Correct option is A
· Assertion (A): "India is illustrative of a 'holding together' federation due to circumstances in which the centre agreed to 'devolve' power for holding the federal units together" — This is true. India is a "holding together" federation, meaning that it was initially a unitary state that adopted a federal system to manage its vast diversity and hold the country together. The central government has devolved powers to states over time, especially in response to growing demands for regional autonomy and the need to manage India's complex social, linguistic, and cultural landscape.
· Reason (R): "This asymmetry of power division, along with an era of coalitions and weaker governments at the centre, led to assertions for demand of autonomy by states" — This is also true and explains A. The uneven distribution of power between the centre and states (asymmetric federalism) and the rise of coalition governments in the 1990s allowed states to push for more autonomy. Weaker central governments were more open to decentralizing power in order to maintain stability and unity, which explains why India evolved into a more devolved federal structure over time.
Thus, R is the correct explanation of A because the demand for more state autonomy and the weaker central governments created the conditions under which India, as a "holding together" federation, devolved power to maintain national cohesion.
Information Booster:
1. "Holding together" federations like India start as unitary states and then adopt federalism to prevent fragmentation and manage diversity.
2. Asymmetric federalism allows certain states more autonomy than others (e.g., special provisions for states like Jammu & Kashmir, Nagaland), reflecting the unique needs of India's diverse regions.
3. The rise of coalition governments in India, especially after the 1990s, weakened the central authority and led to increasing demands from states for more autonomy.
4. India's federal structure was originally more centralized, but over time, states have gained greater control over local matters due to these political dynamics.