article 2 deals with Union Territories only; Article 3 with States only
(d) Article 2 admits or establishes States that are NOT part of India; Article 3 reorganises States already part of India
Show answer
Answer: (d) — Article 2 looks outward — admitting or establishing new states that were not already part of the Union, as with Sikkim. Article 3 looks inward — forming new states out of existing ones, or altering their areas, boundaries or names. Confusing the two is a standing Prelims trap.
Q15. The first State to be created on a linguistic basis in independent India was: (UPSC PYQ)
(a) Andhra, in 1953
(b) Haryana, in 1966
(c) Gujarat, in 1960
(d) Maharashtra, in 1960
Show answer
Answer: (a) — Andhra was carved out of Madras in October 1953, after Potti Sriramulu's fast unto death. Its creation triggered demands across the country and led directly to the Fazl Ali Commission of 1953 and the States Reorganisation Act of 1956.
Q16. The States Reorganisation Act, 1956, together with the 7th Constitutional Amendment, created: (UPSC PYQ)
(a) 17 States and 9 Union Territories
(b) 14 States and 6 Union Territories
(c) 16 States and 3 Union Territories
(d) 11 States and 5 Union Territories
Show answer
Answer: (b) — The Act abolished the old fourfold Part A, B, C and D classification and produced 14 states and 6 union territories with effect from 1 November 1956. It followed the Fazl Ali Commission, which accepted language as a basis for reorganisation but rejected 'one language, one state' as too rigid.
Q17. Which of the following commissions or committees examined the demand for linguistic reorganisation of States? 1. The Dhar Commission (1948) 2. The JVP Committee (1949) 3. The Fazl Ali Commission (1953) (UPSC PYQ)
(a) 1 and 3 only
(b) 1 and 2 only
(c) 1, 2 and 3
(d) 2 and 3 only
Show answer
Answer: (c) — All three. The Dhar Commission rejected language as the basis, preferring administrative convenience; the JVP Committee — Jawaharlal Nehru, Vallabhbhai Patel and Pattabhi Sitaramayya — also rejected it; only the Fazl Ali Commission accepted language, while refusing the 'one language, one state' formula.
Q18. Article 1 of the Constitution describes India as: (UPSC PYQ)
(a) 'India shall be a Federation of States'
(b) 'India, that is Bharat, shall be a Confederation of States'
(c) 'India shall be a Union of States and Union Territories'
(d) 'India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States'
Show answer
Answer: (d) — Article 1 reads 'India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States'. The territory of India is a wider concept than the Union of India: the Union comprises only the states that share federal power, while the TERRITORY takes in the states, the union territories, and any territories India may acquire.
Q19. The 100th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2015 gave effect to: (UPSC PYQ)
(a) the reorganisation of Andhra Pradesh and the creation of Telangana
(b) the creation of the Union Territory of Ladakh
(c) the merger of Sikkim with the Indian Union
(d) the India-Bangladesh Land Boundary Agreement, exchanging certain enclaves
Show answer
Answer: (d) — The 100th Amendment implemented the land boundary agreement with Bangladesh, exchanging enclaves and adverse possessions — the amendment route being necessary precisely because Berubari held that ceding territory cannot be done under Article 3. Telangana came via an ordinary Act in 2014, and Ladakh via the reorganisation Act of 2019.
Mains Practice Questions
Use these to frame full-length answers. You don't have to answer one exactly — they show the angles UPSC tests, so let them guide which points you cover.
Why does Article 1 describe India as a 'Union of States' rather than a 'Federation of States'? Discuss with Ambedkar's reasoning.
Distinguish between Article 2 and Article 3, and explain the procedure and limits of Parliament's power to reorganise states.
'India is an indestructible Union of destructible States.' Examine in the light of Articles 3 and 4 and the 2019 reorganisation of Jammu & Kashmir.
Discuss the constitutional position on the cession of Indian territory to a foreign country, with reference to the Berubari case.