CORE Union Of States And Territorial Power
Article 1 calls India a Union of States, which means the federation is constitutionally created and no State has an independent right of secession. The territorial power sits mainly in Article 3: Parliament may form a new State, alter boundaries, change names, or adjust areas after the President refers the proposal to the affected State legislature for its views. State of West Bengal v. Union of India in 1963 explained this asymmetry by rejecting a claim that a State has the same sovereign status as the Union. Re Berubari Union in 1960 added a different limit: cession of Indian territory to a foreign State required a constitutional amendment, not only an executive arrangement. Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act, 1956 reorganised Part A, Part B and Part C categories and helped consolidate the modern state structure after linguistic reorganisation. Rajasthan fits this design directly. The former princely-state unions had already moved into one Rajasthan before 1956, but the constitutional location of Rajasthan as a State still depends on Article 1 and the First Schedule. Article 3 remains relevant whenever Parliament adjusts State territory or names. The pattern is federal consultation, not federal veto: the State legislature is heard, but Parliament makes the final law. The same structure explains why a border district, a renamed State, or an exchanged enclave is not treated as a bargain among sovereign partners. It is a constitutional exercise in which democratic State opinion is part of the process, but territorial continuity and national sovereignty remain Union responsibilities. That is why Union-State relations begin with territory before they move to subjects, finance, governors, or emergency powers.