On February 24, the Union Cabinet cleared the proposal to rename Kerala as Keralam, setting in motion the long and tedious process to change the name of a state. The politically significant Cabinet decision ahead of the state polls came two years after the Kerala Assembly passed a unanimous resolution seeking the name change. The resolution, forwarded to the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), requested the Union government to replace Kerala in the first schedule of the Constitution with Keralam.
Purpose and rationale
According to the Kerala government, the new name aligns with the state’s historical identity and eliminates mispronunciation as it is called Keralam in Malayalam. The state government argues that since the state was created on November 1, 1956 specifically to honour the Malayalam language, the official name should reflect the correct Malayalam pronunciation.
The resolution adopted by the state Assembly on June 24, 2024 read: “The name of our State is ‘Keralam’ in Malayalam Language. States were formed on the basis of language on the 1st day of November, 1956. The Kerala Piravi Day is also on the 1st day of November. Since the time of National Independence Struggle, there has been a strong demand for the formation of United Kerala for the people speaking Malayalam language. But in the First Schedule to the Constitution the name of our State is recorded as ‘Kerala’. This Assembly unanimously appeals to the Central Government to take urgent steps as per Article 3 of the Constitution for modifying the name as ‘Keralam’.”
Legal process
Unlike changing the names of cities, which is an executive decision by the state government with clearance from the Centre, states can only be renamed through an amendment of the First Schedule of the Constitution, which lists the official names of all states and Union territories along with their territorial jurisdictions. The process involves Articles 3 of the Constitution, which allows Parliament to pass a law to rename a state, and Article 4, which allows Parliament to pass the Bill relatively easily through a simple majority.
The process usually starts with the state taking the initiative by passing a resolution and forwarding it to the Centre as a proposal. Technically, the Constitution does not mandate such an action from the state, but it is usually done for political reasons.
The MHA then examines the state’s proposal and seeks the views of various stakeholders, including the Railways, Survey of India, Department of Posts, Intelligence Bureau, and Registrar General of India, and also secures concurrence from Legal Affairs and Legislative Departments to draft a bill to this effect.
After obtaining the no-objection feedback from these departments and agencies, the Union home ministry refers the draft bill to the Cabinet for consideration.
In Kerala’s case, the MHA had rejected an earlier proposal submitted in 2023 on technical grounds as the resolution erroneously referred to the Eighth Schedule of the Constitution, which lists the official languages. The 2023 resolution sought the state’s name be changed in all 22 official languages, too. However, the Eighth Schedule lists only the languages and not the names of states. So, the MHA returned the proposal flagging the discrepancy.
Thereafter, the Kerala government drafted a fresh resolution, which referred only to the First Schedule and passed it in 2024. It is this resolution that the MHA and the Union Cabinet cleared recently.
The next step is Presidential reference, where the President of India refers the Kerala (Alteration of Name) Bill, 2026, to the State Legislative Assembly for expressing its views within a specified timeframe.
Once the Kerala Assembly endorses it, the Government of India will seek the recommendation of the President to introduce the Bill in Parliament. However, the state’s opinion is not binding on Parliament.
After the Bill is debated and passed by simple majority (more than 50% of the members present and voting) in both Houses, it is sent to the President for assent. After the President signs it, it becomes an Act of Parliament and the state’s name change takes effect with the First Schedule being updated and all official records, central laws, and notification adopting the new name.
Even though the bill amends the First Schedule of the Constitution, it is not considered as a constitutional amendment under Article 368, which requires special majority (more than 50% of the total members of the House and two-third of the members present and voting) as the process takes the easier route through Article 4.
Financial costs
Like in the case of any rebranding exercise, changing the name of a state is a costly affair. After the name is officially changed, public boards, letter heads and stationery, etc will need to be changed to reflect the new name. So will government websites. The names of government enterprises and departments may also be changed. However, the high court usually retains the old name.
There is no official estimate of how much the whole exercise will cost. Various reports peg the figure between ₹400 crore and ₹1,000 crore based on past records involving the renaming of Orissa to Odisha and Uttaranchal to Uttarakhand. To avoid legal complications and also to reduce costs, usually both old and new names are allowed to be used for a year or two till the old stationery is used up.
In Kerala’s case, the bill for renaming is likely to surpass the reported figures, given the state’s propensity to commission big-budget rebranding campaigns with an eye on its tourism industry. If such an initiative is taken, the overall budget could run into a few thousand crores. However, the amount spent may not be strictly viewed as ‘costs’ but as an investment to boost its tourism sector, which may pay back in years to come.
Why Bengal left out
That the decision comes just before the Assembly elections in Kerala is not lost on political pundits. The resolution was moved by the ruling CPM and supported by the opposition Congress. The BJP, which does not have any MLAs in the Assembly, also publicly supported the move, giving it a unanimous push from the state. All three parties are likely to claim credit for the positive development to seek votes.
The CPM, which has been in power for two terms, is fighting anti-incumbency and would like to deploy all available avenues to retain power. It may highlight the fact that the state's proposal cleared the first hurdles and only it can implement the project effectively. The Congress is hopeful of storming back to power and may highlight its support for the move as its commitment to safeguarding the state’s identity.
The BJP, which is desperately trying to make its presence felt in the Assembly, may try to use it as a gesture from the party-led Union government that it truly respects the regional identity and aspirations of Kerala.
Underscoring the political angle of the Centre’s decision to accept Kerala’s request, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee alleged the CPM has some sinister deal with the BJP, though the two parties belong to opposite ideological fronts and often spar in public. Mamata, who ended the CPM’s 34-year rule in West Bengal in 2011, has tried more than once to get her state’s name changed. In July 2018, the West Bengal Assembly passed a resolution seeking a change in the state’s name to Bangla but the Centre did not approve it after the Ministry of External Affairs raised an objection saying it could be confused with the neighbouring country, Bangladesh. The Trinamool Congress leader, however, views the Centre’s stance as confrontational and politically motivated.
Two major reasons have been cited for renaming West Bengal. First, the term makes sense now as East Bengal no longer exists after the creation of Bangladesh.
Also, in administrative meetings, speakers from West Bengal have to wait endlessly for their turn as the state is way down in alphabetical order. If the state’s name starts with B, it could move West Bengal up alphabetically.