In the given political outline map of India (on page 16), five States have been marked as A, B, C, D and E. Id

Question

Q. In the given political outline map of India (on page 16), five States have been marked as A, B, C, D and E. Identify these States on the basis of the information given below and write their correct names in your answer-book along with the respective serial number of the information used and the concerned alphabet as per the following format : [Format table columns: Sr. no. of the information used | Concerned Alphabet | Name of the State — rows

(i) to (v)]

(i) The State where the Congress Party was not in power from 1957 – 59.

(ii) The State where Bharatiya Kisan Union was a prominent organization of farmers.

(iii) The State where the Naxalite movement started.

(iv) The youngest State of India.

(v) The State where the Dalit Panthers were active. [For Visually Impaired Candidates, in lieu of this question: (21.1) Name the State where the Congress Party was not in power from 1957 – 59. (21.2) Bharatiya Kisan Union was a prominent organization of farmers in which State ? (21.3) In which State of India did the Naxalite Movement start ? (21.4) Which is the youngest State of India ? (21.5) In which State of India were the Dalit Panthers active ?]

CBSECBSE Class XII Board 2019Subjective· 5mImportance★★★★★

🔒 Locked · start free trial →

You're viewing a preview — the full solution, concept, methods & PYQ mapping are locked.

Start your 14-day free trial to unlock the full solution →

Concept understanding — Indian Princely States Location

Indian Princely States: Location and Why It Matters

Imagine India before 1947. It wasn't one single country under British rule. Instead, it was a patchwork. About two-fifths of the land was directly ruled by the British — that was called British India. The rest was divided into over 500 Princely States, each ruled by a local king, maharaja, nawab, or nizam, who accepted the British Crown as the "paramount power."

So the first thing to understand: location here doesn't just mean "where on a map." It means the political geography of power — who controlled which territory, and how that shaped everything from trade routes to railway lines to the eventual merger of these states into independent India.

The Basic Geography

Princely States were scattered across the entire subcontinent, but they were not evenly spread. Some regions had many small states; others had a few large ones.

The largest and most powerful were in the west and centre: Hyderabad (in the Deccan), Mysore (in the south), Baroda (in Gujarat), Gwalior and Indore (in central India), and Kashmir (in the north).
The densest clusters were in Rajputana (present-day Rajasthan) — over 20 states including Jaipur, Jodhpur, Udaipur, and Bikaner — and in Kathiawar (Gujarat), which had hundreds of tiny states.
The north-east had fewer but strategically important states like Manipur and Tripura.
The south had Travancore, Cochin, and a handful of others.

Note

The Princely States covered about 45% of the area of pre-1947 India and contained roughly one-third of the population. They were not colonies — they were semi-autonomous kingdoms under British "paramountcy."

Why Location Was Not Random

The location of these states was the result of history, not British planning. Most were kingdoms that existed before the British arrived. The British did not conquer them all; instead, they signed treaties — the Subsidiary Alliance system — that left the local ruler in charge of internal affairs but placed the state under British military and foreign policy control.

So the map of Princely States was essentially the map of pre-colonial Indian kingdoms that survived British expansion. The British found it cheaper to rule through these princes than to administer every village directly.

Why Location Matters for a Commerce/Humanities Student

You might wonder: why should a commerce or humanities student care about where some old kingdoms were?

For commerce students: The location of Princely States determined where trade routes passed, where ports developed, and where tax revenues flowed. For example, the state of Hyderabad controlled the rich Godavari-Krishna delta and the diamond mines of Golconda. Baroda controlled the cotton-growing region of Gujarat. Mysore had gold mines and sandalwood forests. The economic geography of colonial India was shaped by these boundaries.

For humanities students: The location of Princely States explains why some regions developed differently. States like Mysore and Baroda invested in education, railways, and irrigation — they had progressive rulers. Others, like Hyderabad under the Nizam, remained feudal and backward. When India became independent in 1947, the location of these states — especially those that bordered Pakistan — became a matter of life and death. Kashmir, Junagadh, and Hyderabad each had to decide whether to join India or Pakistan, and their location made that decision explosive.

