Union and its Territory: Polity notes for UPSC Prelims

Last reviewed 28 October 2026 · Written and checked by the Prelims Lab faculty · About 20 min to read

Articles 1–4, how States are formed and renamed, linguistic reorganisation and the map since 1956. Free notes for UPSC CSE Prelims 2027, written around the traps UPSC sets, with the exact text of the Constitution and every past question on the topic.

Union and its Territory in short

Articles 1 to 4: Part I of the Constitution (Articles 1 to 4) answers a simple question: what is India made of, and how can its map be changed?
How a State is reorganised (Article 3): How does Parliament make a new State, like Telangana in 2014?
Reorganisation of States on linguistic lines: At independence, States were based on old British provinces and princely states, not on language. People wanted States where one language was spoken.
New States and changes of name after 1956: The map kept changing after 1956.

How to read: each section has The idea in brief (start here if the topic is new), Exam notes (the facts UPSC tests) and Ranker’s edge (the fine points). Each section opens with the bare text of the Constitution. Open In depth for the story behind it and past questions.

1. Articles 1 to 4

The bare text

Bare text · Article 2Constitution of India, as on 1 May 2024

2. Admission or establishment of new States.—Parliament may by law admit into the Union, or establish, new States on such terms and conditions as it thinks fit.

Bare text · Article 4Constitution of India, as on 1 May 2024

4. Laws made under articles 2 and 3 to provide for the amendment of the First and the Fourth Schedules and supplemental, incidental and consequential matters.—(1) Any law referred to in article 2 or article 3 shall contain such provisions for the amendment of the First Schedule and the Fourth Schedule as may be necessary to give effect to the provisions of the law and may also contain such supplemental, incidental and consequential provisions (including provisions as to representation in Parliament and in the Legislature or Legislatures of the State or States affected by such law) as Parliament may deem necessary.

(2) No such law as aforesaid shall be deemed to be an amendment of this Constitution for the purposes of article 368.

Reading the text

Article 2 has two verbs: “admit” and “establish”. “Admit” brings in a State that already exists outside India; “establish” creates a new one. Sikkim (1975) is the textbook case of admission.
“On such terms and conditions as it thinks fit”: Parliament can attach special terms to the entry of a new State. Sikkim’s special provisions in Article 371F are an example.
Article 4(2) is the key line for Prelims: a law that creates or reshapes States is not a constitutional amendment, even though it changes the First and Fourth Schedules. So it needs only a simple majority, with no special majority and no ratification by States.

The idea in brief

Part I of the Constitution (Articles 1 to 4) answers a simple question: what is India made of, and how can its map be changed?

Think of it like thisArticle 2 is for bringing in a new member from outside the family. Article 3 is for rearranging rooms inside the house.

Exam notes

Article	Provision
1	“India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States.” Territory of India = States + Union Territories + territories that may be acquired. Names and territories are in the First Schedule
2	Parliament may admit into the Union or establish new States: applies to areas not already part of India (e.g., Sikkim, 1975)
3	Parliament may form new States and alter areas, boundaries or names of existing States: internal reorganisation
4	Laws under Articles 2 and 3 are not amendments under Article 368; passed by a simple majority like ordinary laws
In detail: “Union of States” was preferred to “federation” because Indian federation was not the result of an agreement among States, and no State has the right to secede (Ambedkar). “Union of India” (States only) is narrower than “territory of India” (States + UTs + acquired territories).

Remember it2 brings in, 3 rearranges, 4 relaxes: Article 2 admits territory from outside, Article 3 reshapes States inside, Article 4 says neither is an amendment (simple majority).

Beyond the basics · ranker’s edge

Point	Depth
“Union of India” vs “territory of India”	Territory = States + UTs + acquired territories (Art 1(3)). UTs are part of the territory, not of the Union
Bharat	The only other name in the Constitution. Official use of “President of Bharat” at the G20 summit (2023) drew attention to Article 1
Article 2 examples	Sikkim (1975) entered under Art 2 via the 36th Amendment; Goa and Puducherry were acquired and made UTs
Prelims trap: Article 2 deals with territory not already part of India; Article 3 with internal changes. A statement saying Article 3 can admit new territory is wrong.

