In November 2017, the 15th Finance Commission (Chair: Mr N. K. Singh) was constituted to give recommendations on the transfer of resources from the centre to states for the five year period between 2020-25.  In recent times, there has been some discussion around the role and mandate of the Commission.  In this context, we explain the role of the Finance Commission.

What is the Finance Commission?

The Finance Commission is a constitutional body formed every five years to give suggestions on centre-state financial relations.  Each Finance Commission is required to make recommendations on: (i) sharing of central taxes with states, (ii) distribution of central grants to states, (iii) measures to improve the finances of states to supplement the resources of panchayats and municipalities, and (iv) any other matter referred to it.

Composition of transfers:  The central taxes devolved to states are untied funds, and states can spend them according to their discretion.  Over the years, tax devolved to states has constituted over 80% of the total central transfers to states (Figure 1).  The centre also provides grants to states and local bodies which must be used for specified purposes.  These grants have ranged between 12% to 19% of the total transfers.

Fig 1Over the years the core mandate of the Commission has remained unchanged, though it has been given the additional responsibility of examining various issues.  For instance, the 12th Finance Commission evaluated the fiscal position of states and offered relief to those that enacted their Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management laws.  The 13th and the 14th Finance Commissionassessed the impact of GST on the economy.  The 13th Finance Commission also incentivised states to increase forest cover by providing additional grants.

15th Finance Commission:  The 15th Finance Commission constituted in November 2017 will recommend central transfers to states.  It has also been mandated to: (i) review the impact of the 14th Finance Commission recommendations on the fiscal position of the centre; (ii) review the debt level of the centre and states, and recommend a roadmap; (iii) study the impact of GST on the economy; and (iv) recommend performance-based incentives for states based on their efforts to control population, promote ease of doing business, and control expenditure on populist measures, among others.

Why is there a need for a Finance Commission?

The Indian federal system allows for the division of power and responsibilities between the centre and states.  Correspondingly, the taxation powers are also broadly divided between the centre and states (Table 1).  State legislatures may devolve some of their taxation powers to local bodies.

Table 1

The centre collects majority of the tax revenue as it enjoys scale economies in the collection of certain taxes.  States have the responsibility of delivering public goods in their areas due to their proximity to local issues and needs.

Sometimes, this leads to states incurring expenditures higher than the revenue generated by them.  Further, due to vast regional disparities some states are unable to raise adequate resources as compared to others.  To address these imbalances, the Finance Commission recommends the extent of central funds to be shared with states.  Prior to 2000, only revenue income tax and union excise duty on certain goods was shared by the centre with states.  A Constitution amendment in 2000 allowed for all central taxes to be shared with states.

Several other federal countries, such as Pakistan, Malaysia, and Australia have similar bodies which recommend the manner in which central funds will be shared with states.

Tax devolution to states

Table 2The 14th Finance Commission considerably increased the devolution of taxes from the centre to states from 32% to 42%.  The Commission had recommended that tax devolution should be the primary source of transfer of funds to states.  This would increase the flow of unconditional transfers and give states more flexibility in their spending.

The share in central taxes is distributed among states based on a formula.   Previous Finance Commissions have considered various factors to determine the criteria such as the population and income needs of states, their area and infrastructure, etc.  Further, the weightage assigned to each criterion has varied with each Finance Commission.

The criteria used by the 11th to 14thFinance Commissions are given in Table 2, along with the weight assigned to them.  State level details of the criteria used by the 14th Finance Commission are given in Table 3.

  • Population is an indicator of the expenditure needs of a state. Over the years, Finance Commissions have used population data of the 1971 Census.  The 14th Finance Commission used the 2011 population data, in addition to the 1971 data.  The 15th Finance Commission has been mandated to use data from the 2011 Census.
  • Area is used as a criterion as a state with larger area has to incur additional administrative costs to deliver services.
  • Income distance is the difference between the per capita income of a state with the average per capita income of all states. States with lower per capita income may be given a higher share to maintain equity among states.
  • Forest cover indicates that states with large forest covers bear the cost of not having area available for other economic activities. Therefore, the rationale is that these states may be given a higher share.

Table 3


Besides the taxes devolved to states, another source of transfers from the centre to states is grants-in-aid.  As per the recommendations of the 14th Finance Commission, grants-in-aid constitute 12% of the central transfers to states.  The 14th Finance Commission had recommended grants to states for three purposes: (i) disaster relief, (ii) local bodies, and (iii) revenue deficit.

The Uttarakhand Assembly concluded a two-day session on November 30, 2022.  The session was scheduled to be held over five days.  In this post we look at the legislative business that was carried out in the Assembly, and the state of state legislatures. 

13 Bills were introduced and passed within two days 

As per the Session Agenda, a total of 19 Bills were listed for introduction in the span of two days.  13 of these were listed to be discussed and passed on the second day.  These included the Uttarakhand Protection of Freedom of Religion (Amendment) Bill, 2022, University of Petroleum and Energy Studies (Amendment), Bill, 2022, and the Uttarakhand Anti-Littering and Anti-Spitting (Amendment) Bill, 2022.

