INDEPENDENCE AND THE PRINCLY STATES

The Indian Independence Act 1947 which was responsible for the creation of the dominions of India and Pakistan left the question of the future of Indian states indefinite. Under the Act the paramountcy of the Crown lapsed and the states could join either dominion or remain free. Although Indian opinion was against the latter option, it was incorporated on the advice of the Viceroy’s Political Adviser, Sir Conrad Confield who was a great champion of the rights of princely states.

On the eve of independence, no less than 565 states were left in the subcontinent with options allowed under the Indian Independence Act 1947 with a great potency of mischief and turmoil. Although the Viceroy Lord Louis Mountbatten was sympathetic to the Indian view that paramountcy did not lapse but vested with the successors to the Government of India, Sir Conrad’s opinion prevailed with the British Government. This left a legacy of complicated and explosive problems with the Government of India which were satisfactorily solved (with one exception) largely due to the ability of Sardar Vallabhai Patel and Sri V.P. Menon who became Secretary to the States Ministry headed by Sardar Patel.

It was soon realised that though the lapse of paramountcy created complications, it would also help in sweeping away outmoded arrangements arising from various treaties signed by the British with different princes. “The Instrument of Accession” which has sometimes been referred to as a new kind of paramountcy was the method by which Patel and Menon brought about the integration of the Indian states. The revolution effected by them is of great significance in the history of modern India. It was a bloodless coup by which a number of princely states claiming various rights which could have seriously impeded the building of modern India were brought down without a struggle.

The Instrument of Accession and the Standstill Agreement provided for surrender of certain limited powers to the Dominion Government leaving them free to manage their internal affairs.

In the matter of getting the states to accede to India, the Viceroy Lord Mountbatten played a very helpful role which greatly contributed to the smooth transition. As a result of all these efforts, 562 of 565 states had acceded to India before independence. Three states continued to remain intrasigent. After India became independent, developments in these states followed different patterns. The three states concerned are Junagadh, Hyderabad and Kashmir.

Junagadh 

Junagadh in Kathiawar was a small state ruled by a Muslim Nawab with a Hindu population of 85%. It was surrounded by territories of Hindu princes of Baroda and Bhavnagar who had already acceded to India. Thus geographically and culturally Junagadh belonged to India. The Nawab however harboured designs of joining his state to Pakistan. The Pakistan Government knowing fully the weakness of the case did nothing to discourage the Nawab who moved his troops to occupy certain outer portions of his territory. This led to counter moves by India and the Nawab fled to Pakistan and his forces offered no resistance to Indian troops who moved in. Pakistan was greatly upset at these events and later on urged these points in defence of their stand on Kashmir which although a Muslim majority State was ruled by a Hindu ruler who acceded to India.

Later on in a plebiscite held on 20th February 1948, 99.95% of voters of Junagarh voted in favour of joining the Union of India.

Hyderabad

The second state whose accession to India did not take place was Hyderabad. This majority state was ruled by a Muslim ruler, the Nizam who had claimed special status amongst princely states from the British, which was however never accorded. The aim of the Nizam was however not to accede to Pakistan but remain independent. Neither the Viceroy nor the British Government gave him any encouragement. The Nizam started organising irregular forces called “Razakars” to enable him to oppose the Indian moves. The “Razakars” were loosely formed militant groups who were used to terrorise the opposition in the state and interrupt the functioning of the services of the Government of India like Railways, Post and telegraph, etc. Lord Mountbatten offered special conditions to the Nizam in the Instrument of Accession to avoid unpleasant developments. However, the Nizam resisted these overtures and continued on his confrontation course. As long as Mountbatten’s Governor-Generalship continued, he kept up negotiations with the Nizam. On his departure from India, he was succeeded by Sri C. Rajagopalachari as Governor-General. The Nizam conveyed his desire to sign the Instrument of Accession as earlier negotiated between him and Mountbatten. The Razakkars had turned violent attacking trains and peoples organisations. The Government of India felt no useful purpose would be served by negotiations and the army moved in to suppress the Razakars. Very little resistance was offered and the Nizam’s dominions were incorporated into the territory of India.