Important

The location of a Princely State was not just a dot on a map. It determined its strategic importance, its economic resources, its cultural identity, and its fate during Partition. The states that were landlocked and surrounded by British India had little choice but to join India. Those on the border — like Kashmir — became flashpoints that still shape politics today.

A Quick Mental Map …

Start your 14-day free trial to unlock the full solution →

Five Indian states are identified through key political and social movements: Kerala (non-Congress rule 1957–59), Uttar Pradesh (Bharatiya Kisan Union), West Bengal (Naxalite origins), Telangana (youngest state), and Maharashtra (Dalit Panthers).

The question asks you to connect specific historical events and movements with the states where they unfolded, drawing on India's rich post-independence political landscape. Each clue points to a defining moment or organization that shaped that state's identity.

The State where the Congress Party was not in power from 1957–59 Kerala made history in 1957 by electing the world's first democratically elected communist government. The Communist Party of India, led by E. M. S. Namboodiripad, came to power through the ballot box, breaking Congress's near-monopoly across India. This government lasted until 1959, when it was controversially dismissed by the Centre under Article 356. The episode remains a landmark in Indian federalism and the politics of the Left.
The State where Bharatiya Kisan Union was a prominent organization of farmers Uttar Pradesh became the heartland of the Bharatiya Kisan Union (BKU), founded in 1986 under the leadership of Mahendra Singh Tikait. The BKU mobilized farmers—particularly from western UP—around issues of fair crop prices, electricity tariffs, and debt relief. Its mass rallies and sit-ins at the capital brought agrarian distress into national focus during the liberalization era.
The State where the Naxalite movement started West Bengal witnessed the birth of the Naxalite movement in 1967, in the village of Naxalbari in the Darjeeling district. Tribal peasants, led by Charu Majumdar and Kanu Sanyal, rose against landlords in an armed uprising inspired by Maoist ideology. Though the original revolt was suppressed within months, it sparked a radical left-wing insurgency that spread across India and continues in altered forms today.
Note

The term "Naxalite" derives directly from Naxalbari, the village where the first armed peasant struggle erupted.
The youngest State of India Telangana became India's 29th state on 2 June 2014, carved out of Andhra Pradesh after decades of agitation for a separate state. The demand was rooted in perceived economic neglect and cultural distinctiveness of the Telangana region. Its formation marked the first major state reorganization in over a decade.
The State where the Dalit Panthers were active …

Start your 14-day free trial to unlock the full solution →

Same / Similar Concept — real previous-year questions on the same or a closely similar concept, not this exact question.

CBSE 2023Set 59/3/11 markMCQ
$Q. Which one of the following Princely States initially opposed joining the Indian Union ?$
(a) Baroda
(b) Hyderabad
(c) Mysore
(d) Gwalior
›Reveal solutionSolution

Hyderabad, under Nizam Osman Ali Khan, was the most prominent Princely State to initially refuse accession to India in 1947, holding out until military action in September 1948.

When the British announced their withdrawal from India in 1947, the subcontinent's 565 Princely States faced a stark choice: accede to India, join Pakistan, or attempt independence. The Cabinet Mission Plan of 1946 had declared that paramountcy—British suzerainty over these states—would lapse with independence, theoretically leaving rulers free to chart their own course. In practice, geography, demography, and political realism sharply constrained that freedom.

Most states acceded without drama. Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, as Minister for States, combined persuasion, pressure, and the promise of privy purses to secure nearly all accessions by August 15, 1947. A few, however, resisted. Kashmir's Hindu Maharaja ruling a Muslim-majority population delayed his decision, leading to the conflict that erupted in October 1947. Junagadh's Muslim Nawab, governing a Hindu-majority state on the Kathiawar coast, briefly acceded to Pakistan before a plebiscite reversed the decision. But the most significant holdout was Hyderabad.

