The Union and Its Territory
What is the difference between Territory of India and Union of India?
Territory of India alludes to a more extensive set including present states, union territories, and areas which might be obtained at a later situation.
Union of India refers to Current States and Union Territories of India.
Articles 1 to 4 :
Articles 1 : Name and territory of the Union
Articles 2 : Admission or establishment of New States
Articles 3 : Formation of New States and alteration of areas boundaries or names of existing states
Articles 4 : Laws made U/A 2 and 3 to provide for the amendment of the first and the 4th schedules and supplemental, incidental and consequential matters.
Article 1 :
Clause (1) : India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States;
Clause (2) : The States and the territories thereof shall be as specified in the First Schedule;
Clause (3) : The territory of India shall comprise,
(a) The territories of the States;
(b) The Union territories specified in the First Schedule;
(c) Such other territories as may be acquire;
Article 1 of the Constitution portrays India, i.e., Bharat as a Union of States.
The explanations for this were clarified by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar in the Constituent Assembly. Ambedkar said that the Indian alliance was a union since it was undone and no State reserved a privilege to withdraw from the Indian Union.
He also said that The Drafting Committee needed to clarify that however India was to be a league, the organization was not the consequence of an arrangement by the States to participate in an alliance/federation and that the alliance not being the after effect of an understanding, no State has the option to withdraw from it.
The alliance/federation is a Union since it is indestructible. In spite of the fact that the country and individuals might be partitioned into various states for comfort of organization, the nation is one integral whole, its population a sole/unique group living under a sole imperium got from a unique source.
The Americans needed to wage a civil war to set up that the States have no privilege of separation and that their organization was indestructible. The Drafting Committee felt that it was smarter to make it clear at the start as opposed to leave it to hypothesis or to debate.
Article 2 :
2 : Parliament may by law admit into the Union, or establish, New States on such terms and conditions as it thinks fit.
2A : [Sikkim to be associated with the Union.] Rep. by the Constitution (Thirty-sixth Amendment) Act, 975, s. 5 (w.e.f.26-4-1975).
Under Article 2 , the Constitution vests power with Parliament for the admission or establishment/foundation of New States. By utilizing this force Parliament has conceded, for instance, the French settlements of Pondicherry, Karaikal, Mahe and Yanam, the Portuguese settlements of Goa, and Daman and Sikkim, and so forth, into India. Article 2 identifies with affirmation or foundation of new States that were/are not piece of the India.
No Parliamentary authorization is needed for the securing of an area/territory. Be that as it may, a territory gained by the Government of India(GOI), however genuinely becomes an area of India from the date of its obtaining, the formal or legitimate digestion is achieved exclusively by Parliamentary enactment made either under this article when the procured region is set up as another State of the Union, or when the gained region is converged into a current State Under Article 3 of the Constitution.
Article 3 :
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;
(c) Diminish the area of any State;
(d) Alter the boundaries of any State;
(e) Alter the name of any State;
Given that no Bill to the reason will be presented in either of the Houses of Parliament besides on the recommendation of the President and except if, where the proposition contained in the Bill influences the territory, area boundaries or name of any of the States, the Bill has been alluded by the President to the Legislature of that State for communicating its perspectives consequently inside such period as might be indicated in the reference or inside such further period as the President may permit and the period so determined or permitted has lapsed.
Clarification I: In this article, in provisos (a) to (e), "State" incorporates a Union Territory, yet in the stipulation/proviso, "State" does exclude a Union region.
Clarification II: The power given to the Parliament by proviso (a) incorporates the ability to frame another State or Union domain by joining a piece of some other State or Union region to some other State of Union region.
Article 4 :
Clause (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.
Clause (2) : No such law as aforesaid shall be deemed to be an amendment of this Constitution for the purposes of article 368.
Article 4 takes into consideration the following changes in the First Schedule [names of the States in the Union of India] and Fourth Schedule [number of seats each State is allocated in the Rajyasabha / Upper house].
It additionally says that no law altering or changing existing States or making another State will be viewed as an constitutional amendment. It is in accordance with the prior arrangements of necessity of just simple majority in the Parliament and proposes the unlimited authority of Union over regions of individual States of the Union.

0 Comments
If you have any queries, please comment down below