In depth: the story behind it and how UPSC asks it

The story behind it

In 1950 India was a patchwork: former British provinces (Part A), former princely states and unions of them (Part B), and centrally ruled areas (Parts C and D). The drafters knew the map would have to be redrawn and did not want each change to need a constitutional amendment. So they gave Parliament an easy, ordinary-law power. That is the meaning of the description of India as “an indestructible Union of destructible States”: the Union cannot break, but its States can be remade.

How UPSC asks it

UPSC 2003 Which one of the following schedules of the Indian Constitution lists the names of states and specifies their territories?
1. First
2. Second
3. Third
4. Fourth
Show answer
(a) First. The First Schedule lists States and UTs and their territories.

2. How a State is reorganised (Article 3)

The bare text

Bare text · Article 3Constitution of India, as on 1 May 2024

3. Formation of new States and alteration of areas, boundaries or names of existing States.—Parliament may by law—

(a) form a new State by separation of territory from any State or by uniting two or more States or parts of States or by uniting any territory to a part of any State;

(b) increase the area of any State;

(d) alter the boundaries of any State;

(e) alter the name of any State:

[Provided that no Bill for the purpose shall be introduced in either House of Parliament except on the recommendation of the President and unless, where the proposal contained in the Bill affects the area, boundaries or name of any of the States***, the Bill has been referred by the President to the Legislature of that State for expressing its views thereon within such period as may be specified in the reference or within such further period as the President may allow and the period so specified or allowed has expired.]

[Explanation I.—In this article, in clauses (a) to (e), “State” includes a Union territory, but in the proviso, “State” does not include a Union territory.

Explanation II.—The power conferred on Parliament by clause (a) includes the power to form a new State or Union territory by uniting a part of any State or Union territory to any other State or Union territory.]

Amended by: 5th (1955), 18th (1966) Amendments

Reading the text

Clauses (a) to (e) cover every kind of change: new State, larger or smaller State, new boundary, new name.
The proviso has two conditions: the President’s recommendation before the Bill is introduced, and a reference to the affected State’s legislature “for expressing its views”. The word is views, not consent. Parliament may go ahead even if the State says no, as it did with Telangana in 2014.
“Within such period as may be specified”: added by the 5th Amendment (1955), so that a State cannot stall a Bill by sitting on the reference.
Explanation I, added by the 18th Amendment (1966): in clauses (a)–(e) “State” includes a Union Territory, but in the proviso it does not. So a UT’s legislature need not be consulted.

The idea in brief

How does Parliament make a new State, like Telangana in 2014?

ExampleThe Andhra Pradesh Assembly opposed the bill to create Telangana, but Parliament passed it anyway. This shows that a State’s consent is not needed.

Exam notes

Introduction	Bill can be introduced only with the prior recommendation of the President
Views of the State	President refers the bill to the affected State legislature for its views within a set time. Views are not binding; a fresh reference is not needed for every amendment to the bill
Union Territories	No reference to the UT legislature is needed
Majority	Simple majority in each House (Article 4); the First and Fourth Schedules change as a result (PYQ 2001)
Cession of territory	Berubari Union (1960): giving Indian territory to another country needs a constitutional amendment under Article 368 (9th Amendment, 1960). Settling a boundary dispute does not (1969 ruling)
Land boundary with Bangladesh	100th Amendment, 2015: exchange of enclaves (111 Indian enclaves given, 51 Bangladeshi enclaves received)
Prelims trap: Parliament can redraw the map of India without the consent of the State concerned, so India is called an “indestructible Union of destructible States”. Reorganising States is not a constitutional amendment, but ceding territory abroad is.

Case / event	Point to remember
Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation, 2014	Parliament created Telangana even though the AP Assembly had rejected the draft bill: State views are not binding
J&K Reorganisation Act, 2019	An ordinary law under Article 3 turned a State into two UTs; upheld in In Re: Article 370 (Dec 2023), which asked for early restoration of statehood

Creating a new State or changing a State’s name (Article 3)

President’s recommendationNeeded before the bill is introduced in either House
Reference to the State legislaturePresident fixes a time for its views; views are not binding (no reference to a UT legislature)
Parliament passesSimple majority in each House (Art 4: not an amendment under 368)
President’s assentFirst and Fourth Schedules change accordingly

Remember itRecommend → Refer → Pass simply: President recommends, the State is asked (not bound), Parliament passes by simple majority. Giving land to another country is different: that needs a 368 amendment (Berubari → 9th; Bangladesh → 100th).