Hyderabad was no ordinary Princely State. It was the largest and wealthiest, sprawling across the Deccan plateau with a population of sixteen million—larger than many independent nations of the time. The Nizam, Osman Ali Khan, reputedly the world's richest man, ruled a Hindu-majority population (roughly 85 percent) as a Muslim monarch. He harbored ambitions of independence, encouraged by his powerful Prime Minister Mir Laik Ali and the militant Razakar paramilitary, which sought to suppress pro-accession sentiment and terrorized Hindu villages. …
Start your 14-day free trial to see the full solution →
CBSE 2019Set 59/2/11 mark
$Q. Evaluate the role played by Sardar Patel towards the integration of the Princely States with India.$
›Reveal solutionSolution

Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel’s iron will, diplomatic skill, and relentless persuasion were decisive in integrating over 560 princely states into the Indian Union, preventing the Balkanisation of the country.

The princely states were a patchwork of territories that covered nearly half of India’s landmass and accounted for about a quarter of its population. Ruled by hereditary monarchs who had enjoyed varying degrees of autonomy under British paramountcy, these states were legally free to choose their own fate after the British withdrawal in 1947. The Indian National Congress was determined to build a unified, democratic nation, but the prospect of dozens of independent or semi-independent principalities threatened that vision. It was in this volatile atmosphere that Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, as the first Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Home Affairs, took charge of the States Department.

Patel’s approach was a masterful blend of firmness and flexibility. He understood that the princes were anxious about losing their power, privileges, and personal wealth. So he offered them generous terms: the rulers would retain their private property, their titles, and a privy purse — a tax-free annual allowance — in exchange for signing the Instrument of Accession. This document ceded only three subjects to the central government: defence, foreign affairs, and communications. Everything else — internal administration, taxation, law and order — remained with the prince. This was a brilliant political bargain. It gave the princes a dignified exit and gave India the essential levers of a sovereign state.

Note

The Instrument of Accession was not a merger. It was a legal agreement that brought a princely state into the Dominion of India on limited terms. Full integration came later, through the Merger Agreements of 1948–49.

Patel did not rely on the pen alone. He deployed a two-pronged strategy: persuasion backed by the implicit threat of force. His chief lieutenant, V.P. Menon, the Secretary of the States Department, travelled tirelessly to negotiate with individual rulers. Patel himself wrote personal letters, held meetings, and appealed to the princes’ patriotism and common sense. He reminded them that the British had left, and that the people of their states were already looking to the new Indian government for leadership. To hold out was to invite chaos.

Where persuasion failed, Patel acted decisively. The most dramatic example was Hyderabad. The Nizam, one of the richest rulers in the world, dreamed of an independent state and refused to sign the Instrument of Accession. He armed irregular forces (the Razakars) who terrorised the Hindu population and defied the Indian government. After months of patience, Patel ordered a police action in September 1948. The Indian Army entered Hyderabad, the Razakars were crushed, and the Nizam surrendered within days. Hyderabad was integrated — not by negotiation, but by force. Patel made it clear that no ruler, however powerful, could stand in the way of national unity.

Important

Patel’s handling of Junagadh was equally telling. The Muslim ruler of a Hindu-majority state acceded to Pakistan. Patel responded by sending troops to the border, cutting off supplies, and organising a plebiscite. The people voted overwhelmingly for India. The ruler fled, and Junagadh was integrated. Patel showed that accession was not a ruler’s personal whim — it had to reflect the will of the people.

Kashmir was the one major exception where Patel’s approach did not fully succeed. The Maharaja of Kashmir, Hari Singh, hesitated. He signed a standstill agreement with Pakistan but delayed accession to India. When tribal raiders from Pakistan invaded in October 1947, he appealed to India for help. Patel insisted that accession must precede military aid. The Maharaja signed the Instrument of Accession, and Indian troops were airlifted to Srinagar. But the resulting war with Pakistan left Kashmir a disputed territory — a problem that persists to this day. Patel had secured the legal accession, but the military and political consequences were beyond his control. …
Start your 14-day free trial to see the full solution →

🎓Unlock everything free for 14 days

Unlock everything free for 14 days