The States Reorganisation of India Explained

The States Reorganisation of India is the long process through which the country redrew its internal map after independence, replacing the patchwork of British provinces and princely states with administrative units that are largely based on language. The landmark moment was the States Reorganisation Act of 1956, but the story began earlier, with the integration of princely states and the demand of linguistic communities for states of their own.

Few chapters in Indian history show the Constitution at work as clearly as this one. Mass movements, commissions, fasts, parliamentary debates and political negotiation shaped the political geography. The process did not end in 1956. States such as Maharashtra, Gujarat, Punjab, Haryana, Chhattisgarh and Telangana were created later, and the map continues to be an area of debate. This explainer follows the story from the first committees to the most recent changes. Last reviewed: 2 October 2026.

Quick Facts

The Inheritance: Provinces and Princely States

At independence in 1947, India’s political map was an inheritance from British rule. Territory was divided between provinces, such as Bombay, Madras, Bengal and the United Provinces, which were ruled directly, and more than five hundred princely states, which were under indirect rule. The boundaries followed the history of conquest and administration, not language or culture. Madras Presidency, for example, included Telugu-, Tamil-, Malayalam- and Kannada-speaking areas, and Bombay Presidency combined Marathi and Gujarati speakers.

The first task of the new government was to integrate the princely states, a process led by Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel with the help of V.P. Menon. Most states signed the Instrument of Accession, and some, such as Junagadh and Hyderabad, were brought in by other means in 1947-48. After this, the Constitution of 1950 classified states into four categories, namely Part A, B, C and D. Part A states were the former provinces, Part B states were the former princely states or unions of such states, Part C states were centrally administered and Part D covered the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. This arrangement was widely seen as untidy and temporary.

The Constitutional framework

Article 1 of the Constitution describes India as a Union of States. Articles 2 and 3 empower Parliament to admit new states and to form new states, alter the areas, boundaries or names of existing states. Under Article 3, a bill for this purpose must be introduced with the prior recommendation of the President, who refers it to the concerned state legislature for its views. Those views are not binding. This arrangement gives Parliament the final word and makes the Indian Union indestructible in its territory but destructible in its states.

The Demand for Linguistic States

The idea of states based on language predates independence. The Indian National Congress had already reorganised its own regional committees on linguistic lines in 1920, in line with the view that people could participate in public life more effectively in their own language. Gandhi and other leaders supported the idea during the freedom movement. After 1947, however, the leaders faced the problem of keeping a newly partitioned country together and were cautious about anything that might encourage division.

Language was a powerful identity. Telugu, Marathi, Gujarati, Kannada, Malayalam, Punjabi and other communities all felt that their own states would give them a fair share of jobs, education and development in their own tongue. Supporters pointed out that language would be a natural and practical basis for administration, while critics feared that it could weaken national unity. This tension shaped the next decade.

The Dhar Commission and the JVP Committee

In June 1948, the Constituent Assembly appointed the Linguistic Provinces Commission, headed by S.K. Dar, a retired judge. It is generally known as the Dhar Commission. It reported in December 1948 and advised against the formation of provinces mainly on the basis of language. It said that administrative convenience, geographical continuity, financial self-sufficiency and the potential for future development should be the main considerations, and that reorganisation should not be undertaken in a hurry.

The report angered the supporters of linguistic states, and the Congress appointed a three-member committee to review the matter. The committee consisted of Jawaharlal Nehru, Vallabhbhai Patel and Pattabhi Sitaramayya, and it is known as the JVP Committee. It submitted its report in December 1948 as well. It cautioned that the time was not right for reorganisation given the situation after Partition, but accepted that if the public demand was strong and insistent, the matter could be reconsidered. It also recognised that Andhra’s case was the strongest among the claims.

Why the leadership hesitated

• The shock of Partition and fears of further fragmentation.
• The ongoing task of integrating princely states.
• Worry that linguistic rivalries could undermine national unity.
• A wish to focus on economic development and the first general elections.