Beyond the basics · ranker’s edge

Point	Depth
5th Amendment (1955)	Proviso to Article 3: President fixes the time within which the State legislature gives its views
18th Amendment (1966)	“State” in Article 3 includes a UT; forming a new State includes uniting part of a State or UT with another
Babulal Parate (1960)	Parliament need not send each amendment of the bill back to the State
Cession vs settlement	In re Berubari (1960) → 9th Amendment. Maganbhai Patel (1969): implementing the Kutch boundary award is settlement, not cession
100th Amendment (2015)	Implemented the 1974 Land Boundary Agreement and 2011 Protocol; changed the First Schedule entries of Assam, West Bengal, Meghalaya and Tripura
In re Article 370 (2023)	Upheld carving out the UT of Ladakh; did not rule on converting a State into a UT, relying on the assurance that statehood would be restored. Ordered Assembly polls (held September–October 2024)
Renaming a State	Kerala’s “Keralam” and West Bengal’s “Bangla” proposals are pending. Renaming a city is a State matter with Central clearance
Prelims trap: The First Schedule (and the Fourth, for Rajya Sabha seats) changes with every reorganisation. (PYQ 2001)

In depth: the story behind it and how UPSC asks it

The story behind it: what Article 3 cannot do

Article 3 is about rearranging territory inside India. Giving Indian territory to another country is different. In In re Berubari Union (1960), the Supreme Court held that ceding part of Berubari to Pakistan needed a constitutional amendment under Article 368. Hence the 9th Amendment (1960). The same logic produced the 100th Amendment (2015), which carried out the land boundary exchange of enclaves with Bangladesh. But settling an unclear boundary is not cession: implementing the Kutch award needed no amendment (Maganbhai Patel, 1969).

How UPSC asks it

UPSC 2001 If a new state of the Indian Union is to be created, which one of the following schedules of the Constitution must be amended?
1. First
2. Second
3. Third
4. Fifth
Show answer
(a) First. The First Schedule (names and territories) must change; the Fourth (Rajya Sabha seats) usually changes too, but it is not among the options.

3. Reorganisation of States on linguistic lines

The bare text

Bare text · Article 371Constitution of India, as on 1 May 2024

(2) Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, the President may by order made with respect to [the State of Maharashtra or Gujarat], provide for any special responsibility of the Governor for—

(a) the establishment of separate development boards for Vidarbha, Marathwada, [and the rest of Maharashtra or, as the case may be], Saurashtra, Kutch and the rest of Gujarat with the provision that a report on the working of each of these boards will be placed each year before the State Legislative Assembly;

(b) the equitable allocation of funds for developmental expenditure over the said areas, subject to the requirements of the State as a whole; and

(c) an equitable arrangement providing adequate facilities for technical education and vocational training, and adequate opportunities for employment in services under the control of the State Government, in respect of all the said areas, subject to the requirements of the State as a whole.]

Clauses not relevant here are left out.

Amended by: 7th (1956) Amendment

Reading the text

Article 371(2) lets the President give the Governor a special responsibility for development boards in backward regions of Maharashtra and Gujarat. It is a constitutional answer to a fear that came with reorganisation: that the dominant region of a new State would neglect the rest.
The same idea runs through Articles 371A to 371J for other States, a family of special provisions that accompanied reorganisation.

The idea in brief

At independence, States were based on old British provinces and princely states, not on language. People wanted States where one language was spoken.

