UPSC CSE 2026 Essay Paper Discussion
GS Paper 2 15 marks · 250w 14 min Medium

Examine the evolving pattern of Centre-State financial relations in the context of planned development in India. How far have the recent reforms impacted the fiscal federalism in India?

Subtopic: Constitution & Polity · Centre-State financial relations & fiscal federalism

Model answer outline

How to structure your answer

Introduction: constitutional design — Seventh Schedule, Articles 268-293, Finance Commission → Planning-era centralization: Planning Commission, discretionary plan transfers, CSS → Recent reforms: NITI Aayog, 14th/15th FC devolution, GST Council, end of plan/non-plan → Gains for cooperative fiscal federalism → Continuing stress: cesses, CSS conditionalities, compensation, borrowing limits → Conclusion: 16th FC and trust-based federalism
Full model answer

Written within the word limit

244 words · target 250 words · 14 min

The Constitution distributes taxing powers through the Seventh Schedule and mandates a Finance Commission (Article 280) to share Union revenues with states. Planned development, however, superimposed a centralizing layer on this design.

Planning-era pattern

  • The Planning Commission (1950), an extra-constitutional body, channelled discretionary plan transfers under the Gadgil-Mukherjee formula and scheme-tied grants, confining the Finance Commission largely to non-plan revenue gaps.
  • Centrally Sponsored Schemes proliferated on State List subjects, turning states into implementing agencies, with Article 282 grants as a parallel discretionary channel.

Recent reforms and their impact

  • NITI Aayog (2015) replaced plan transfers with cooperative-federalism platforms; the plan/non-plan distinction ended from 2017-18.
  • The 14th Finance Commission raised untied tax devolution from 32% to 42% (41% under the 15th FC after the J&K reorganization) — a structural gain in states' fiscal autonomy.
  • GST (101st Amendment) created the GST Council (Article 279A) — pooled sovereignty with weighted voting and a consensus culture, alongside a unified national market.

Continuing stress points

  • Cesses and surcharges — roughly a fifth of gross tax receipts — remain outside the divisible pool, clawing back devolution gains.
  • End of GST compensation (June 2022), reduced state revenue autonomy post-GST, matching burdens under conditional CSS, and Article 293(3) borrowing controls including the netting of off-budget borrowings.
  • Equity disputes — 2011 Census population weights and southern states' demand to raise devolution to 50% — dominate submissions before the Sixteenth Finance Commission (award period 2026-31).

Fiscal federalism has moved from discretionary, plan-led paternalism toward rule-based devolution and shared institutions; consolidating it now requires disciplining cesses, rationalizing CSS and guaranteeing states predictable, untied resources.

Key points

What an examiner expects to see

  • Constitutional frame: Seventh Schedule tax assignment, Articles 268-293, Finance Commission under Article 280 as the neutral transfer channel.
  • Planning era distortion: extra-constitutional Planning Commission, discretionary Gadgil-Mukherjee plan transfers, Article 282 grants and CSS reduced the Finance Commission's role and centralized fiscal power.
  • 14th FC: devolution raised 32% → 42% of the divisible pool (untied); 15th FC kept 41% after J&K's reorganization — the single biggest pro-state reform.
  • GST and the GST Council (Article 279A): pooled sovereignty, one national market; but states lost independent indirect-tax autonomy and compensation ended in June 2022.
  • NITI Aayog and the end of plan/non-plan (2017-18) removed discretionary plan transfers but also states' formal bargaining forum.
  • Countervailing centralization: cesses and surcharges (about one-fifth of gross tax receipts) outside the divisible pool; conditional CSS with matching shares; Article 293(3) borrowing consent and off-budget netting.
  • Forward look: Sixteenth Finance Commission (award 2026-31) faces demands on devolution share, cess discipline and equity weights in horizontal distribution.
Examples to use

Concrete cases, schemes and judgments

  • 14th Finance Commission (Y.V. Reddy) — 42% devolution
  • GST Council under Article 279A; compensation cess row and its end in June 2022
  • Replacement of the Planning Commission by NITI Aayog (2015)
  • Southern states' conclave (2024) on Finance Commission terms and 50% devolution demand
  • Union decision to net off-budget borrowings against state limits under Article 293(3)
  • Sixteenth Finance Commission constituted for the 2026-31 award period
Keywords / terms

Terminology to weave into the answer

fiscal federalismvertical devolutiondivisible poolcesses and surchargesGST CouncilCentrally Sponsored Schemes

Share this answer