The Constitution of India has deviated from the traditional federal systems like US, Switzerland and Australia and incorporated a large number of unitary or non-federal features, tilting the balance of power in favour of the Centre. This has promoted the constitutional experts to challenge the federal character of Indian Constitution in the following ways:

• Professor KC Wheare has described the Constitution of India as quasi-federal. He remarked that "Indian Union is a unitary state with subsidiary federal features rather than a federal state with subsidiary unitary features." However, there are other political scientists who do not agree with the above description.
• Paul Appleby characterises the Indian system as extremely federal.
• Morris Jones termed it as a bargaining federalism.
• Ivor Jennings has described it as a federation with a strong centralising tendency. He observed that the Indian Constitution is mainly federal with unique safeguards for enforcing national unity and growth.
• Granville Austin called the Indian Federalism as a Cooperative Federalism. He described Indian federation as a new kind of federation to meet India's peculiar needs.

While replying to the criticism of over-centralisation in the Constitution, BR Ambedker stated: "A serious complaint is made on the ground that there is too much centralisation and the states have been reduced to municipalities".

It is evident that this viewpoint is not only exaggerated, but also based on a misunderstanding of what the Constitution seeks to accomplish.

The core premise of federalism is that legislative and executive authority is divided between the centre and the states by the Constitution, not by any law established by the centre. The states are not reliant on the Centre for legislative or executive authority. In this regard, the states and the centre are equal partners. It's difficult to see how such a Constitution could be referred to be centralism. As a result, it is incorrect to assert that the states have been placed under the supervision of the Centre.

Infact, the federalism in India represents a compromise between the following two conflicting considerations. These are:

• Normal division of powers under which states enjoy autonomy within their own spheres.
• Need for national integrity and a strong union government under exceptional circumstances.

The following trends in the working of Indian political system reflect its federal spirit:

• Territorial disputes between the states. Disputes between states over sharing of river water.
• The emergence of regional parties and their coming to power in states like Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu etc.
• The creation of new states to fulfil the regional aspirations.
• Demand of the states for more financial grants from the centre to meet their developmental needs.
• Assertion of autonomy by the states and their resistance to the interference from the centre.
• Supreme Court’s imposition of several procedural limitations on the use of Article 356, by the centre.