Article 1 of the Indian Constitution describes India as:

Explanation

Article 1 uses the exact formulation: "India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States." The key word is "Union", not "federation" or "confederation". Dr Ambedkar explained this choice as deliberate: the Indian federation was not created by an agreement among sovereign states, and no state has a right to secede from it. That is why the phrase "Union of States" captures both the territorial structure of India and the constitutional idea that the Union is indestructible, even though states exist within it.

Why the other options are wrong

• (A) "A Federal Union of States" adds the word "federal", which Article 1 deliberately does not use.
• (C) A confederation is a loose association of sovereign states, while Indian states did not enter the Union by agreement and cannot secede.
• (D) "A Federation of States" is wrong because federation is linked with an agreement among states and a possible right to secede, neither of which applies to India.

Concept

This tests the constitutional description of India's political structure under Article 1. It recurs in RAS because the distinction between Union, federation and confederation is a core Indian Polity concept.

Source

• Legislative Department, Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India

Related questions

• A bill to amend the Constitution can be introduced:
• A bill under Article 3 for the formation of a new State requires:
• A CAG audit of the Pradhan Mantri Kaushal Vikas Yojana (PMKVY) revealed that what percentage of beneficiaries had blank, zero, Null or N/A bank-account details?
• A Financial Emergency under Article 360 must be approved by Parliament within:
• A joint sitting of both Houses of Parliament can be summoned under which Article?
• A joint sitting of both Houses of Parliament under Article 108 can be called to resolve a deadlock on: