Chapter 16 · Topic 16.1 · Prelims + Mains1 of 3

Integration of Princely States: The problem and the method

Key points

  • The problem in 1947.
  • Patel and Menon's two stages.
  • Junagadh and Hyderabad.
  • Kashmir.

Prelims box: facts and traps

StepDetail
States Department (July 1947)Vallabhbhai Patel in charge; V.P. Menon its secretary
Mountbatten's appealSpeech to the Chamber of Princes, 25 July 1947
Instrument of AccessionStates handed over only defence, external affairs and communications
Standstill AgreementExisting arrangements to continue until new ones were made
By 15 August 1947Almost all states had acceded; Junagadh, Hyderabad and Kashmir had not.
  • In 1947 over 560 princely states covered about two-fifths of India's area.
  • The 1935 Act had already tried to bring them in.
  • In December 1947 Menon held an all-night meeting with the princes of the Eastern States and Chhattisgarh agencies, who signed Merger Agreements joining their states to Orissa, the Central Provinces and Bihar from 1 January 1948.
  • Trap (UPSC Prelims 2024, the Government of India Act): “Defence and Foreign Affairs were kept under the control of the federal legislature” is incorrect.
  • Trap: Defence and foreign affairs stayed with the Governor-General, not the federal legislature.

The problem of the princely states

In 1947 over 560 princely states covered about two-fifths of India’s area. They were ruled by princes under British paramountcy. The Indian Independence Act ended paramountcy, so in law each state could join India or Pakistan, or try to stay independent.

The 1935 Act had already tried to bring them in. Prelims 2024: it ‘provided for the establishment of an All India Federation based on the union of the British Indian Provinces and Princely States ‘ (correct). Defence and foreign affairs stayed with the Governor-General, not the federal legislature. The federation never came into being because not enough princes joined.

Asked by UPSCUPSC Prelims 2024 · GS Paper I · Q62

With reference to the Government of India Act, 1935, consider the following statements : 1. It provided for the establishment of an All India Federation based on the union of the British Indian Provinces and Princely States. 2. Defence and Foreign Affairs were kept under the control of the federal legislature. Which of the statements given above is/are correct ?

  1. 1 only
  2. 2 only
  3. Both 1 and 2
  4. Neither 1 nor 2
Show answer

Answer: (a) · UPSC official key

StepDetail
States Department (July 1947)Vallabhbhai Patel in charge; V.P. Menon its secretary
Mountbatten’s appealSpeech to the Chamber of Princes, 25 July 1947
Instrument of AccessionStates handed over only defence, external affairs and communications
Standstill AgreementExisting arrangements to continue until new ones were made
By 15 August 1947Almost all states had acceded; Junagadh, Hyderabad and Kashmir had not
Vallabhbhai Patel on his 74th birthday, 31 October 1949
Vallabhbhai Patel on his 74th birthday, 31 October 1949.

Some rulers tested the waters: the Dewan of Travancore, C.P. Ramaswami Iyer, announced independence, and the rulers of Jodhpur and Bhopal held talks with Pakistan’s side. All joined India before independence.

Patel and Menon: accession, then integration

Patel combined persuasion with pressure. Princes were promised respect, privy purses and their personal property; popular movements in the states (the States People’s Conference) kept up pressure from below.

Stage two (1948–49)Detail
Merged into provincesSmall states joined neighbouring provinces, e.g. Orissa and Central Provinces states
Unions of statesSaurashtra (1948), Matsya, Vindhya Pradesh, Madhya Bharat, PEPSU, Rajasthan (completed 1949), Travancore-Cochin (1949)
Centrally administeredHimachal Pradesh, Kutch, Tripura, Manipur, Bhopal and others
Constitution (1950)Former unions became Part B states headed by a Rajpramukh
Privy pursesAnnual payments to princes; abolished by the 26th Amendment (1971)

Mains 2021 asked candidates to ‘Assess the main administrative issues and socio-cultural problems in the integration process of Indian Princely States’. Administrative: different laws, revenue systems, services and armies. Socio-cultural: loyalty to rulers, communal tension (Hyderabad, Kashmir), tribal and linguistic diversity.

Asked by UPSCUPSC Mains 2021 · GS Paper I · Q3 · 10 marks

Assess the main administrative issues and socio-cultural problems in the integration process of Indian Princely States.

Mains box: analysis and answer points

  • The federation never came into being because not enough princes joined.
  • The Indian Independence Act ended paramountcy, so in law each state could join India or Pakistan, or try to stay independent.
  • Likely next angle: Instrument of Accession
  • Asked: Mains 2021 (GS Paper I, 10 marks): Assess the main administrative issues and socio-cultural problems in the integration process of Indian Princely States.

Practice

Practice MCQs (8)

Q1 · Battle IAS practice

In the context of the integration of the princely states, the term 'privy purse' referred to

Answer (d) & explanation

Under the Merger Agreements and the Covenants of Merger, rulers ceded full and exclusive jurisdiction over their states. In return they received an annual payment from the Indian government, the privy purse, as compensation for the surrender of their powers and the dissolution of their states. The amount depended on factors such as the state's revenue, its salute status and the antiquity of the dynasty. Their private property, personal privileges, dignities and titles were protected, and succession was guaranteed by custom; separately, the provinces had to absorb state employees on equal pay. The privy purse and the princes' privileges survived full integration and were abolished only in 1971.

Q2 · Battle IAS practice

In 1947, which ruler of a Rajputana border state, together with the ruler of Jaisalmer, held talks with Muhammad Ali Jinnah about joining Pakistan, but finally acceded to India after Mountbatten's persuasion?

Answer (b) & explanation

Jinnah hoped to win over some large border states to compensate for the loss of half of Punjab and Bengal. He offered Jodhpur and Jaisalmer accession on any terms, reportedly handing their rulers blank sheets on which to write their conditions. The ruler of Jaisalmer refused, saying he could not side with Muslims against Hindus if communal trouble broke out. Hanwant Singh of Jodhpur, who disliked the Congress, came close to signing, but opinion in his state was hostile to Pakistan. Mountbatten pointed out that a Hindu-majority state joining Pakistan would contradict the two-nation theory and could provoke communal violence, and Hanwant Singh reluctantly acceded to India. By contrast, the ruler of Bikaner joined India early out of patriotic conviction and was among those who took seats in the Constituent Assembly in April 1947.

Q3 · Battle IAS practice

With reference to the Instruments of Accession used to bring the princely states into India in 1947, consider the following statements:
1. States that had enjoyed internal autonomy under the British ceded only defence, external affairs and communications to the Dominion of India.
2. The States Department refused to sign a Standstill Agreement with any state that did not also sign an Instrument of Accession.
3. A clause of the Instrument bound the acceding ruler to accept the future Constitution of India as and when it was framed.
Which of the statements given above are correct?

Answer (b) & explanation

Vallabhbhai Patel and V. P. Menon backed their diplomacy with two documents. The Standstill Agreement kept existing arrangements (railways, customs, posts) running, while the Instrument of Accession transferred specified subjects to India. States with internal autonomy under the British ceded only three subjects: defence, external affairs and communications, as defined in List 1 of Schedule VII of the Government of India Act, 1935; smaller estates and talukas signed a different form vesting residuary powers in India. The States Department used the Standstill Agreement as a lever and categorically refused it to states that would not accede. The Instrument also carried safeguards: Clause 7 said the ruler would not be bound to accept any future constitution, and Clause 8 guaranteed autonomy in all matters not ceded. That is why fresh instruments and covenants were needed later to bring the states fully under the Constitution.

Q4 · Battle IAS practice

On the eve of independence, the head of the British Political Department, which had handled relations with the princely states, resigned in protest against Lord Mountbatten's policy of pressing the princes to accede. He was

Answer (c) & explanation

Under paramountcy the Crown dealt with the princes through the Political Department and its residents and political agents. Its last head, Sir Conrad Corfield, was sympathetic to the princes' claim that they would regain full freedom when paramountcy lapsed. When Mountbatten told the princes that Britain would neither give dominion status to any state nor admit it to the Commonwealth, and used his personal standing to push them towards accession, Corfield resigned in protest. Several princes complained that Britain had betrayed them, and the Conservative opposition attacked the policy. On the Indian side, the new States Department, headed politically by Vallabhbhai Patel with V. P. Menon as its secretary, replaced the Political Department; Patel stressed that it would not be an instrument of paramountcy.

Q5 · Battle IAS practice

Consider the following princely states:
1. Bhopal
2. Travancore
3. Hyderabad
4. Mysore Before the transfer of power in 1947, how many of the above announced that they did not intend to join either India or Pakistan?

Answer (c) & explanation

When paramountcy was due to lapse, some rulers claimed full freedom. Bhopal, Travancore and Hyderabad announced that they would join neither dominion. Nawab Hamidullah Khan of Bhopal, Chancellor of the Chamber of Princes, even tried to build an alliance of princes with the Muslim League, though Mountbatten, a personal friend, asked him by confidential letter to sign an Instrument that would be kept in his safe until 15 August, and Bhopal was finally taken over by the Centre on 1 June 1949. Travancore's dewan Sir C. P. Ramaswami Iyer stressed the state's thorium reserves and its value to the West, but after he survived a stabbing on 25 July 1947 the Maharaja gave up the plan and acceded. Hyderabad kept up its claim and was integrated only after Operation Polo in September 1948. Mysore, by contrast, acceded early: Maharaja Jayachamarajendra Wadiyar signed on 9 August 1947.

