Government of India Act, 1935: Features & Its Role in Federal constitution

The Government of India Act, 1935, was a landmark legislation and the most comprehensive British law for India, paving the way for self-governance. It arose from demands for autonomy and was influenced by the Simon Commission and Round Table Conferences.. It was the longest and most comprehensive act passed by the 

This article will provide an in-depth analysis of the Government of India Act, 1935, its key features, and whether it successfully laid down a federal constitution for India. We will also explore its impact on India's independence movement and how it influenced the Indian Constitution of 1950.

The early 20th century saw rising nationalist movements demanding self-rule. The Government of India Act, 1919, failed to provide real autonomy, leading to widespread discontent. In response, the British introduced constitutional reforms, culminating in the Government of India Act, 1935.

Causes Leading to the Act

• Simon Commission (1927): Faced opposition due to the absence of Indian representatives.
• Round Table Conferences (1930-1932): Failed to reach a consensus on India's governance.
• Failure of Government of India Act, 1919: The diarchy system was criticized for denying real power to Indians.

The 1935 Act, Thus was a British attempt to address nationalist pressure while retaining control. It stemmed from the Simon Commission and Round Table Conferences but offered only limited concessions.

Federal Structure

• The act proposed a federal system by dividing powers between the Center, Provinces, and Princely States.
• The princely states were given the option to join the federation, but most declined, making federalism ineffective in practice.

Provincial Autonomy

• Provinces were granted autonomy in administration and legislation.
• Governors retained overriding powers, allowing British control over key decisions.

Division of Powers
(Federal, Provincial, and Concurrent Lists)

Diarchy System at the Central Level

• Reintroduced diarchy at the center, dividing subjects into Reserved (British-controlled) and Transferred (Indian-controlled) categories.
• The Governor-General had extensive powers, including veto authority over legislative decisions.
  
  

Bicameral Legislature

• The act provided for a bicameral legislature at the center, with the Council of State (Upper House) and the Federal Assembly (Lower House).
• However, the Governor-General had powers to override legislative decisions.

Franchise and Reorganization

• Expanded the electorate to about 10% of the population, but voting rights were still restricted based on property and education qualifications.
• Reorganized provinces, creating Sindh and separating Burma from India.

Separate Electorates & Communal Representation

• Extended separate electorates to different religious and social communities.
• Increased communal divisions, which Indian leaders opposed as a strategy to divide and rule.

Indian Council & Reserve Powers of the Governor-General

• The Governor-General and Governors had emergency powers to override provincial autonomy.
• The British retained control over finance, military, and key administrative decisions

• Absence of Full Autonomy: While provincial autonomy was granted, the Governor-General and British authorities retained overriding powers.
• Failure of Federal Structure: The princely states refused to join, rendering the proposed federal system ineffective.
• Diarchy at the Central Level: Instead of promoting responsible government, the act reintroduced diarchy, keeping key powers in British hands.
• Communal Representation: Separate electorates were expanded instead of being abolished, deepening communal divisions.
• No Universal Franchise: The act restricted voting rights based on property and education, limiting mass political participation.
• Governor-General’s Veto Powers: The Governor-General had excessive control over budgets, laws, and administration, making the act a tool of British dominance rather than self-rule.

Federal vs. Unitary Structure Debate

• The act introduced a federal framework but was never implemented in full.
• The British retained overriding powers, making it more unitary than federal in practice.

Why It Was Never Fully Implemented

• The princely states refused to join, making the federal structure unworkable.
• World War II (1939-1945) further delayed its implementation as Britain focused on war efforts.

Connection with the Indian Independence Movement

• The act was seen as an attempt to prolong British rule rather than grant true autonomy.
• Indian leaders demanded full independence, leading to movements such as the Quit India Movement (1942).

Influence on the Indian Constitution (1950)

• The act provided a structural framework that influenced the Indian Constitution.
• Key elements such as bicameralism, federal structure, and provincial autonomy were retained.
  
  

Long-Term Implications

• The act introduced bureaucratic and administrative structures that continued post-independence.
• The act’s provincial autonomy provisions laid the foundation for India's current federal governance.
• The system of reserved powers for the executive influenced the role of the President and Governors in independent India.

Criticism by Indian Leaders

• Jawaharlal Nehru: Called it a “Charter of Slavery” due to excessive British control.
• B.R. Ambedkar: Acknowledged its structural reforms but criticized its limitations.
• Mahatma Gandhi: Opposed separate electorates, stating they would divide communities further.

The Government of India Act, 1935, was a crucial yet controversial law that laid the foundation for India’s governance system. While it introduced significant reforms, it fell short of granting full autonomy. Its federal structure, legislative framework, and provincial autonomy influenced the Indian Constitution of 1950, but provisions favoring British dominance were rejected.

The act’s partial reforms fueled the freedom struggle, ultimately leading to independence in 1947. Today, its legacy remains a key chapter in India’s constitutional history

1. Did the Government of India Act, 1935, provide full autonomy to Indians?

Ans: No, the act granted only partial provincial autonomy, while the British retained control over crucial matters like defense, finance, and foreign affairs.

2. What were the key features of the Government of India Act, 1935?

Ans: The act introduced provincial autonomy, a federal structure, bicameralism, diarchy at the central level, separate electorates, and communal representation.

3. Why was the 1935 Act not fully implemented?

Ans: The princely states refused to join the federation, and the onset of World War II led to a shift in British priorities, preventing full implementation.

4. How did the Government of India Act, 1935, influence India’s Constitution?

Ans: It provided the structural foundation for governance, influencing India's federal system, bicameral legislature, and administrative divisions.

5. Which provisions of the act were removed in the Indian Constitution?

Ans: Provisions such as diarchy, separate electorates, and excessive Governor-General powers were abolished in the Indian Constitution of 1950.

Also Read About - Recent Constitutional Amendments: Key Amendments Every UPSC Aspirant Should Know

Enhance Your UPSC Preparation with SuperKalam!

Meet SuperKalam! Your Super Mentor provides a comprehensive learning ecosystem, you can benefit from focused and disciplined preparation strategies. 

Do you too want easy UPSC notes on similar topics? SuperKalam has you covered! Get instant, comprehensive notes on any topic from any subject—right when you need them. Plus, you can seamlessly integrate these notes with your handmade notes. 

Start Now—it's FREE and take advantage of personalized guidance to crack the UPSC with confidence and clarity.

Explore SuperKalam's Resources and set yourself on the path to success!