Many State Governments further bifurcate geographical administrative areas like Districts and Talukas for…

Question

Many State Governments further bifurcate geographical administrative areas like Districts and Talukas for better governance. In light of the above, can it also be justified that more number of smaller States would bring in effective governance at State level ? Discuss.

Ghissu Editorial · Accepted Answer

Smaller states can bring administration closer and focus development, but effective governance depends on fiscal viability, political stability and institutional capacity rather than size. Jharkhand's three spells of President's Rule by 2013 contrast with Uttarakhand's much faster growth than Uttar Pradesh after 2000.

**Introduction**

States such as Telangana and Andhra Pradesh have multiplied their districts to bring administration closer to citizens, and the same logic drives demands for new states under Article 3. Smaller states can aid governance, but size is not the decisive factor.

**How Smaller States Can Help**

1. **Administrative proximity**: B.R. Ambedkar's Thoughts on Linguistic States (1955) argued for splitting Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Madhya Pradesh so that government stays within reach of every region.
2. **Focused development**: Uttarakhand, created in 2000, grew much faster than Uttar Pradesh in the next decade as its hill economy, hydropower and tourism got dedicated attention.
3. **Regional aspirations**: A new state can end long neglect, the grievance behind the Telangana demand that the Srikrishna Committee (2010) examined.

**Why Size Alone Is Not Enough**

SKETCH: forcefield | Smaller States and Governance
center: Smaller states
driving: Administrative proximity, Focused development, Regional identity
restraining: Fiscal viability, Political instability, Resource disputes

1. **Political instability**: Jharkhand saw three spells of President's Rule and an independent MLA, Madhu Koda, as Chief Minister within thirteen years of its creation.
2. **Fiscal viability**: Small states with a thin tax base depend on central transfers and bear the cost of new capitals and cadres.
3. **Resource disputes**: Division breeds conflicts over rivers and assets, as in Krishna water sharing after Telangana's creation in 2014.
4. **Capacity over size**: Tamil Nadu, with over seven crore people, delivers better health and education outcomes than many smaller states.

**Conclusion**

Smaller states are justified only where a region is viable, administratively distinct and backed by broad consensus, the tests the Fazl Ali Commission (1955) weighed alongside language. Empowering local bodies under the 73rd and 74th Amendments often brings governance closer at lower cost.

Many State Governments further bifurcate geographical administrative areas like Districts and Talukas for better governance. In light of the above, can it also be justified that more number of smaller States would bring in effective governance at State level ? Discuss.

Model answer

Practise this question

Devolution, Panchayati Raj1 question

Ghissu