Talk:Government of India

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kirimani.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:35, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Help deciphering Subhashini Ali?
The article Subhashini Ali consists of a list of what appear to be past and present Indian government officials. Anyone have any idea what this article is trying to communicate? I know there is a former MP by that name as well as an actress. They should probably have an article at that name but I'm trying to find out what the creator's intent was in putting up this list. Thanks for any insights! Demi T/C 07:39, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

FYI, it looks like the same content appears at Travancore sisters. Demi T/C 07:41, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Andaman has a high court?
The list in the article misses the Andaman and Nicobar islands. Which high court has jurisdiction over them? Anwar 21:04, 23 May 2006 (UTC) The Jurisdiction of Kolkatta(Calcutta) extends upto the Andaman and Nicobar Islands i.e Kolkatta high court has the juridiction over Andaman & Nicobar islands.

Holding a portfolio?
From the page: "Any minister holding a portfolio must be a member of either house of parliament."  Can anyone explain this phrase "holding a portfolio" to someone unfamiliar with Indian or parliamentary government? It might help to explain it in the article if it might be helpful to others as well. 24.155.88.186 22:46, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

proportional representation
I believe there is an inaccuracy regarding whether indian legislators are elected to the Lok Sabha via proportional representation. I believe they are elected via a first past the post system. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.36.68.201 (talk) 06:44, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

Socialism
The section on Socialism seems to be a non-NPOV. Consider revising. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.154.121.182 (talk) 21:30, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Government of India
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Government of India's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "survey": From Standard of living in India:  From Poverty in India: Sarkaritel.com : Corporate News & Features : Highlights of Economic Survey 2004-2005 

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 19:20, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

NPOV????
Who's been writing this article? The Indian Tourism Agency???

"The concept of tipping and working on commission is new to India. She has enjoyed her freedom for little over 60 years, less than the average life span of a human. The democratic western world has enjoyed such privileges for a long time, whereas the other major communist or socialist nation have enforced its ways into people's lives. As India still maintains a free and fair policy to all citizens (with of course some exceptions) concepts like "premium" processing is new and is being slowly adopted to reduce the otherwise action of corruption. At micro levels, these are called as "Tatkaal" schemes being introduced in government offices, meaning immedidate processing, which directly deals with the common man. At macro levels these are called betterment charges that are levied on corporations that wish to invest in large projects. Starting early 90s, privatization has helped government to raise more taxes, than the money being laundered in corruptions. Professions such as facilitator, negotiator, or coloquillay known as an "agent", such professions were never part of the Indian society and in business there was a seller and a buyer; and negotiation was considered the skill of the seller to influence the buyer.

Talking of corruption, press in India has more freedom and is not as supresssed as it is in rest of the world. Press plays an important role in dealing with corruption.

In general, it is amazing how a nation in spite of having so many cross cultural relationships, different languages, people from various ethinicity and religion, the social fabric of India is still intact with of course a little abrasions here and there." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.255.196.199 (talk) 23:39, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Reform
The section on reform contains significant bias towards highlighting and enhancing the perception of corruption in the nation. The citations, though well-placed, have been selectively placed to cater to the presumed bias. The subject and the implications are too vast. There are no benchmarks on the quality of governance of a nation, let alone one with a diversity as huge and a complex past as that of India, factors which bring their own set of challenges. Using a singular lens to look at this democracy and to judge it thereby is a flaw which needs to be avoided and corrected. - Mave12 (talk) 20:29, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * There are statistics gathered on corruption by country. While they also include business corruption, police and government corruption are also mentioned. India scored 88 out of 159. While this doesn't sound too bad, the actual subjective score was 2.9 out of a possible 10, with countries scoring close to ten. So while India has a lot of company, the corruption does not look good. see. I don't think anyone is making this up. Police are switched around fairly rapidly because they are corrupt and some of their superiors are trying to fight that. Not a good situation at all. Pretending it doesn't exist is not productive nor encyclopedic. This is not supposed to be WP:PR for India. It is supposed to report the truth. Student7 (talk) 22:50, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Important notice
The government section of the "Outline of India" needs to be checked, corrected, and completed -- especially the subsections for the government branches.

When the country outlines were created, temporary data (that matched most of the countries but not all) was used to speed up the process. Those countries for which the temporary data does not match must be replaced with the correct information.

Please check that this country's outline is not in error.

