Revision summary
Article 263 is the constitutional base of the Inter-State Council, set up in 1990 after Sarkaria. The Council can recommend on administrative and political friction between the Union and the States. River disputes follow Article 262 and statutory tribunals, not the Council as a court. Article 131 remains the judicial path for certain Union–State legal disputes. The Council works only to the extent it is convened and its advice is accepted.
Model answer
Introduction
Article 263 allows the President to set up an Inter-State Council to inquire, discuss, and recommend on Union–State and inter-State subjects. The Council is a political forum, not a court, and the extent of its power must be stated plainly.
Body
What the Council can do
- The Sarkaria Commission recommended a permanent Inter-State Council, and it was constituted in 1990 to discuss policy friction before it hardens into litigation.
- It can place GST compensation, Centrally Sponsored Schemes, and residual Union–State irritants on a common table with the Prime Minister in the chair.
- Political settlement of a dispute, as when States accept a recommended formula, is a real form of resolution even without a decree.
What it cannot do
- Article 262 keeps river-water disputes out of the Supreme Court’s original path and sends them to tribunals under the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act; the Council does not replace that machinery.
- Recommendations are not binding in the way a Supreme Court judgment under Article 131 on Union–State legal rights is binding.
- Long gaps between meetings, seen for years after the early sittings, show that the forum is only as strong as the Union’s will to convene it.
Extent of the claim
- It is correct to say the Council can ease many political and administrative disputes if it meets often and if both sides bargain in good faith.
- It is not correct to say it can effectively resolve every Union–State dispute, especially those that need a tribunal, a finance commission, or a court.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD A263[Article 263 Council] --> P[Political recommendation] P --> E[Some Union-State easing] W[Article 262 tribunals] --> R[River disputes] C[Article 131 Court] --> L[Legal Union-State suits]
Conclusion
The Inter-State Council can resolve a slice of Union–State conflict through talk and recommendation. The claim of effective resolution is only partly true, because water, money, and justiciable rights still travel on other constitutional tracks.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
The Citizen Charter has been a landmark initiative in ensuring citizen-centric administration. Comment.
Next question in the 2025 paper (Q5). View answer →
-
Is the GST Council the same as the Inter-State Council?
No. The GST Council is a separate body under Article 279A for GST. The Inter-State Council is the general Article 263 forum.
-
Can the Council overrule a water-tribunal award?
No. River disputes have their own statutory path. The Council may discuss politics around them; it does not sit as an appellate court.
Same topic · past papers
UPPSC has asked this before
These previous-year questions sit on the same topic. Open one to practise the earlier ask.
-
2025 · Q14 · UPGS2 · 12 marks
Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is an important tool for promoting social justice and protecting the rights of marginalized communities. Analyse with suitable examples. -
2020 · Q3 · UPGS2 · 8 marks
Critically analyse the role of the Inter-State Council in promoting Co-operative Federalism in India.
More from this paper
Q1 · UPSC Mains 2025 · UPGS2 · 8 marks · Solution
What role do Joint Parliamentary Committees (JPCs) play in the Indian legislative process? How do they contribute to effective law-making? Analyse.
Parliament and State legislatures
A JPC is an ad hoc joint committee used for complex bills or major controversies. It gathers evidence that floor debate cannot gather at the same depth. Reports have shaped later drafting after inquiries such as Bofors and 2G. The committee cannot enact law; the Houses may still ignore the report. Effective law-making follows only when Parliament uses that record to amend the bill.
Q2 · UPSC Mains 2025 · UPGS2 · 8 marks · Solution
How does Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) strengthen efficient governance and enhance the effectiveness of the justice delivery system in India? Analyze.
Separation of powers
Section 89 CPC and the 1996 Arbitration Act, with the 2023 Mediation Act, give ADR a legal base. Lok Adalats under the 1987 Legal Services Authorities Act clear compoundable claims in bulk. Governance gains when contracts and welfare complaints do not wait years for a trial. Justice delivery gains only if weaker parties are not forced into unfair bargains. Courts remain necessary for crime and for constitutional rights.
Q3 · UPSC Mains 2025 · UPGS2 · 8 marks · Solution
"Legislature is supreme within its domain, yet it is not sovereign." Examine this statement in the constitutional context with examples.
Indian Constitution
Articles 245 and 246 make a legislature supreme on its constitutional list. Kesavananda and Minerva Mills deny unlimited amending power. Articles 13, 32, and 226 allow courts to void unconstitutional statutes. The NJAC judgment is an example of a constitutional amendment falling to basic structure review. India follows constitutional supremacy, not British parliamentary sovereignty.