Which one of the following statements is correct about reorganisation of states in India?
Answer & explanation
Correct answer: option 4
The correct answer is Option (4) → After independence, our political leaders felt that linguistic reorganisation of states might lead to disruption and disintegration.
Option (1) Reorganization of states was just a matter of administrative divisions or annexation by British government. — False. Drawing the internal boundaries was not just a matter of administrative divisions; they had to reflect the linguistic and cultural plurality of the country without affecting its unity.
Option (2) During colonial rule, the boundaries of the Indian states were drawn based on various cultural factors. — False. Colonial boundaries were drawn on administrative convenience, or just followed the territories annexed by the British or ruled by the princes.
Option (3) In the Nagpur session of Congress in 1920, the linguistic principle was rejected as the basis of the reorganization of states. — False. At the Nagpur session the linguistic principle was recognised, as the basis of reorganising the Congress party itself.
Option (4) After independence, our political leaders felt that linguistic reorganisation of states might lead to disruption and disintegration. — True. After Independence and partition, the leaders felt that states carved out on the basis of language might lead to disruption and disintegration, so they decided to postpone the matter.
NCERT (2025-26): “Reorganisation of States The process of nation-building did not come to an end with partition and integration of Princely States. Now the challenge was to draw the internal boundaries of the Indian states. This was not just a matter of administrative divisions. The boundaries had to be drawn in a way so that the linguistic and cultural plurality of the country could be reflected without affecting the unity of the nation. During colonial rule, the state boundaries were drawn either on administrative convenience or simply coincided with the territories annexed by the British government or the territories ruled by the princely powers. Things changed after Independence and partition. Our leaders felt that carving out states on the basis of language might lead to disruption and disintegration. It was also felt that this would draw attention away from other social and economic challenges that the country faced. The central leadership decided to postpone matters.… Reorganisation of States … Our national movement had rejected these divisions as artificial and had promised the linguistic principle as the basis of formation of states. In fact after the Nagpur session of Congress in 1920 the principle was recognised as the basis of the reorganisation of the Indian National Congress party itself. Many Provincial Congress Committees were created by linguistic zones, which did not follow the administrative divisions of British India.” |