If you have any questions or comments, please contact The Transhumanist.

Thank you.

Junk bonds?
An editor has removed the deterioration of bonds to near junk bond status as outdated (notice the "near"). I haven't checked this either way. However, if bonds ever deteriorated to where S&P rating was single B or Cs, this should be recorded somewhere, such as History of India. There is no reason why there can't be a "History" subsection in the Government article. Student7 (talk) 11:28, 30 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I was the one who removed the sentence, and my edit-summary may have caused the confusion, so let me explain: In 2008 the three credit rating agencies (S&P, Moddy's, and Fitch) were threatening to reduce India's external debt ratings from BBB- (which is the lowest rung of "investment grade") because of many factors including the deficits, economic downturn and particularly because of the uncertainty about the stability and effectiveness of the government once the Left parties had withdrawn from the coalition. The downgrade never came to pass, and after the 2009 elections the agencies either re-affirmed the BBB- rating or said that they were going to reevaluate in June.
 * Note that India's debt rating have been at the "junk status" for most of its history AFAIK, and in fact, in 1991 India came very close to defaulting on its external debt (it escaped narrowly by airlifting its gold reserves to London to be used as collateral)! The latter event is very significant in Indian economic history since it arguably sparked off the economic reforms during the 90's, and should be covered in Economy of India (see also 1991 India economic crisis. The discussion of the proposed-downgrade-that-never-happened in 2008, on the other hand, is both recentism and outdated at the same time. It was also undue and misplaced in this article.
 * Hope my removal now makes sense. Let me know if you have any further questions or comments. Abecedare (talk) 14:45, 30 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the tutorial. Very informative. The story seems to be (now!) that the government recovered its bonds from junk status which it formerly held. That is (instead) a positive item that might be mentioned (and maybe is) in history or economy..., but if not there, it can wait I guess. Student7 (talk) 21:11, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Union of India
To the reverter Abecedere. It's not saying "in the name of" anywhere. It's "by the name of". I don't know where you got the "in the name of" thing. I would also like to remind you, that "union of india" is the term which is used in the supreme court to denote the indian government. --91.130.91.48 (talk) 07:42, 22 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, that was a typo in my edit summary. I should have said: "by the name of" does not mean "is the name of". Essentially, my understanding of the facts is as follows:
 * The government of India (GOI) is also know as the "Union Government", especially when it is to be distinguished or contrasted with the state budgets. (cf. "Union Budget").
 * The Republic of India (ROI), is also known as the "Union of India", especially when its federal structure or status as a legal entity, is being emphasized.
 * As per Article 300 of the Indian constitution, which you cited, "The Government of India may sue or be sued by the name of the Union of India". This does not mean that the GOI is the "Union of India"; it simply lays down that the government is representative of the State, and thus may use that designation in legal proceedings.
 * Note that the Article 300 goes on to say that, "Government of a State may sue or be sued by the name of the State", which means, for example that suits in which the Gujarat state government is a party are labeled "State of Gujarat vs ..." (example) etc; this does not mean that the "State Government of Gujarat" is officially know as "State of Gujarat".
 * This is also similar to the situation in US, in which the DOJ and other federal entities sue, and are sued, in the name of "United States", as in United States v. Microsoft.
 * Let me know if you have any remaining questions or comments. Abecedare (talk) 08:26, 22 September 2009 (UTC)


 * This is an awesome explanation. I understand the nuances now better. However, there are some issues left:
 * 1) When India is known as Union of India, why the main article India isn't mentioning this fact, if it's a fact?
 * 2) Still the Indian government would be refered to as "Union of India", but if you're interpretation is right, then it's not "the official name" of the government and this association would have to be removed and a notice to be added, that it is only for these occations.
 * 3) Your point about the state government meaning would have the same issues as point 1) and 2)
 * 4) The "United States" must have a similar meaning like Union of India, because both of them are not the "official" names for India or USA (would be "United States of America")
 * Well, this is really interesting stuff. I would like to go deeper in this issue. Any good sources for this kind of stuff (us related)? checking now the us constitution --91.130.91.48 (talk) 08:46, 22 September 2009 (UTC)