Potti Sriramulu and the Birth of Andhra State

The Telugu-speaking people of the Madras region had pressed for a separate state of their own for decades. The issue came to a head in 1952, when the Gandhian leader Potti Sriramulu began a fast unto death on 19 October 1952, demanding a separate Andhra state. After several weeks, he died on 15 December 1952. His death caused widespread unrest, riots and public anger in the Telugu areas.

Within days, the Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, announced that a separate Andhra state would be formed. Andhra State came into being on 1 October 1953, with its capital at Kurnool. It was carved out of the Madras State and became the first state formed on a linguistic basis in independent India. The success of the movement encouraged other linguistic groups, and made it difficult for the government to avoid a broader review of state boundaries.

Significance of 1953

The creation of Andhra showed that peaceful as well as agitational pressure from citizens could bring about a change in the federal map. It converted the linguistic question from a theoretical debate into a pressing political task.

The Fazl Ali Commission, 1953-55

In December 1953, the Government of India appointed the States Reorganisation Commission to examine the entire question objectively. It had three members, Justice Fazl Ali as chairman, K.M. Panikkar and H.N. Kunzru. The commission toured the country, met thousands of people and examined a large number of memoranda before submitting its report in 1955.

The commission accepted language as an important basis for reorganisation but not as the only one. It identified four main factors that needed to be considered, which were the preservation and strengthening of the unity and security of the country, linguistic and cultural homogeneity, financial, economic and administrative considerations, and the success of the five-year plans. It recommended that the old classification into Part A, B, C and D states should be abolished. In its place, it proposed 16 states and 3 centrally administered territories.

Notable recommendations

• Abolition of the Part A, B, C and D classification of states.
• Formation of Kerala by merging Malabar with Travancore-Cochin.
• Formation of a larger Karnataka-speaking state out of Mysore with adjoining Kannada areas.
• Creation of Vidarbha as a separate state, which was later not accepted by the government.
• Retention of Bombay as a bilingual state with Marathi and Gujarati areas.

The States Reorganisation Act, 1956

The government accepted most of the recommendations with modifications, and Parliament passed the States Reorganisation Act in August 1956. At the same time, the Constitution was amended through the Seventh Amendment, which removed the Part A, B, C and D categories and created the classification of states and union territories. The Act came into force on 1 November 1956.

The new map consisted of 14 states and 6 union territories. Hyderabad State was broken up, with its Telugu-speaking districts joining the Andhra State to create Andhra Pradesh, its Marathi-speaking districts going to Bombay State and its Kannada-speaking districts going to Mysore. Kerala was created as a Malayalam-speaking state. Mysore was enlarged with Kannada-speaking regions, and was renamed Karnataka in 1973. Madras State retained its Tamil-speaking areas and was later renamed Tamil Nadu in 1969.

The 14 states of 1956

The six union territories included Delhi, Himachal Pradesh, Manipur, Tripura, and the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, as well as the Laccadive, Minicoy and Amindivi Islands.

Maharashtra and Gujarat: The Bombay Question

In 1956, Bombay State was left as a large bilingual state, which satisfied neither the Marathi nor the Gujarati speakers. The Samyukta Maharashtra Samiti campaigned for a Marathi-speaking state with Bombay city as its capital, while the Mahagujarat movement demanded a separate state for the Gujarati speakers. The agitation was intense and was marked by protests, strikes and loss of life.

The government finally agreed to divide the state. Parliament passed the Bombay Reorganisation Act, 1960, and on 1 May 1960 the states of Maharashtra and Gujarat were created. Bombay became the capital of Maharashtra, and Ahmedabad was initially the capital of Gujarat before the administration moved to the new city of Gandhinagar. Since then, 1 May is celebrated as Maharashtra Day and Gujarat Day.

The Later Creations, from Nagaland to Goa

The map continued to change after 1960 as the Centre responded to the demands of regions, languages and communities.

Union territories and Goa

Puducherry was transferred by France to India in 1954 as a de facto matter, and the formal treaty was ratified in 1962. Goa, Daman and Diu were freed from Portuguese rule in December 1961 and were first a union territory, before Goa became a state in 1987. The north-eastern region was progressively reorganised out of the old Assam, in response to the demands of tribal communities for self-rule and administration.

