Non-BJP govts accuse Centre of eroding state autonomy and weakening cooperative federalism, from education to scheme funds to delimitation to language policy
Even as the year opened on a stormy note over Centre–state relations, with flashpoints such as the National Education Policy (NEP) and delimitation, it closed on an equally turbulent note as non-BJP-ruled states openly challenged the Centre’s move to replace MGNREGA with the VB-G RAM G Bill.
Also read | VB-G RAM G Bill sparks political row in TN; EPS rakes up DMK's 2021 promise on MGNREGA
Among the most vocal critics of what they described as the Centre’s attempt to bulldoze its will were Tamil Nadu, West Bengal and Kerala, states headed for Assembly elections next year, where the stakes are particularly high for the ruling DMK, TMC and the LDF, respectively, ahead of crucial electoral battles.
Delimitation and southern backlash
The year started with Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MK Stalin leading the charge against the Centre over the issues of delimitation and Hindi imposition allegations.
On March 5, Stalin chaired an all-party meeting, which decided to take the first step in uniting all the South Indian states on the issue of delimitation by forming a Joint Action Committee (JAC). He expressed concern over the looming exercise set for 2026, which is estimated to reduce the number of Tamil Nadu's parliamentary constituencies from 39 to 31. Subsequently, he organised a JAC meeting on delimitation, attended by chief ministers and leaders of many non-BJP parties in Chennai on March 22.
Addressing the meeting, Stalin stressed that delimitation should not rely solely on current population statistics, as this could unjustly penalise states like Tamil Nadu that have effectively managed population growth.
The Telangana Legislative Assembly, too, on March 27, adopted a resolution asserting that population should not be the sole yardstick for the delimitation of Lok Sabha constituencies.
Also read | Why South Indian CMs should stop viewing uteruses as voting machines
With the prospect of delimitation looming large over southern states, Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu unveiled an unconventional move aimed at boosting the state’s population. He announced that only those with more than two children would be eligible to contest elections for posts such as sarpanch, municipal councillor and mayor, and said the state would roll out policies to encourage families to have more children.
NEP deepens divide
It was again Tamil Nadu that was at daggers drawn with the Centre over the New Education Policy (NEP) for the better part of the year, as the DMK-led government labelled the NEP as “regressive”, arguing that it undermines social justice and attempts to impose Hindi.
Stalin, on August 8, unveiled the State Education Policy (SEP) amid ongoing friction between the state government and the Centre over NEP and education funds. Framed as a clear alternative to the Centre’s NEP, the SEP's key features include the continuation of the state’s two-language policy, rejecting the NEP’s three-language formula.
The TN government also accused the Union government of withholding ₹2,152 crore under the Samagra Shiksha scheme because it refused to implement the NEP, and consistently opposed provisions such as the three-language formula, which it viewed as an indirect attempt to impose Hindi.
Also read | CM MK Stalin unveils TN's state education policy; snubs NEP's 3-language rule
The NEP row also echoed in the BJP-ruled Maharashtra, where it brought together estranged Thackeray cousins after almost two decades. Shiv Sena (UBT) chief Uddhav Thackeray and Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) president Raj Thackeray decided to share a public stage to jointly celebrate the state government’s rollback of government orders linked to the three-language policy in primary schools.
The BJP government at the Centre rejected allegations of language imposition, with Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan asserting that the NEP promotes linguistic choice and that no language is being forced on states.
VB-G RAM G Bill reignites tensions
The Centre’s move to replace the MGNREGA with the Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) (VB-G RAM G) Bill, 2025, emerged as the latest flashpoint in Centre–state ties at year-end.
Congress leader Rahul Gandhi accused the Modi government of dismantling the MGNREGA through the newly passed VB-G RAM G legislation. In a post on X, he said, “The Modi government has undone twenty years of MGNREGA in a single day. By shifting control to Delhi, the law weakens states and undermines village-level livelihoods,” he said.