Exam notes

Commission / event	Outcome
Dhar Commission (1948)	S.K. Dhar: reorganise on administrative convenience, not language
JVP Committee (1948)	Jawaharlal Nehru, Vallabhbhai Patel, Pattabhi Sitaramayya: rejected language as the basis
Andhra State (1953)	First linguistic State, after Potti Sriramulu‘s death following a fast of nearly two months
Fazl Ali Commission (1953–55)	Members Fazl Ali, K.M. Panikkar, H.N. Kunzru. Accepted language as a basis but rejected “one language, one State”; recommended 16 States and 3 Centrally administered areas
States Reorganisation Act, 1956	With the 7th Amendment, 1956: 14 States and 6 UTs; Part A/B/C/D classification abolished

Body / movement	Point to remember
Part A/B/C/D (1950)	A: former Governors’ provinces; B: princely states with legislatures; C: Chief Commissioners’ provinces; D: Andaman and Nicobar
Potti Sriramulu	Died on 15 December 1952 after fasting from 19 October (nearly two months); Andhra State formed on 1 Oct 1953 with Kurnool as capital
Shah Commission (1966)	Justice J.C. Shah: Haryana carved out of Punjab
1956 outcomes	Kerala (Travancore-Cochin + Malabar), Mysore State (renamed Karnataka 1973), Telugu areas of Hyderabad merged with Andhra

Remember itNo, No, Yes: Dhar (no), JVP (no), then Potti Sriramulu’s death forced Andhra (1953) and Fazl Ali said yes (1955). Result in 1956: 14 States, 6 UTs.

Beyond the basics · ranker’s edge

Point	Depth
1950 classes	Part A (9), Part B (9), Part C (10), Part D (Andaman and Nicobar): 29 units in all
Commissions’ timeline	Dhar (June 1948) → JVP (December 1948) → Andhra State (1 October 1953) → Fazl Ali (appointed December 1953, report September 1955) → SRA in force 1 November 1956
Fazl Ali’s tests	Unity and security of India, linguistic and cultural homogeneity, financial and administrative considerations, planning and welfare
Meghalaya route	First an autonomous State within Assam (22nd Amendment, 1969, Article 244A), full State in 1972

In depth: the story behind it and how UPSC asks it

The story behind it

Nehru and Patel were wary of linguistic States so soon after Partition; they feared language could divide the country again. Both the Dhar Commission and the JVP Committee (1948) advised against it. The pressure came from below. When Potti Sriramulu died in December 1952 after fasting for a Telugu State, protests forced the creation of Andhra State in 1953.

The States Reorganisation Commission (Fazl Ali) then accepted language as a major basis, but not “one language, one State”. The bilingual Bombay State it kept did not last. After the Samyukta Maharashtra movement, it was split into Maharashtra and Gujarat in 1960. Article 371(2) is a trace of that settlement: it promised Vidarbha, Marathwada, Saurashtra and Kutch that they would not be left behind.

4. New States and changes of name after 1956

The bare text

Bare text · Article 371AConstitution of India, as on 1 May 2024

[371A. Special provision with respect to the State of Nagaland.—(1) Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution,—

(a) no Act of Parliament in respect of—

(i) religious or social practices of the Nagas;

(ii) Naga customary law and procedure;

(iii) administration of civil and criminal justice involving decisions according to Naga customary law;

(iv) ownership and transfer of land and its resources, shall apply to the State of Nagaland unless the Legislative Assembly of Nagaland by a resolution so decides;

Clauses not relevant here are left out.

Amended by: 13th (1962) Amendment

Reading the text

Article 371A does something unusual: Acts of Parliament on four subjects do not apply to Nagaland unless its own Assembly agrees by resolution. The subjects are Naga religious and social practices, customary law and procedure, justice under customary law, and land and its resources.
It was inserted by the 13th Amendment (1962), when Nagaland became a State (formally in December 1963), after an agreement with the Naga People’s Convention.

The idea in brief

The map kept changing after 1956. You do not need every year now; just the big ones:

