Union and its Territories

Articles 1 to 4: the name and territory of India, new States, changes to States, and Union territories

In one minute

Articles 1 to 4 say what India is, what its territory includes and how Parliament can change the map. Parliament can admit new territory, form new States and alter State boundaries and names by an ordinary law. The affected State is heard, but it cannot say no.

Exams ask about the words "Union of States", the difference between Article 2 and Article 3, and why handing over territory to another country is different. Union territories (Part VIII) are also asked.

Exam focus

Frequency: Frequently asked
Usually asked as: Both (long answer and short answer)

Legal provision

Article 1: India, that is Bharat, is a Union of States. Its territory is the States, the Union territories in the First Schedule and territories acquired later.
Article 2: Parliament may by law admit into the Union, or establish, new States on such terms and conditions as it thinks fit.
Article 3: Parliament may by law form new States and alter the area, boundaries or name of a State. The proviso needs the President's recommendation and a reference to the State Legislature.
Article 4: a law under Article 2 or 3 amends the First and Fourth Schedules. Under Article 4(2) it is not an amendment for Article 368.
Articles 239 to 241: Union territories. Article 143: the President may refer a question to the Supreme Court.

Meaning and definition

The Union is India as a whole, made up of States and Union territories.

Article 1(1) says "Union of States", not "federation". The States did not make an agreement to join, so none can secede. That is why the Constitution does not use the word "federation".

Which route does a territorial change take?How to read this: go down the boxes in order. A "No" answer sends you to the result beside the box.

1. Is the territory already part of India? Articles 1(3), 2
No: Parliament may admit it or establish a new State by law, on terms it thinks fit (Article 2).
2. Does the change stay inside India? Article 3
No: handing territory to a foreign country needs a constitutional amendment under Article 368, not Article 3 (Berubari).
3. Does the Bill affect the area, boundaries or name of a State? Article 3 proviso
No: the Bill needs only the President's recommendation.
Yes: the President's recommendation is needed and he must refer the Bill to that State's Legislature for its views. Once the period has expired, Parliament may pass it by an ordinary law. It is not an amendment under Article 368 (Article 4(2)).

Detailed explanation

Step 1: Article 1, the name and territory

"India, that is Bharat" gives the country two names of equal standing. The States and territories are listed in the First Schedule (Article 1(2)). Article 1(3)(c) covers territory acquired later.

Ambedkar explained the choice of "Union" by saying no State may secede.

Step 2: Article 2, new territory

Article 2 deals with territory that is not yet part of India. Parliament may admit it, or establish a new State, on terms it thinks fit. Sikkim came in by constitutional amendment instead. The 35th Amendment inserted Article 2A to associate Sikkim with the Union (in force from 1 March 1975). The 36th Amendment omitted it from 26 April 1975 and made Sikkim a State (see Article 371F).

Step 3: Article 3, changes inside India

Article 3 deals with territory already in India. Parliament may, by law, do any of five things:

form a new State by separating territory from a State, by uniting States or parts of States, or by uniting any territory to part of a State;
increase the area of a State;
diminish the area of a State;
alter the boundaries of a State;
alter the name of a State.

Two conditions apply to the Bill. It must be introduced only on the President's recommendation. If it affects the area, boundaries or name of a State, the President must refer it to that State's Legislature for its views within a stated period. The State's views are not binding. The text of Article 3 requires only that the period expires.

Explanation I says "State" in clauses (a) to (e) includes a Union territory, but in the proviso it does not. A Union territory can therefore be changed under Article 3 without consulting its Legislature. Explanation II adds that clause (a) covers uniting part of a State or Union territory to another.

Example. The Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014 divided Andhra Pradesh and created Telangana under Articles 3 and 4. The States Reorganisation Act, 1956 redrew the map largely on linguistic lines.

Step 4: Article 4, consequences

A law under Article 2 or 3 must amend the First Schedule (list of States and Union territories) and the Fourth Schedule (seats in the Council of States) as needed. It may also deal with representation in Parliament and the State Legislatures. Because of Article 4(2), such a law needs only a simple majority.

Step 5: giving territory to another country

Article 3 does not allow the cession of Indian territory. In the Berubari Union reference (1960), the President asked the Supreme Court under Article 143 about an India and Pakistan agreement to transfer part of Berubari Union. The question was whether Article 3 could carry it out. The Court held that Article 3 does not cover cession of Indian territory to a foreign country. Such a transfer needs a constitutional amendment under Article 368. This was a Presidential reference, and the Court's answer was advisory.

Step 6: Union territories

A Union territory is administered by the Union (Part VIII, Articles 239 to 241).