Q6 · Battle IAS practice

With reference to the Merger Agreements signed by smaller princely states in 1947-49, consider the following statements:
1. In December 1947, rulers of the Eastern States Agency and the Chhattisgarh States Agency signed agreements merging their states into Orissa, the Central Provinces and Bihar with effect from 1 January 1948.
2. Thirty states of the former Punjab Hill States Agency were integrated into Himachal Pradesh, which was administered directly by the Centre as a Chief Commissioner's Province.
3. The border states of Kutch, Tripura and Manipur were merged into the adjoining provinces of Bombay and Assam.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Answer (a) & explanation

Patel and Nehru had at first meant to wait until Mountbatten left before breaking his guarantees to the smaller states, but an adivasi uprising in Orissa in late 1947 forced the pace. In December 1947 Menon held an all-night meeting with the princes of the Eastern States and Chhattisgarh agencies, who signed Merger Agreements joining their states to Orissa, the Central Provinces and Bihar from 1 January 1948. Later, 66 states of Gujarat and the Deccan, including Kolhapur and Baroda, were merged into Bombay. For security reasons, thirty Punjab hill states became Himachal Pradesh, run by the Centre as a Chief Commissioner's Province. A second type of merger agreement was taken from sensitive border states: Kutch, Tripura and Manipur were not merged into any province but kept as Chief Commissioners' Provinces under direct central control, as were Bhopal and Bilaspur.

Q7 · Battle IAS practice

Consider the following statements: Statement-I: In May 1948, at a meeting called on V. P. Menon's initiative, the Rajpramukhs of the princely unions signed new Instruments of Accession giving the Government of India power to legislate on all matters in the Seventh Schedule of the Government of India Act, 1935. Statement-II: The Instruments of Accession of 1947 had ceded only a few subjects, which kept the states insulated from Union policy in all other fields.
Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?

Answer (a) & explanation

Integration after accession passed through merger, democratisation and centralisation. Once the unions had been formed and their Rajpramukhs bound by a special covenant to act as constitutional heads, one gap remained: the 1947 Instruments ceded only defence, external affairs and communications, so Union laws in other fields did not reach the former states. The Congress leadership saw this as an obstacle to national development and social justice. In May 1948, at Menon's initiative, the Rajpramukhs met the States Department in Delhi and signed new Instruments giving the Centre power to legislate on all matters in the Seventh Schedule of the 1935 Act. The unions, Mysore and Hyderabad then adopted the Constitution of India itself, placing them on the same legal footing as the old provinces; Kashmir alone remained outside this route.

Q8 · Battle IAS practice

During the integration of 1947-1950, most princely states either signed Merger Agreements with India or joined unions of states through Covenants of Merger. Which one of the following groups consists only of states that signed neither?

Answer (d) & explanation

Integration ran in two tracks. Small states signed Merger Agreements and were absorbed into neighbouring provinces or made Chief Commissioner's Provinces (Bhopal became one in 1949). Larger states and groups of states signed Covenants of Merger to form unions such as Saurashtra, Madhya Bharat, PEPSU, Rajasthan and Travancore-Cochin, each headed by a Rajpramukh. The only states that signed neither were Kashmir, Mysore and Hyderabad. Mysore and Hyderabad remained single states and, like the unions, became Part B states that adopted the Constitution of India; their rulers (the Maharaja of Mysore and the Nizam) served as Rajpramukhs. Kashmir stood apart, its relationship governed by its original Instrument of Accession and later Article 370.

0 / 0 correct

Write an answer

In 150 words, explain the significance of Integration of Princely States with one recent example.

Flashcards (9)

Who headed the States Department?

Vallabhbhai Patel.

Who was its secretary?

V.P. Menon.

Which subjects did the Instrument of

Accession cover? Defence, external affairs, communications.

Which three states had not acceded by 15

August 1947? Junagadh, Hyderabad, Kashmir.

Which Dewan announced Travancore's

independence? C.P. Ramaswami Iyer.

Why did the 1935 federation fail?

Not enough princes joined.

Name one union of states formed in 1948.

Saurashtra.

Who headed a Part B state?

A Rajpramukh.

Which amendment abolished privy purses?

26th Amendment, 1971.

Read more: related explainers

In the news

Next topic · 16.2 →Integration of Princely States: Junagadh, Hyderabad and Kashmir

Syllabus: GS-I · Post-independence consolidation and reorganization within the country.

Read these notes on battleias.com