Three New States in 2000

For several decades after the 1960s, the creation of new states slowed. The year 2000 saw a new wave, but this time based on regional development concerns and cultural identity rather than language alone. Three states were created in the same year, namely Chhattisgarh from Madhya Pradesh on 1 November, Uttarakhand from Uttar Pradesh on 9 November, and Jharkhand from Bihar on 15 November. Uttarakhand was initially named Uttaranchal and was renamed in 2007.

These states were carved out of the large Hindi-speaking states, and their creation was supported by arguments of regional neglect, tribal identity and administrative ease. The creation passed off relatively peacefully, in contrast to earlier agitations, because the parent states and the Centre both supported the proposals.

Telangana and Recent Changes

The demand for a separate Telangana had a long history. Telangana had been merged with the Andhra State in 1956 to create Andhra Pradesh, but a section of its people argued that the region was neglected in water, jobs and development. There were major agitations in 1969 and again in the early 2000s. After a long political process, Parliament passed the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014, and Telangana was formed as the 29th state on 2 June 2014, with Hyderabad as a shared capital for a transition of up to ten years.

In August 2019, Parliament passed the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, under which the former state of Jammu and Kashmir was divided into two union territories, Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh, with effect from 31 October 2019. In 2020, the union territories of Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu were merged into one. As of the early 2020s, India has 28 states and 8 union territories.

Why Reorganisation Still Matters

The reorganisation of states is widely regarded as one of the successes of Indian federalism. The fear that linguistic states would break up the country did not materialise, and in many respects, shared language made governance and education closer to the people. India’s states generally conduct administration, schooling and local politics in the regional language, while Hindi, English and other scheduled languages work at the national level.

At the same time, the process has produced continuing debates about demands for smaller states, border and river water disputes, and the balance between the Union and the states. The Supreme Court has held that federalism is part of the basic structure of the Constitution, and Article 3 provides a legal route through which new demands are handled. Each new state raises questions about capitals, assets, employees and resource sharing, and these are usually settled in the reorganisation law itself.

Conclusion

The States Reorganisation of India shows how a young democracy dealt with diversity. From the cautious reports of 1948 to the sacrifice of Potti Sriramulu in 1952, the Fazl Ali Commission of 1953-55 and the Act of 1956, the process combined popular pressure with careful institutional design. Later changes, from Maharashtra and Gujarat to Telangana, show that the map remains a living part of the federal system.

Frequently Asked Questions

What was the States Reorganisation Act of 1956?

It was a law passed by Parliament that reorganised the states of India mainly on linguistic lines. It came into force on 1 November 1956 and created 14 states and 6 union territories, abolishing the earlier Part A, B, C and D classification.

Who headed the States Reorganisation Commission?

The commission was headed by Justice Fazl Ali, with K.M. Panikkar and H.N. Kunzru as members. It was appointed in December 1953 and submitted its report in 1955.

Which was the first linguistic state of independent India?

Andhra State, created on 1 October 1953 from the Telugu-speaking areas of Madras State, was the first. It came after the death of Potti Sriramulu following a fast of several weeks in 1952.

What were the Dhar Commission and the JVP Committee?

The Dhar Commission, appointed in 1948, advised that administrative convenience and not language should be the main basis for forming provinces. The JVP Committee, consisting of Jawaharlal Nehru, Vallabhbhai Patel and Pattabhi Sitaramayya, also advised delaying linguistic states in 1948 but accepted that strong public demand might need to be considered later.

When were Maharashtra and Gujarat created?

Both were created on 1 May 1960 through the Bombay Reorganisation Act, 1960, by dividing the bilingual Bombay State into a Marathi-speaking and a Gujarati-speaking state.

Which Constitutional articles allow the creation of new states?

Articles 2 and 3 empower Parliament to admit or establish new states and to change the areas, boundaries or names of existing ones. Under Article 3, the President refers the bill to the concerned state legislature for its views, but Parliament is not bound by them.