Exam notes

Year	Change
1960	Bombay split into Maharashtra and Gujarat
1961–62	Dadra and Nagar Haveli (1961), Goa, Daman and Diu (1962) and Puducherry (1962) become UTs
1963	Nagaland made a State
1966	Punjab split: Haryana State; Chandigarh UT; hill areas to Himachal Pradesh
1971–72	Himachal Pradesh (1971); Manipur, Tripura, Meghalaya (1972) become States; Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh UTs
1975	Sikkim: associate State (35th Amendment, 1974), then full State (36th Amendment, 1975)
1987	Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh, Goa become States
2000	Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, Jharkhand
2014	Telangana: 29th State
2019	J&K State reorganised into two UTs: Jammu and Kashmir (with legislature) and Ladakh (without)
2020	Dadra and Nagar Haveli merged with Daman and Diu: one UT
In detail, renamings: Madras → Tamil Nadu (1969); Mysore → Karnataka (1973); Laccadive, Minicoy and Amindivi → Lakshadweep (1973); Pondicherry → Puducherry (2006); Uttaranchal → Uttarakhand (2007); Orissa → Odisha (2011). Today: 28 States and 8 UTs.
In detail, amendments behind the map: 7th (1956) reorganisation; 9th (1960) Berubari; 10th (1961) Dadra and Nagar Haveli; 12th (1962) Goa, Daman and Diu; 13th (1962) Nagaland, Article 371A; 14th (1962) Puducherry; 35th (1974) and 36th (1975) Sikkim; 100th (2015) Bangladesh enclaves. J&K Reorganisation Act, 2019 was an ordinary law under Article 3; Article 370 was made inoperative by Presidential orders, upheld by the Supreme Court in December 2023.

State no.	State (year)
22nd	Sikkim (1975)
23rd–25th	Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh (formerly NEFA), Goa (1987)
26th–28th	Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, Jharkhand (Nov 2000, from MP, UP and Bihar)
29th (now 28 States)	Telangana (2 June 2014); J&K became a UT in 2019

Remember itSix landmark years: 60-63-66-75-2000-2014 (Maharashtra–Gujarat, Nagaland, Haryana, Sikkim, three new States, Telangana). Count today: 28 States + 8 UTs.

Beyond the basics · ranker’s edge

Point	Depth
Exact dates	Maharashtra and Gujarat 1 May 1960; Nagaland 1 Dec 1963; Haryana 1 Nov 1966; Manipur, Tripura, Meghalaya 21 Jan 1972; Mizoram and Arunachal 20 Feb 1987; Goa 30 May 1987; Chhattisgarh 1 Nov, Uttarakhand 9 Nov, Jharkhand 15 Nov 2000
Sikkim	35th Amendment (1974): “associate State” with Article 2A and a Tenth Schedule (both later repealed). 36th (1975): full State, Article 371F
North-Eastern Areas (Reorganisation) Act, 1971	Made Manipur, Tripura, Meghalaya States
UT mergers	Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu merged on 26 January 2020
Prelims trap: Nagaland’s statehood came with Article 371A (13th Amendment). Arunachal was NEFA; it was a UT from 1972 to 1987.

In depth: the story behind it and how UPSC asks it

The story behind it

Most new States after 1956 came with a political settlement, and the settlement was often written into the Constitution. The North-East shows this most clearly. Nagaland (1963) got Article 371A. The reorganisation of 1971–72 created Meghalaya, Manipur and Tripura as States. Mizoram (1987) got Article 371G after the 1986 Mizo Accord. Arunachal Pradesh (1987) got Article 371H. Goa (1987) also became a State. Later came Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand and Jharkhand (2000), and Telangana (2014). Andhra Pradesh and Telangana share Article 371D on jobs and education.

Since 2019 the direction has also run the other way. The State of Jammu and Kashmir was reorganised into two Union Territories by an ordinary Article 3 law. In 2020 Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu were merged into one UT.

5. Quick revision and traps

Exam notes

Article 2 vs 3	2: outside territory admitted; 3: internal reorganisation
First Schedule	Lists the States and UTs and their territories; amended whenever a State is created (PYQ 2001, 2003)
First linguistic State	Andhra, 1953 (not Andhra Pradesh, which came in 1956)
28 + 8	States and Union Territories today
Article 3 bills	President’s prior recommendation; State’s views sought, not consent; simple majority (Art 4)
Cession of territory	Needs Art 368 amendment (Berubari, 9th Amdt); boundary settlement does not
Bangladesh enclaves	100th Amendment, 2015: 111 given, 51 received

Beyond the basics · ranker’s edge

PYQ pattern	How to prepare
Article 2 vs 3, Article 4	Know who recommends, whose views are sought, and the majority
Chronology of new States	Arrange-in-order questions; learn the six landmark years
Cession of territory	Berubari and the 100th Amendment are favourites