White Paper on Indian States (1950)/Part 5/Popular Movements in States
Popular Movements in States
90. 'Hopes and aspirations', wrote the authors of the Montagu-Chelmsford Report, thirty years ago, 'may overlap frontier lines like sparks across a street'. The events in the States since 15th August, 1947 have borne out the truth of this statement.
91. With the advent of independence, the popular urge in the States for attaining the same measure of freedom as was enjoyed by the people in the Provinces gained momentum and unleashed strong movements for the transfer of power from the Rulers to the people.
92. So far as the larger units were concerned, the democratisation of administration could be a satisfactory solution of their constitutional problem; however in the case of small States, responsible Government would have only proved a farce. The Rulers of the smaller States were in no position to meet the demand for equating the position of their people with that of their countrymen in the Provinces. With the best will in the world, these small units did not have the resources to stand up to popular agitation; nor could they afford the machinery for a self-sufficient and progressive democratic set-up. In some cases, the subversive elements did not hesitate to exploit the situation for their own ends. The result was a serious threat to law and order in the States. The situation, if allowed to deteriorate, would have imperilled peace and good order not only in these States but in the neighbouring Provinces as well. Without doubt the smaller State unis could not have continued in modern conditions as separate entities; integration provided the only approach to the problem.
93. The immediate objective of the policy of integration was the settlement of the problem of smaller States. As, however, the process of integrating small units in sizeable administrative unite gained strength, certain important factors, to which reference is made later, inevitably operated to bring within the compass of this process major States as well.
94. The integration of States did not follow a uniform pattern in all cases. Merger of States in the Provinces geographically contiguous to them was one form of integration; the second was the conversion of States into Centrally administered areas; and the third the integration of their territories to create new viable units known as Unions of States. Each of these forms has been adopted according to size, geography and other factors relating to each State or group of States.
In the paragraphs that follow, the results of this three-fold integration have been set out—not on the basis of the sequence of events, but according to the categories into which the integrated States could be classified.