General Studies 2022 GS Paper II 15 marks 250 words Compulsory Comment

Q13

"While the national political parties in India favour centralisation, the regional parties are in favour of State autonomy." Comment. (Answer in 250 words) 15

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

"भारत में राष्ट्रीय राजनीतिक दल केन्द्रीकरण के पक्ष में हैं, जबकि क्षेत्रीय दल राज्य-स्वायत्तता के पक्ष में ।" टिप्पणी कीजिए । (250 शब्दों में उत्तर दीजिए)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2022 General Studies questions

Directive word: Comment

This question asks you to comment. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.

See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

The directive 'Comment' requires a balanced, opinionated analysis rather than mere description. Structure as: brief introduction acknowledging the tension → body examining both national parties' centralising tendencies and regional parties' autonomy demands with evidence → nuanced conclusion on whether this dichotomy holds or is oversimplified.

Key points expected

National parties' centralisation: Congress's 'high command' culture, BJP's 'one nation' policies, use of Article 356, central schemes with state branding
Regional parties' autonomy demands: DMK's federalism advocacy, TMC's opposition to central agencies, states' GST compensation claims, language/cultural identity politics
Constitutional provisions: Seventh Schedule, Article 3, Finance Commission, Inter-State Council as institutional battlegrounds
Exceptions and overlaps: Regional parties in NDA/UPA coalitions accepting centralisation; national parties adopting regional stances when in opposition
Contemporary manifestations: CAA protests, farm laws repeal, COVID-19 vaccine distribution conflicts, ED/CBI 'misuse' allegations
Critical assessment: Whether this is a genuine ideological divide or opportunistic positioning based on power location

Evaluation rubric

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Demand-directive understanding	20%	3	Recognises 'Comment' requires balanced judgment, not binary validation; acknowledges nuance that parties shift positions based on whether they hold Centre or State power; avoids treating the statement as absolute truth	Treats the statement as largely correct with superficial acknowledgment of exceptions; presents as two-sided debate without deeper interrogation of the premise itself	Mere description of national vs regional parties without engaging the centralisation-autonomy tension; or takes one side uncritically; confuses with 'Discuss' or 'Examine'
Content depth & accuracy	20%	3	Covers constitutional federalism (Seventh Schedule, Article 356, Finance Commission), political federalism (coalition compulsions), and administrative federalism (centrally sponsored schemes); accurately distinguishes between de jure and de facto centralisation	Mentions federal structure and some centralising mechanisms but conflates constitutional provisions with political practice; limited coverage of fiscal or administrative dimensions	Vague references to 'power' without constitutional specificity; factual errors about Article 3, Governor's role, or Finance Commission recommendations; ignores administrative/fiscal federalism
Structure & flow	20%	3	Clear progression: thesis statement → evidence for national centralisation → evidence for regional autonomy → critical synthesis showing position-dependency → forward-looking conclusion; smooth transitions between historical and contemporary	Basic introduction-body-conclusion with some organisation but either too descriptive or lacking clear analytical thread; abrupt shifts between examples without thematic grouping	Disorganised listing of parties and events; no clear argument; conclusion merely restates introduction; poor paragraphing exceeding 250 words or severely underwritten
Examples / case-law / data	20%	3	Specific instances: S.R. Bommai case, Sarkaria/Punchhi Commission recommendations; DMK's 1960s anti-Hindi agitation to present CAA resistance; TMC's 'Bengal model' vs BJP's 'double engine'; GST compensation shortfall data; recent ED raids timing	General references to Congress era dismissals (no specific state/year) or 'some regional parties' without naming; mentions Article 356 but no case law; contemporary examples lack specificity	No examples beyond generic 'Congress did this' or 'regional parties want more power'; outdated or invented instances; irrelevant international comparisons dominating Indian evidence
Conclusion & analytical edge	20%	3	Synthesises that centralisation-autonomy debate is instrumental rather than ideological—parties advocate federalism when in states, unitarism when at Centre; suggests institutional reforms (inter-state council strengthening, GST Council reform) to depoliticise federalism	Balanced summary of both sides without advancing argument; or predicts 'cooperative federalism' without addressing power asymmetry; generic statement about Constitution's flexibility	Absolute conclusion favouring one side; or vague 'both are needed' without synthesis; no connection to broader democratic/decentralisation debates; missing entirely or tacked-on final sentence

Practice this exact question

Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.

Evaluate my answer →