Assertion (A): Constitutional provisions define the powers of the States and the Centre. Reason (R): Respecting regional sentiments is not just a matter of creating States but it has to be backed up with an institutional structure.
Assertion (A): Constitutional provisions define the powers of the States and the Centre. Reason (R): Respecting regional sentiments is not just a matter of creating States but it has to be backed up with an institutional structure.
Options
Correct option: (B) Both statements are true, but Reason does not correctly explain Assertion.
The Indian Constitution does define the division of powers between the Centre and the States (a factual, structural provision). Separately, it is also true that merely creating States is not enough to respect regional sentiments — durable institutional structures matter too. However, R explains WHY institutional structure matters for accommodating diversity, not why the Constitution defines Centre-State powers in the first place; the two ideas address different questions.
Marking Scheme
- 11 mark for selecting option (B).
- 2No partial credit; MCQ/assertion-reason is all-or-nothing.
Hint
Ask: does R explain WHY the Constitution divides powers, or is it a separate point about managing regional sentiment more broadly?
Quick Oral Answer
Both statements are true independently — the Constitution divides Centre-State powers, and respecting regional sentiment needs more than just creating states — but the second does not causally explain the first, so the answer is (B).
Analysis & Explanation
This assertion-reason pair tests the ability to separate a structural fact (federal division of powers) from a normative argument (institutional backing for regional sentiments).
Assertion (A) is true: the Indian Constitution, through lists like the Union, State, and Concurrent Lists, clearly demarcates legislative and administrative powers between the Centre and the States — this is the basis of Indian federalism.
Reason (R) is also true: NCERT's discussion of regional aspirations argues that accommodating diverse regional/linguistic identities requires more than just drawing state boundaries — it needs ongoing institutional mechanisms (like the States Reorganisation, special provisions, and devolution of powers) to work.
Why (B), not (A)
R is a broader argument about how to manage regional diversity and sentiment, while A is a narrower, purely constitutional/structural statement about power division. R does not directly explain why the Constitution defines Centre-State powers; rather, both statements independently support the theme of federalism and diversity management in India.
Common Mistakes
- 1Assuming any two true statements on a related theme must have a cause-effect relationship — always verify the specific logical link.
- 2Confusing 'defining powers of States and Centre' (a structural/legal fact) with 'accommodating regional sentiment' (a broader political/institutional argument).
Interesting Facts
India's Constitution originally provided for a strong Centre with residuary powers, but subsequent linguistic reorganisation of states (States Reorganisation Act, 1956) and later bifurcations (like Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand in 2000, and Telangana in 2014) reflect ongoing institutional responses to regional sentiment.
India follows a 'quasi-federal' structure — often described as federal in form but unitary in spirit — because the Centre retains significant powers such as imposing President's Rule under Article 356.
Spotted a mistake or something unclear?
Tell us — we fix reported answers fast.
Frequently Asked Questions
What constitutional provisions define the powers of the States and the Centre in India?
The Seventh Schedule of the Indian Constitution divides subjects into the Union List (Centre's exclusive powers), State List (States' exclusive powers), and Concurrent List (both can legislate), forming the basis of India's federal structure.
Why is creating new States alone not enough to address regional sentiments?
Because regional identity and aspirations need continuous institutional support — such as devolution of financial and administrative powers, cultural recognition, and political representation — beyond just redrawing state boundaries, to genuinely accommodate diversity.