Kashmir

The last of the states which did not accede to India before independence was Kashmir. This state with its predominantly Muslim population was ruled by a Hindu Rajah. The aim of the Maharajah of Kashmir was to be independent if possible or accede to either of the dominions which offered him better terms. In order to gain time he offered to sign standstill agreements with both India and Pakistan. This was immediately agreed to by Pakistan but not by India. The Maharajah signed the standstill agreement with Pakistan under which Post & Telegraph and other services were operated by them. At this point, tribesmen from the frontier provinces of Pakistan (supported by the Government of Pakistan) crossed into the state and overran many areas and reached up to Srinagar. The Maharaja appealed to India and since India would not intervene without the state’s accession to India, the Instrument of Accession was signed by the Maharajah of Kashmir on 26th October 1948. The Indian troops thereafter marched into Kashmir and the raiders were cleared from the valley. At this stage the case was referred to the U.N. and a ceasefire ordered. It was agreed that a plebiscite would be held to determine the wishes of the Kashmiris after the vacation of aggression by Pakistan. The aggression was never vacated and ultimately the Government of India declared that the accession of the state to India was now full and complete.

Although the parts of Kashmir which were not under the occupation of Pakistan were integrated into India, with special provisions under Art. 370 for the protection of the States identity, Pakistan is not reconciled to this situation and has time and again disturbed the peace of this sub-continent on this issue.

In 1950, India became a republic. The former provinces and native states became constituent units of the republic to be called states or Union Territories and India became a “Union of States”.

In 1947 when India attained freedom, there were nine Governor’s provinces, five Chief Commissioner’s provinces and certain tribal areas, frontier regions and the Andaman and Nicobar islands. The Indian states included major states like Hyderabad, Kashmir, Mysore, Baroda and Travancore and several hundred small states run on autocratic lines like feudal principalities. According to the Independence Act even these could be sovereign states if they did not wish to accede to either dominion.

Due to the magnificent efforts of Sardar Patel and V.P. Menon, the problems had been reduced to manageable proportion when India became a republic. The accession and integration of the states into the Union was achieved by two operations-integration and merger. Rajasthan was created by integration of several small states in Rajputana. The states of Travancore-Cochin, Saurashtra, etc, were formed by similar process of integration. The process of merger was particularly useful in states such as Bihar and Orissa, Serakala and Kasravan merged with Bihar, Mayurbanj and some feudatory states merged with Orissa. The state of Pudukkotah was also merged with the province of Madras.

Constitution adopted and brought into force in 1950 provided for three classes. Part A, Part B Part C states.

       Part A states were generally those which constituted the former British Indian provinces, some of which had expanded by the merger of states mentioned earlier. All Part A states were full-fledged members of the Union

       Part B states were composed mostly of integrated states. As these were considered to be in a lower level of political development, they were under the general control of the Central Government and had to comply with such particular directions as the latter may issue from time to time.

       Part C states were directly administered by the Centre on a unitary basis. They consisted mostly of the earlier Chief Commissioner’s provinces. The Union executive was responsible to Parliament for their administration.

The Andaman & Nicobar Islands were classified as a Part D state, fully under the control of the Central Government. The number of states which formed the Union of India in 1950 are shown below:-

Part A states-10, Party B states-8, Part C states-10, Part D-1.

This three-tier system of states organisation (Part A, B, C states) was not a very happy situation and was bound to be changed. Many suggestions had been made to terminate this arrangement and evolve a more national scheme. However, sudden political developments in Andhra precipitated the end of this system. In 1952 as a result of continued agitation, it was decided to create a new State of Andhra for Telugu speaking population from certain parts of Madras and Hyderabad. This was the first state to be formed on a purely linguistic basis. This led to countrywide demand and agitation for formation of linguistic states. The political leadership of the day could not stand against these demands. A States Reorganisation Commission was constituted in 1953 to go into the question “objectively and dispassionately”. Former Judge of the Supreme Court Justice Fazl Ali headed this Commission assisted by two other members, Pandit H.N. Kunzru and Sardar K.M. Panikkar. On 30th September 1955 the Commission submitted its report. They emphasised that any scheme of re-organisation of states must have the following aims:

1)   preservation and strengthening of the unity and security of India,

2)   linguistic and cultural homogeneity,

3)   financial, economic and administrative considerations and

4)   successful working of the national development plans.

The Commission also recognised that re-organisation problems required a regional approach and a uniform pattern would be difficult to implement throughout the country. The Commission recommended abolition of the Part A,B,C state classification, abolition of special arrangements with Part B states and the institution of Rajpramukhs. On these bases, the Commission recommended creation of 16 states and 3 centrally administered territories.

The report was discussed at length in Parliament and the states legislatures after which the States Re-organisation Bill was introduced. Subsequently, Bombay was divided into the states of Maharashtra and Gujarat, the State of Nagaland created from Assam and Haryana from Punjab.

Later a number of states in the north-east such as Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur, Meghalaya, Tripura, came into being on ethno-linguistic grounds. Some Union territories like Goa also became full fledged states.