 * The official names of India are laid down in Article 1 of the constitution, which says, "India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States" (incidentally, that is where the Union in Article 300 arises from; note how article 1 emphasizes the federal structure in its use of "union"). I think the "Union of India" moniker is worth mentioning in names of India and in the body of this article, where we can explain that the GOI can assume that designation, in legal settings.
 * As for US: it is not really clear whether the "official" name of the country is United States or United States of America, since the US Constitution, unlike the precursor Articles of Confederation, does not make it explicit. This, in fact, has been long debated on the talk page of United States article; you can read a summary of the debate here. If you have further questions about US law or book recommendations, consider posting them at wikipedia refdesk, where you should get knowledgeable responses. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 09:16, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Ishantvarade (talk) 20:07, 18 December 2013 (UTC) [www.constitution.org/cons/india/p01001.html Article 1] of The Constitution of India, which says "India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States". Here we can easily find that India is the name of the Union of States like USA also we call US is United States of America or United States, but never known as the by the name of United America. In the same manner, the Article 1 of The Constitution of India gives "India" as the name of the Union of States. When we don't have name of the Union of States then how can we know what is the Union of India. After declaration of name of the Union of States as India in Article 1. Now if we move to what is "Union of India" then Article 300 clearly showing that it is the sue or sued name of "The Government of India". But if you see in the Constitutional debates we could find that 'Dominion of India' really covers the period from 15th August 1947 tip to the 25th January, 1950. Before that we had the expression Government of India', the expression 'Government of India' should be confined to Government before the 'Dominion' stage came in. After the Dominion stage is over. Therefore we use 'Union of India' officially for 'Government of India'. Now if we further move and find that from The Constitution of India that Part V. The Union, we can easily find that what is Union of India. Therefore there is difference between 'Union of India' and 'Union of States'

Edit request from, 6 November 2011
173.49.246.160 (talk) 22:23, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

As per the CIA World Factbook, India ranks 49th in the world, with respect to the Public Debt, with a total of 51.9% of GDP (2010 estimated).[14]

173.49.246.160 (talk) 22:23, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ C T J F 8 3  17:53, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Government of India. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140527214936/http://pmindia.gov.in/details9.php to http://pmindia.gov.in/details9.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090116065316/http://www.dailytimes.com.pk:80/default.asp?page=story_25-3-2005_pg5_13 to http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_25-3-2005_pg5_13

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 00:20, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Needs a real lead section
The lead section should be a summary of the whole article, up to 4 full paragraphs long, not a one-liner. · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 18:16, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 November 2018
In the paragraph:

Modelled after the Westminster system for governing the state, the union government is mainly composed of the executive, the legislature, and the judiciary, in which all powers are vested by the constitution in parliament, the prime minister and the supreme court.

please change:

"parliament, the prime minister and the supreme court. " TO "the prime minister, the parliament and the supreme court respectively."

This is to correctly order these three with "the executive, the legislature and the judiciary..." in the preceding half of the sentence. Theuprightbassman (talk) 18:07, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done DannyS712 (talk) 19:00, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 August 2019
Change second sentence in Section 3.1 on President From: The president has all constitutional powers and exercises them directly or through officers subordinate to him as per the aforesaid Article 53(1) To: The president has all constitutional powers and exercises them directly or through subordinate officers as per the aforesaid Article 53(1)

Change first sentence in Section 3.4 on Cabinet, ministries, and agencies From: The Cabinet of India includes the prime minister and his cabinet ministers To: The Cabinet of India includes the prime minister and cabinet ministers.

Why: Make this article gender neutral. Sanketpatel.301090 (talk) 06:02, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done--Goldsztajn (talk) 06:40, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 October 2019
in the second paragraph it is written that it consist of 24 highcourt,and several district court suggestion is that please make it 672 district court. Somu1805 (talk) 04:48, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. NiciVampireHeart 08:56, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 November 2019
103.21.125.78 (talk) 17:13, 12 November 2019 (UTC) 28 states and 9 union teritory
 * Yes check.svg Done  D Big X ray ᗙ  17:28, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Are state governments within article scope?
Government_of_India is written as if the topic of this article is government in India. "Power is divided between union government and state governments." Accordingly, is this article about "union government" or the national structures, or about government in India, which includes state and local government structures separate from the national government? I'm inclined to make it about the union government, in which case most of the Government_of_India section should be removed. Daask (talk) 15:34, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 June 2020
Please change Nine Union territories to Eight Union territories. Sajanrajput007 (talk) 15:17, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Megan Barris   (Lets talk📧)  15:58, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

