Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumFederal System, Centre-State Relations, and Emergency Provisions

With reference to the inconsistency between laws made by Parliament and laws made by the State Legislatures under Article 254 of the Constitution of India, consider the following statements:

1. If any provision of a law made by the Legislature of a State is repugnant to any provision of a law made by Parliament on a Concurrent List subject, the central law prevails whether passed before or after the State law.
2. A State law on a Concurrent List subject containing a provision repugnant to an earlier Parliamentary law shall prevail in that State if it was reserved for the President and received Presidential assent.
3. Once a State law receives Presidential assent under Article 254(2), Parliament is permanently barred from enacting any subsequent law that amends or repeals that State law.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

  1. 1 and 2 onlyAnswer
  2. B
    2 and 3 only
  3. C
    1 and 3 only
  4. D
    1, 2, and 3

Answer

Statements 1 and 2 only are correct.
The option selecting statements 1 and 2 only is correct. Statement 1 accurately states the general rule of federal supremacy in Concurrent List matters (Article 254(1)). Statement 2 correctly describes the exception where Presidential assent allows a repugnant State law to prevail within that State (Article 254(2)). Statement 3 is false because Parliament retains the power under the proviso to Article 254(2) to subsequently amend, vary, or repeal such State legislation.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze Statement 1 regarding Article 254(1).
Statement 1 is correct. Under Article 254(1), if a State law on a Concurrent List topic conflicts with a Union law, the Union law prevails regardless of the sequence of enactment.
Establishes the general doctrine of repugnancy under Indian federal legislative relations.
2
Analyze Statement 2 regarding Article 254(2).
Statement 2 is correct. Article 254(2) provides an exception: if a State law reserved for Presidential consideration receives Presidential assent, the State law prevails in that specific State.
Demonstrates the exception mechanism balancing federal rigidity with state autonomy.
3
Analyze Statement 3 regarding the proviso to Article 254(2).
Statement 3 is incorrect. Under the proviso to Article 254(2), Parliament can at any time enact a law adding to, amending, varying, or repealing the State law so made.
Confirms the ultimate legislative supremacy of Parliament on Concurrent List subjects.

Key Concept

Repugnancy and Legislative Overriding Powers under Article 254
Rate this question

Topics

Federal System, Centre-State Relations, and Emergency Provisions

More questions from this topic