The Assembly had proposed to discuss and pass each Bill (barring two) within five minutes (see Figure 1).  Two Bills were allocated 20 minutes each for discussion and passing - the Haridwar Universities Bill, 2022, and the Public Service (Horizontal Reservation for Women) Bill, 2022.  As per news reports, the Assembly passed all 13 Bills within these two days (this excludes the Appropriation Bills).  This raises the question on the amount of scrutiny that these Bills were subject to, and the quality of such laws when the legislature intends to pass them within mere minutes.

Figure 1: Excerpt of Uttarakhand Assembly's November 2022 Session Agenda


Law making requires deliberation, scrutiny

Our law-making institutions have several tools at their disposal to ensure that before a law is passed, it has been examined thoroughly on various aspects such as constitutionality, clarity, financial and technical capacity of the state to implement provisions, among others.  The Ministry/Department piloting a Bill could share a draft of the Bill for public feedback (pre-legislative scrutiny).  While Bills get introduced, members may raise issues on constitutionality of the proposed law.  Once introduced, Bills could be sent to legislative committees for greater scrutiny.   This allows legislators to deliberate upon individual provisions in depth, understand if there may be constitutional challenges or other issues with any provision.  This also allows experts and affected stakeholders to weigh in on the provisions, highlight issues, and help strengthen the law.  

However, when Bills are introduced and passed within mere minutes, it barely gives legislators the time to go through the provisions and mull over implications, issues, or ways to improve the law for affected parties.  It also raises the question of what the intention of the legislature is when passing laws in a hurry without any discussion.  Often, such poorly thought laws are also challenged in Courts.   

For instance, the Uttarakhand Assembly passed the Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion (Amendment) Bill, 2022 in this session (five minutes had been allocated for the discussion and passing of the Bill).  The 2022 Bill amends the 2018 Act which prohibits forceful religious conversions, and provides that conversion through allurement or marriage will be unlawful.  The Bill has provisions such as requiring an additional notice to be sent to the District Magistrate (DM) for a conversion, and that reconversion to one’s immediate previous religion will not be considered a conversion.  Some of these provisions seem similar to other laws that were passed by states and have been struck down by or have been challenged in Courts.  For example, the Madhya Pradesh High Court while examining the Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 2021 noted that providing a notice to the DM for a conversion of religion violates the right to privacy as the right includes the right to remain silent.  It extends that understanding to the right to decide on one’s faith.  The Himachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 2006 exempted people who reconvert to their original religion from giving a public notice of such conversion.  The Himachal Pradesh High Court had struck down this provision as discriminatory and violative of the right to equality.  The Court also noted that the right to change one’s belief cannot be taken away for maintaining public order.  

Uttarakhand MLAs may not have had an opportunity to think about how issues flagged by Courts may be addressed in a law that regulates religious conversions. 

Most other state Assemblies also pass Bills without adequate scrutiny

In 2021 44% states passed Bills on the day it was introduced or on the next day.  Between January 2018 and September 2022, the Gujarat Assembly introduced 92 Bills (excluding Appropriation Bills).  91 of these were passed in the same day as their introduction.  In the 2022 Monsoon Session, the Goa Assembly passed 28 Bills in the span of two days.   This is in addition to discussion and voting on budgetary allocation to various government departments.  

Figure 2: Time taken by state legislatures to pass Bills in 2021

Note: The chart above does not include Arunachal Pradesh and Sikkim. A Bill is considered passed within a day if it was passed on the day of introduction or on the next day. For states with bicameral legislatures, bills have to be passed in both Houses. This has been taken into account in the above chart for five states having Legislative Councils, except Bihar (information was not available for Council). 
Sources: Assembly websites, E-Gazette of various states and Right to Information requests; PRS.

Occasionally, the time actually spent deliberating upon a Bill is lesser than the allocated time.   This may be due to disruptions in the House.  The Himachal Pradesh Assembly provides data on the time actually spent discussing Bills.   For example, in the August 2022 Session, it spent an average of 12 minutes to discuss and pass 10 Bills.  However, the Uttarakhand Assembly allocated only five minutes to discuss each Bill in its November 2022 Session.  This indicates the lack of intent of certain state legislatures to improve their functioning.

In the case of Parliament, a significant portion of scrutiny is also carried out by the Department Related Standing Committees, even when Parliament is not in session.  In the 14th Lok Sabha (LS), 60% of the Bills introduced were sent to Committees for detailed examination, and in the 15th LS, 71% were sent.  These figures have reduced recently – in the 16th LS 27% of the Bills were sent to Committees, and so far in the 17th LS, 13% have been sent.  However, across states, sending Bills to Committees for detailed examination is often the exception than the norm.  In 2021, less than 10% of the Bills were sent to Committees.  None of the Bills passed by the Uttarakhand Assembly had been examined by a committee.   States that are an exception here include Kerala which has 14 subject Committees, and Bills are regularly sent to these for examination.  However, these Committees are headed by their respective Ministers, which reduces the scope of independent scrutiny that may be undertaken.