Daily Mains Question – GS 2 – 1st July 2025
- TPP
- Jul 1
- 4 min read
Welcome to your daily Mains Model Answer — crafted to deepen your understanding of Centre-State relations within the framework of Indian constitutional governance, as required in GS Paper 2. Today’s answer examines how the reliance on Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS) for implementing fundamental rights — particularly the Right to Education under Article 21A — can strain the principles of cooperative federalism in India.
This topic directly aligns with GS Paper 2 under the theme “Governance, Constitution, Polity, Social Justice and International Relations,” specifically within the subdomains of federal structure, devolution of powers and finances up to local levels, and the implementation of fundamental rights. Analysing the constitutional, fiscal, and administrative dimensions of CSS is essential for evaluating how India’s quasi-federal system balances national priorities with regional autonomy.
Click Here to read the Monthly Current Affairs Pointers (CAP).
QUESTION
Discuss how relying on Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS) to implement fundamental rights, such as the Right to Education (Article 21A), can jeopardise cooperative federalism in India.
Answer: Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS) are a vital component of India’s fiscal architecture. Designed and primarily funded by the Union Government, these schemes are implemented by the states and often pertain to subjects within the State or Concurrent List. While CSS aim to promote national development goals, their increasing use to implement fundamental rights, such as the Right to Education (Article 21A), raises concerns about their impact on cooperative federalism, a core feature of India’s constitutional structure (as per the Sarkaria Commission and Punchhi Commission reports).
CSS and the Constitutional Context:
Article 21A mandates the State to provide free and compulsory education to all children aged 6 to 14 years.
Education is a subject in the Concurrent List (Entry 25, List III), requiring both the Centre and States to work collaboratively.
CSS, however, are not governed by any specific statute but are issued through executive directions under Article 282, which allows both the Union and the States to make discretionary grants for any “public purpose”.
How CSS Jeopardise Cooperative Federalism:
1. Centralised Policy Design Undermines State Autonomy:
CSS are often designed unilaterally by the Centre, leaving limited flexibility for states to adapt schemes to local needs.
For example, the Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan, an umbrella scheme integrating Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA), Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan (RMSA), and Teacher Education (TE), follows a 60:40 funding pattern (Centre:States).
However, the Centre has made fund release conditional on compliance with National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 and alignment with centrally promoted schemes like PM SHRI Schools, despite opposition from several states.
2. Use of Article 282 for Routine Fiscal Transfers:
Originally intended for exceptional or one-time grants, Article 282 is now being used as a regular funding route, allowing the Centre to exert influence over state subjects.
According to the 14th Finance Commission, over 60% of plan assistance from the Centre came through CSS, increasing central control over state development priorities.
3. Fiscal Coercion and Non-Transparent Allocations:
States that do not align with central policies face delays or denial in funding.
As per the Ministry of Education data (2025 Budget session), no funds were released to Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and West Bengal under the Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan for 2024–25, despite their strong education performance.
This halted admissions under the Right to Education Act in some regions, illustrating how CSS-based implementation can directly affect the delivery of a fundamental right.
4. Politicisation of Developmental Schemes:
The lack of statutory backing and procedural safeguards in CSS allows them to be influenced by political or ideological considerations, rather than objective needs-based criteria.
The coercive linkage between scheme funding and central policy priorities erodes the foundational principle of federal balance.
5. Weak Institutional Mechanisms for Federal Consultation:
Forums such as the Inter-State Council and NITI Aayog have limited powers and are rarely used for prior consultation on scheme design.
As per the Punchhi Commission (2010), “consultative mechanisms between the Centre and States have weakened over time”, making CSS a tool for unilateralism rather than collaboration.
Impact on Fundamental Rights:
The Right to Education (RTE), being a fundamental right, is universal and non-negotiable. Linking its implementation to CSS compliance undermines its constitutional sanctity.
Access to such rights becomes conditional, threatening equality before law (Article 14) and the right to life with dignity (Article 21).
Implementation of fundamental rights via CSS introduces uncertainty and inequality across states depending on their relationship with the Centre.
Way Forward:
Statutory Backing for CSS:
Enact a comprehensive law to regulate design, approval, and fund devolution under CSS, ensuring transparency and accountability.
Greater Fiscal Autonomy to States:
Implement the recommendations of the 15th Finance Commission, which advocated increasing untied transfers to states.
Strengthen Institutional Mechanisms:
Revive the Inter-State Council and empower it as a permanent forum for Centre-State consultations on national development schemes.
Judicial Clarification:
The Supreme Court should revisit its interpretation of Article 282 to clarify the limits of fiscal discretion, especially when it affects fundamental rights.
While CSS serve as an important tool for achieving national objectives, their use to enforce compliance or conformity undermines the principle of cooperative federalism enshrined in the Constitution. When fundamental rights like the Right to Education (Article 21A) are implemented through centrally dictated schemes without legal safeguards, it threatens both federal integrity and constitutional morality. The current standoff between the Centre and certain states provides an opportunity for the judiciary and policy-makers to establish clear constitutional norms ensuring that no citizen’s fundamental rights are compromised due to intergovernmental discord.
Previous Daily UPSC Mains Question
Click for Daily Prelims MCQs
Click for NCERTs Pdfs
Click for Daily Quotes:
Stay updated with the latest news by joining our Telegram channel – The PRESS Pad , and follow us on Instagram and X.
Comments