Stalin strongly opposed the VB-G RAM G Bill, urging Modi not to implement it. In a letter to the PM, Stalin said the Bill, which seeks to replace the MGNREGA, would jeopardise the livelihoods of crores of rural poor, particularly in performing states like Tamil Nadu, and strain Centre–state relations. He objected to the removal of Mahatma Gandhi’s name and warned that the changes would undermine the rights-based, demand-driven nature of the original law. He flagged concerns over the proposed 60:40 funding pattern, which he said would place a heavy fiscal burden on states.
Also read | Why Centre's G RAM G spells trouble for states | Talking Sense With Srini
Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah said the Centre’s decision was reflective of its ‘hatred’ towards both Gandhiji and the poor. He also took exception to the Centre’s decision to share the financial burden for the scheme with the states.
Kerala, Bengal up in arms
Meanwhile, days after suffering a setback in the local self-government elections, Kerala’s ruling Left Democratic Front (LDF) decided to shift into agitation mode, with the VB-G RAM G Bill emerging as a central plank of its mobilisation strategy. It plans statewide protests, focusing on mobilising MGNREGA workers, whom it sees as the most directly affected.
The Left argues that the Bill marks a shift away from the rights-based, demand-driven character of MGNREGA and reflects the Centre’s long-standing effort to weaken the scheme through budget cuts and centralisation.
TMC deputy leader in the Rajya Sabha, Sagarika Ghose, said the new legislation amounted to the “destruction” of MGNREGA and attacked the government for pushing it through with what she described as “bulldozer tactics”.
VBSA Bill and the autonomy debate
The widening federal dispute has also extended to higher education, with Kerala emerging as a key critic of the Centre’s proposed regulatory overhaul.
Kerala has opposed the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan (VBSA) Bill, 2025, arguing that it encroaches upon the constitutional framework governing higher education, which falls under the Concurrent List.
State Higher Education Minister R Bindu said the Bill undermines the autonomy of state-funded universities by proposing a single umbrella body to replace existing regulators such as the UGC, AICTE and NCTE. She alleged that the proposed commission would function in line with policies and decisions of the Union government, effectively centralising control over regulation, accreditation and academic standards.
The minister warned that the legislation would allow the Centre to interfere in university curricula and syllabi, including the introduction of Indian Knowledge Systems, which Kerala has opposed. She also raised concerns over provisions allowing hefty penalties ranging from Rs 10 lakh to Rs 2 crore for non-compliance, saying these could be used to shut down institutions.
Borrowing curbs and fiscal federalism
In another move that has deepened Centre–state tensions, the Union government has sharply curtailed Kerala’s borrowing limit. The state has strongly objected to the reduction for the January–March quarter, describing it as a serious threat to fiscal federalism and the cooperative spirit between the Centre and states.
Kerala Finance Minister KN Balagopal termed the move a “major setback” that undermines the state’s ability to discharge essential functions and violates federal principles. The state argues that repeated and retrospective curbs on its market borrowings amount to arbitrary central interference in an area that directly affects democratic governance and people’s welfare.
Also read | Centre again slashes Kerala’s borrowing limit by Rs 5,944 crore
The Left-led government has taken the issue to the Supreme Court, contending that the Centre’s expanding definition of “public borrowing” and imposition of caps under Article 293 erode states’ constitutional autonomy. Critics and former policymakers say the selective tightening of borrowing rules for states, while the Union government faces no comparable restraints, creates a structural asymmetry that weakens fiscal federalism.
Similarly, the Centre imposed a sharp cut in Punjab’s open market borrowing limit in May, approving borrowings that were Rs 16,676 crore lower than what the state had sought. Against a requested limit of Rs 47,076.40 crore, the reduction drew strong criticism from the AAP government, with Finance Minister Harpal Cheema describing it as “financial strangulation” of a debt-stressed state. He said the cut came at a time when the Centre had already reduced Punjab’s dues, including the Rural Development Fund, and accused it of discriminating against the state.
As India heads into an election-heavy cycle, these disputes suggest that federalism itself may emerge as a central political fault line, reshaping Centre-state relations well beyond 2025.
