Actual Article
Article 254: Inconsistency between laws made by Parliament and laws made by the Legislatures of States
- If any provision of a law made by the Legislature of a State is repugnant to any provision of a law made by Parliament which Parliament is competent to enact, or to any provision of an existing law with respect to one of the matters enumerated in the Concurrent List, then, subject to the provisions of clause (2), the law made by Parliament, whether passed before or after the law made by the Legislature of such State, or, as the case may be, the existing law, shall prevail and the law made by the Legislature of the State shall, to the extent of the repugnancy, be void.
- Where a law made by the Legislature of a State with respect to one of the matters enumerated in the Concurrent List contains any provision repugnant to the provisions of an earlier law made by Parliament or an existing law with respect to that matter, then, the law so made by the Legislature of such State shall, if it has been reserved for the consideration of the President and has received his assent, prevail in that State:
- Provided that nothing in this clause shall prevent Parliament from enacting at any time any law with respect to the same matter including a law adding to, amending, varying or repealing the law so made by the Legislature of the State.
UPSC Notes for Article 254
Explanation:
- Repugnancy Between State and Central Laws: Article 254 addresses conflicts between laws made by State Legislatures and Parliament, particularly in matters listed in the Concurrent List.
- Primacy of Parliamentary Law: Clause (1) establishes that if there is any inconsistency between a state law and a central law, the central law will prevail, and the state law will be void to the extent of the inconsistency.
- Exception with Presidential Assent: Clause (2) provides an exception where a state law, which has received the President’s assent, can prevail over an earlier central law within that state. However, Parliament retains the power to amend, vary, or repeal such a state law at any time.
Key Points:
- Conflict Resolution: Article 254 provides a clear mechanism for resolving conflicts between central and state laws, ensuring legal clarity and consistency.
- Presidential Assent: The requirement of presidential assent for state laws to prevail over central laws underscores the balance between state autonomy and central oversight.
- Supremacy of Central Legislation: While states have the power to legislate, this article ensures that central legislation maintains primacy in case of conflicts, preserving the unity of the legal framework.
Important Cases and Commissions Related to Article 254
Cases:
- M. Karunanidhi vs. Union of India (1979): The Supreme Court elaborated on the principles of repugnancy and the scope of Article 254, emphasizing the conditions under which a state law would be deemed repugnant to a central law.
- Hoechst Pharmaceuticals Ltd. vs. State of Bihar (1983): This case reiterated that a state law repugnant to a central law on a Concurrent List subject is void to the extent of the repugnancy unless it has received the President’s assent.
Commissions:
- Sarkaria Commission: Examined the balance of power between the Union and States, including mechanisms for resolving conflicts between central and state laws.
- Punchhi Commission: Further explored federal relations and suggested measures to improve the legislative process and conflict resolution mechanisms.
Important Reports Related to Article 254:
- Administrative Reforms Commission: Could have discussed the implications of repugnancy clauses on federalism and suggested frameworks for effective legislative harmony.
Previous Year Prelims Questions Related to Article 254
- (UPSC Prelims 2016) What happens if a state law is repugnant to a central law on a matter in the Concurrent List?
- A. The state law prevails
- B. The central law prevails
- C. Both laws are valid
- D. The state law prevails if it receives the Governor’s assent Correct Answer: B. The central law prevails
- (UPSC Prelims 2018) Under what condition can a state law on a Concurrent List matter prevail over a central law according to Article 254?
- A. If it receives the President’s assent
- B. If it is passed by a two-thirds majority in the state legislature
- C. If it is approved by the Supreme Court
- D. If it receives the Governor’s assent Correct Answer: A. If it receives the President’s assent
Previous Year Mains Questions Related to Article 254
- Mains 2016: “Discuss the significance of Article 254 in resolving conflicts between central and state legislation. How does it ensure legal uniformity while respecting state autonomy?”
- Mains 2019: “Evaluate the role of the President’s assent in the legislative process under Article 254. How does this provision impact the balance of power between the Union and the States?”
Additional Insights:
- Ensuring Legal Uniformity: Article 254 ensures that there is uniformity in the legal framework across the country, preventing a fragmented legal system.
- Balancing Federalism: The article balances the need for a unified national legal framework with the autonomy of states, allowing state laws to prevail in certain circumstances with presidential assent.
Understanding Article 254 is crucial for UPSC aspirants as it provides insights into the mechanisms for resolving legislative conflicts between the Union and States, emphasizing the balance between central authority and state autonomy. This knowledge is essential for both preliminary and main examinations, offering a comprehensive understanding of the legislative framework and federal principles enshrined in the Indian Constitution.