Power Sharing Class 10 Notes (CBSE 2026–27) | NCERT Class 10 Civics Chapter 1

Power sharing is the practice of distributing political authority among different organs of government, levels of government, social groups, and political parties, rather than concentrating it in one office or one community.

These CBSE Class 10 Social Science Notes cover the full NCERT Chapter 1 syllabus for the CBSE 2026–27 academic year — Class 10 Civics Chapter 1 in Democratic Politics–II — including the Belgium and Sri Lanka case studies, the four forms of power sharing, and how India's own system compares.

Power Sharing Notes for Class 10 

In simple terms, power sharing means no single group, party, or branch of government gets to decide everything on its own. Instead, authority is split so that different voices — legislature, executive, judiciary, states, communities, and parties — all get a share of decision-making power. NCERT presents this as the practical foundation of stable democratic government, not an optional add-on to it.

Four broad arrangements count as power sharing:

• Legislature, executive, judiciary check one another so no single organ of government dominates.
• National and regional governments divide authority between the centre and the states.
• Social groups — ethnic, linguistic, or religious communities — receive guaranteed representation.
• Political parties and pressure groups shape governance through coalitions, unions, and lobby groups.

Power Sharing Class 10 Chapter Summary

Chapter 1 opens with two contrasting stories. Belgium, a small European country split between Dutch, French, and German speakers, avoided serious conflict by rebuilding its constitution around shared power — a national government, regional governments, and separate community governments for each language group. 

Sri Lanka, by contrast, adopted a majoritarian approach after independence, favouring its Sinhala-speaking majority through language and religious policy, which alienated the Tamil minority and eventually led to a civil war lasting from 1983 to 2009. 

From these two cases, the chapter draws out the prudential and moral reasons for power sharing, defines its four forms, and asks students to connect the lesson to India's own federal, multi-party democracy. The chapter's central claim is that power sharing is not merely useful for keeping the peace — it is what democratic legitimacy actually means.

Prudential and Moral Reasons for Power Sharing Class 10

Social conflict escalates when a majority tries to impose its will on other groups — this is the prudential case for power sharing. The moral case does not depend on outcomes at all: it holds that shared governance is intrinsically more just, whether or not it produces stability.

Belgian Model of Power Sharing Class 10

Belgium's ethnic map is the reason power sharing became unavoidable there:

• Flemish region residents, roughly 59% of the population, speak Dutch.
• Wallonia residents, roughly 40% of the population, speak French.
• German-speaking community makes up close to 1% of Belgians, concentrated in the east.
• Brussels, the capital, has a French-speaking majority (about 80%) alongside a Dutch-speaking minority (about 20%) — the most sensitive flashpoint in the country's ethnic balance.

Between 1970 and 1993, Belgian leaders amended the constitution four times to build the Belgian model of power sharing:

• Equal ministerial representation — the central government guarantees an equal number of Dutch- and French-speaking ministers.
• Regional autonomy — many central powers were transferred to the Flemish and Walloon regional governments.
• Community government — a third tier elected by Dutch, French, and German speakers regardless of where they live, with authority over cultural, educational, and language matters.
• Brussels' special status — its government guarantees equal representation for both language communities.

Majoritarianism in Sri Lanka Class 10

Sri Lanka took the opposite path after independence in 1948, and this is where majoritarianism in Sri Lanka becomes central to the chapter.

• Sinhala speakers form about 74% of the population — the majority community.
• Sri Lankan Tamils, roughly 12%, are concentrated in the north and east with generations-old roots in the country.
• Indian Tamils, roughly 5%, descend from plantation workers brought from India during colonial rule.
• Religious composition cuts across language lines, with Buddhist, Hindu, Christian, and Muslim populations in both communities.

Majoritarianism is the belief that the majority community should rule a country however it wishes, disregarding minority interests. In Sri Lanka this took concrete form:

• The 1956 Act made Sinhala the sole official language, disadvantaging Tamil speakers in education and government jobs.
• State religious policy favoured Buddhism, despite constitutional promises to protect all religions.
• University and civil-service access shifted toward the Sinhala-speaking majority, deepening Tamil exclusion.

The result was a steady breakdown of trust, culminating in a civil war (1983–2009) driven by demands for a separate Tamil state.

Belgium and Sri Lanka Power Sharing Comparison Class 10

Forms of Power Sharing Class 10 with Examples

Power Sharing in India, Belgium and Sri Lanka Comparison

• Federal structure — the Union government and State governments divide authority the way Belgium's central and regional governments do, giving India vertical power sharing built into its constitution.
• Separation of powers — India's legislature, executive, and judiciary function as independent, checking organs, the same horizontal form seen in the chapter.
• Reservation policies — Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes, and women receive representation in legislatures and local bodies, functionally similar to Belgium's accommodation of language communities.
• Coalition politics — India's experience with multi-party coalition governments illustrates power sharing among political parties, the fourth form in the chapter.

The comparison is directional, not literal: India did not copy either country, but its constitutional design reflects the same underlying choice Belgium made — accommodate diversity through structured power sharing rather than risk the instability majoritarian rule produced in Sri Lanka.

Power Sharing Class 10 Key Terms and Definitions

Power Sharing Class 10 Mind Map (Quick Visual Summary)

POWER SHARING (Class 10, Chapter 1)

├── Why Desirable

│ ├── Prudential reason → avoids conflict, ensures stability

│ └── Moral reason → spirit of democracy, consent of the governed

├── Case Studies

│ ├── Belgium → accommodation → community government, regional autonomy

│ └── Sri Lanka → majoritarianism → 1956 Act → civil war (1983–2009)

├── Forms of Power Sharing

│ ├── Horizontal → legislature, executive, judiciary

│ ├── Vertical → central, state, local governments

│ ├── Among social groups → community government, reservation

│ └── Among political parties/pressure groups → coalitions, unions

└── India Comparison → federalism + separation of powers + reservation + coalitions

A downloadable, printable version of this Power Sharing Class 10 mind map PDF is available as a separate resource.

Power Sharing Class 10 One-Shot Revision Notes

For a fast, single read-through before an exam:

1. Power sharing = authority split across institutions, levels, groups, or parties.
2. Two reasons it matters — prudential (stability) and moral (democratic consent).
3. Belgium = accommodation model → three-tier government, equal representation.
4. Sri Lanka = majoritarian model → Sinhala-only policy → Tamil alienation → civil war.
5. Four forms — horizontal, vertical, social-group, and political-party sharing.
6. India applies all four forms through federalism, separation of powers, reservation, and coalitions.

Power Sharing Class 10 Short Notes for Board Exam

• Definition: distribution, not concentration, of political authority.
• Belgium: solved diversity through constitutional accommodation (1970–1993).
• Sri Lanka: majoritarian policy from 1956 led to prolonged civil conflict.
• Four forms: horizontal, vertical, social-group, political-party.
• India: reflects the accommodation model through federalism and reservation.

Power Sharing Class 10 3 Mark and 5 Mark Questions (Sample Answers)

1-mark format: Define power sharing in a single sentence — the distribution of political authority among different organs, levels of government, or social groups, rather than its concentration in one hand.

3-mark format: State the four forms of power sharing and give one example of each — horizontal (separation of powers), vertical (federalism), among social groups (community government), and among political actors (coalition government).

5-mark format: Compare Belgium and Sri Lanka's approaches to power sharing, explaining why one produced stability and the other produced conflict — cover ethnic composition, post-independence policy choices, and long-term consequences for each country.