Q.Should some States be governed by special provisions? Does this create resentment among other States? Does it help forge greater unity?

The Constitution gives special provisions to States like the north-eastern States, hilly States such as Himachal Pradesh, and (formerly) Jammu and Kashmir because of their distinct tribal population, terrain, or history, not as favouritism. …

The Indian Constitution treats many States differently rather than applying one identical set of rules everywhere. In the case of the division of powers, while the general scheme (Union, State and Concurrent Lists) applies to all States, the Constitution makes special provisions for some States because of their peculiar social and historical circumstances. Most of these apply to the north-eastern States — Assam, Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram and others — largely because of their sizeable indigenous tribal population with a distinct history and culture, though these provisions have not fully stemmed alienation and insurgency in parts of the region. Special provisions also exist for hilly States like Himachal Pradesh, and for some other States such as Andhra Pradesh, Goa, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Sikkim and Telangana.

Jammu and Kashmir had the most extensive special status of all, under Article 370. As one of the large princely States with the option of joining India, joining Pakistan, or remaining independent, it acceded to India under exceptional circumstances after Pakistan sent tribal infiltrators to try to capture it in 1947. Because of this, it was given much greater autonomy than other States — the Centre's powers there were limited to matters the State government agreed to, no financial emergency could be declared, the Directive Principles did not apply, and constitutional amendments needed the State government's concurrence. (This special status was ended and J&K was reorganised into the Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir, and Ladakh, with effect from 31 October 2019.) …