42nd Amendment of the Constitution of India
If I am not mistaken, the 42nd amendment amended the preamble by changing the description of India from "sovereign democratic republic" to a "sovereign, socialist secular democratic republic". Despite this declaration in their constitution, the adjectives socialist and secular are never used in this article. Should mention be added to enhance context regarding the Government of India?Vac1911 (talk) 14:29, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: This article is not about the Indian constitution, and those terms do not significantly add to the article in any way.  Debit pixie 💬 16:04, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Renaming the page
I am considering renaming the page of Government of India into Federal Government of India Ktdk (talk) 02:18, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The word 'Federal' isn't mentioned in Indian constitution. Nitesh003 (talk) 15:56, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
 * To distinguish it from other governments of India that aren't federal? Largoplazo (talk) 16:15, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Regarding the unsourced changes to the lead made by
has made significant changes to the lead without any sources and without any prior discussion. The user also moved the page without establishing consensus. The user has been warned regarding the issue but that hasn't worked, I am starting this discussion with the hopes of bringing more opinions into this issue and establishing consensus regarding the lead as it was before the edits by the aforementioned user.  Pro lix 💬 06:46, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

I apologise for the changes I made to the page. I was not aware of the way consensus is made prior to making significant changes to important topics. My intention was just to stress on the fact that India is a 'Federal Republic' and not a unitary one, which the page looked like. Anyway, I apologise for the same. I haven't made any further changes once I was warned and the process was mentioned to me. <span style="font family:Lobster;text-shadow: 4px 4px 20px mediumturquoise, -4px -4px 20px darkorchid"> Addie 666 💬 18:21, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , what you refer to in your reply as a 'fact' is merely a statement until you can provide sources that back up your claims. Please avoid edit warring when your edits are reverted, instead take to the talk page and discuss per WP:BRD. Kindly propose your changes with relevant citations under a new section on this talk page. Thank you for understanding. <span style="font family:Lobster;text-shadow: 4px 4px 20px mediumturquoise, -4px -4px 20px darkorchid"> Pro lix 💬 18:47, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 December 2020
twenty eight states should be changed to twenty nine states

From : The Government of India (ISO: Bhārat Sarkār), often abbreviated as GoI, is the union government created by the constitution of India as the legislative, executive and judicial authority of the union of twenty eight states and eight union territories of a constitutionally democratic republic. The seat of the Government is located in New Delhi, the capital of India. To : The Government of India (ISO: Bhārat Sarkār), often abbreviated as GoI, is the union government created by the constitution of India as the legislative, executive and judicial authority of the union of twenty nine states and eight union territories of a constitutionally democratic republic. The seat of the Government is located in New Delhi, the capital of India. Morsdor (talk) 08:54, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Please stop adding these spam edit requests, there are 28 states . If you claim otherwise provide sources. <span style="font family:Lobster;text-shadow: 4px 4px 20px mediumturquoise, -4px -4px 20px darkorchid"> Pro lix 💬 11:11, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
 * FYI Jammu and Kashmir is not a state anymore. 28 is correct. ◢ <i style="background-color:#F7E3F7; color:#960596"> Ganbaruby! </i>  (Say hi!) 13:38, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 January 2022
change 29 states instead of 28 in para 1 2409:4060:308:FD90:0:0:2678:20AC (talk) 16:08, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:09, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Its Union government and not central government
Government of India should not be called as Central government but as Union government. Please change it. 2A01:C23:60D4:5C00:9108:926A:4F95:5DF6 (talk) 12:46, 29 January 2022 (UTC)


 * ❌ Reliable sources use both terms — DaxServer (talk · contribs) 20:30, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Change the President Name
You havent Changed the current president name from Ram Nath Kovind to Draupadi Murmu, as she is the president of India since 25 July 2022. Mudits05 (talk) 13:50, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 * It was updated two days ago in the infobox, but I found one mention of the old president in the body and updated it. Thanks. Largoplazo (talk) 02:07, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

'negligle'
The last line of the introductory paragraph spells the word 'negligible' incorrectly. Rectify as soon as possible. Based47 (talk) 14:40, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ Largoplazo (talk) 16:23, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Official Name?
The infobox states that the full official name of the GOI is "Government of the Republic of India" which is a term I've never seen before or in any other articles. Can someone tell if it's sourced or else I'm changing it to "Government of India". PadFoot2008 (talk) 02:45, 22 April 2023 (UTC)