Article 239: unless Parliament provides otherwise, the President administers a Union territory through an administrator. He may appoint a State's Governor as administrator of an adjoining Union territory. The Governor then acts independently of his State Council of Ministers.
Article 239A: Parliament may create a Legislature or a Council of Ministers, or both, for Puducherry. It was made applicable to Jammu and Kashmir by the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019. Such a law is not an amendment under Article 368.
Article 239AA: Delhi is the National Capital Territory. Its administrator is the Lieutenant Governor and it has a directly elected Legislative Assembly. The Assembly can make laws on State List and Concurrent List matters, except Entries 1, 2 and 18 of the State List (public order, police and land).
Article 240: the President may make regulations for peace, progress and good government of certain Union territories, such as the Andaman and Nicobar Islands and Lakshadweep.
Article 241: Parliament may constitute a High Court for a Union territory or declare a court there to be a High Court.

In Government of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India (2018), a Constitution Bench held the Lieutenant Governor bound by the aid and advice of the Delhi Council of Ministers. The exception is matters outside the Assembly's powers. In 2023 another Constitution Bench held that the Delhi Government controls services, apart from public order, police and land.

Don't confuse: Article 2 and Article 3

Point	Article 2	Article 3
Deals with	Territory not already part of India	Territory already part of India
Power	Admit or establish new States on terms Parliament thinks fit	Form States; alter area, boundaries or names
State Legislature heard?	The Article does not require it	Yes, if its area, boundaries or name is affected (views not binding)
Amendment under Article 368?	No (Article 4(2))	No (Article 4(2))

Inside the concept (Article 3). Parliament divides one State into two. It is an internal change, and Article 3 applies.

Just outside it. The Government agrees to hand over a strip of Indian territory to a neighbouring country. Article 3 does not apply. A constitutional amendment is needed.

Common mistakes

Saying a State must consent to a change in its area. It is only heard.
Saying a law under Article 3 is a constitutional amendment. Article 4(2) says it is not.
Using Article 3 for handing over territory to another country. That needs Article 368.

Apply it

Problem

Parliament decides to carve a new State out of the northern districts of an existing State. The State Legislature passes a resolution against the split. Can the State block the Bill in court because it did not consent?

Issue. Does Article 3 need the State's consent?

Rule. The Bill needs the President's recommendation and a reference to the State Legislature for its views (Article 3 proviso). The views do not bind Parliament. Once the State has been heard on the Bill, it need not be referred back after amendment (Babulal Parate).

Application. The reference was made and the period expired. The State's opposition does not stop Parliament.

Conclusion. The State cannot block the law on the ground that it did not consent. The same Bill would fail if it gave the territory to a foreign country, because that needs Article 368.

Leading case laws

Babulal Parate v. State of Bombay (1960)
Facts. The challenge was to the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, which set up a composite State of Bombay in place of the three units in the original Bill.

Principle. Once the State Legislature has given its views on the original Bill, a fresh reference is not needed even if Parliament amends the Bill.

Why it matters. The State Legislature is heard once. It has no continuing veto.
In re Berubari Union (1960)
Facts. The President referred to the Supreme Court the question whether an India and Pakistan agreement to transfer part of Berubari Union could be implemented by a law under Article 3.

Principle. Article 3 does not cover cession of Indian territory to a foreign country. That needs a constitutional amendment under Article 368.

Why it matters. It is the standard authority on the limit of Article 3.
Government of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India (2018)
Facts. The dispute was about the powers of the Lieutenant Governor and the elected Government of Delhi under Article 239AA.

Principle. The Lieutenant Governor is bound by the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, except on matters outside the Assembly's powers (public order, police and land).

Why it matters. It shows that Delhi's Government has real powers within Article 239AA.

How to write this answer in the exam

5-mark answer

State Article 1: name, "Union of States", and the three parts of territory.
Explain Article 3 and its proviso.
Mention Article 4(2) and one example, such as Telangana.
Close with Berubari.

10-mark answer

Article 1 and why "Union".
Article 2 and Article 3, with the comparison.
Procedure under the proviso; Babulal Parate.
Article 4 and Schedules.
Limit of Article 3: Berubari.
Union territories: Articles 239, 239A, 239AA, 240, 241.
Examples and conclusion.

Key points to remember

Article 1: "Union of States"; territory = States, Union territories, acquired territory.
Article 2: new territory. Article 3: change inside India.
Article 3 Bill: President's recommendation; reference to the State; views not binding.
Article 4(2): such a law is not an amendment under Article 368.
Berubari (1960): ceding territory to a foreign country needs Article 368.
Babulal Parate (1960): no second reference after amendment.
Part VIII: Union territories; Delhi under Article 239AA; Puducherry under Article 239A.

Quick self-test

1. Why does the Constitution say "Union of States" and not "federation"?

The States did not agree to join, so no State may secede.

2. What must happen before a Bill under Article 3 that affects a State is passed?

The President must recommend it and refer it to that State's Legislature for its views within the stated period. The views do not bind Parliament.

3. Can Article 3 be used to transfer Indian territory to another country?

No. In the Berubari reference the Court held that this needs a constitutional amendment under Article 368.