CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-II Unit-III

Paper III:

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-II

Unit-III

1. Discuss the Legislative Relations between the Centre and the States under the Indian Constitution. How are conflicts resolved in the case of overlapping jurisdiction?

Introduction:

The Indian Constitution establishes a federal structure with a clear distribution of legislative powers between the Centre and the States. This distribution is aimed at avoiding conflicts and promoting cooperative governance. However, India’s federalism is unique due to its unitary tilt, giving more powers to the Union in situations of conflict or national interest.

Constitutional Provisions:

Article 245: Extent of Laws Made by Parliament and State Legislatures

Parliament can legislate for the whole or any part of India.
State legislatures can legislate for their respective states.

Article 246: Subject-Matter of Laws Made by Parliament and State Legislatures

This is the most important article in the context of legislative relations. It divides legislative subjects into three lists under the Seventh Schedule:

Three Lists in the Seventh Schedule:

Union List (List I):
- Subjects of national importance like defence, foreign affairs, atomic energy, railways, etc.
- Parliament has exclusive powers to make laws on these 100 items (originally 97).
State List (List II):
- Subjects of local importance like police, public health, agriculture, etc.
- State legislatures have exclusive power to make laws on these 61 items (originally 66).
Concurrent List (List III):
- Subjects of joint interest like education, criminal law, marriage, bankruptcy, etc.
- Both Parliament and State legislatures can make laws on these 52 items (originally 47).
- In case of conflict, Central law prevails (Article 254).

Special Powers of Parliament Over State Subjects:

1. Article 249 – National Interest (Rajya Sabha Resolution):

If the Rajya Sabha passes a resolution (by a 2/3 majority) stating it is necessary in the national interest, Parliament can make laws on matters in the State List.

2. Article 250 – During Emergency:

When a Proclamation of Emergency is in force, Parliament gets the power to legislate on State List matters.

3. Article 252 – By Request of Two or More States:

If two or more states consent, Parliament can make laws on State List matters which will apply only to those consenting states.

4. Article 253 – International Agreements:

Parliament can legislate on any matter (including State List subjects) to give effect to international treaties or agreements.

Resolution of Conflicts and Overlapping Jurisdiction:

1. Article 254 – Doctrine of Repugnancy (Concurrent List Conflicts):

If a State law is inconsistent with a Central law on the same Concurrent List subject, the Central law prevails.
However, if the State law has received the President’s assent, it prevails in that state — unless Parliament overrides it later.

2. Doctrine of Pith and Substance:

This doctrine allows the courts to examine the true nature of legislation. If the core subject of the law falls within the jurisdiction of the legislature that enacted it, then incidental encroachment is permissible.

3. Doctrine of Harmonious Construction:

This principle is used when there is an apparent conflict between Union and State laws. Courts interpret them harmoniously so that both laws can co-exist without nullifying each other.

4. Doctrine of Colourable Legislation:

Used by courts to check whether a legislature has enacted a law disguising it to appear within its power when in reality it falls outside its jurisdiction.

Judicial Interpretation and Role:

In State of West Bengal v. Union of India (1963), the Supreme Court emphasized the supremacy of the Union Parliament in the Indian federal structure.
In Hoechst Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. State of Bihar (1983), the Supreme Court reiterated that in case of conflict in the Concurrent List, Parliament’s law prevails.
In State of Karnataka v. Union of India (1977), the Court observed that Indian federalism is not rigid, and cooperation and coordination are essential for its smooth functioning.

Conclusion:

The legislative relations under the Indian Constitution are well-structured to maintain a balance between the Union and the States. Although the Constitution provides exclusive powers to both levels of government, it clearly tilts towards the Centre in times of national importance or conflict. Through constitutional mechanisms, judicial doctrines, and cooperative governance, the system ensures smooth functioning despite overlapping jurisdictions.

2. Examine the Administrative Relations between the Centre and the States. What Mechanisms are Provided in the Constitution to Ensure Coordination and Control?

Introduction:

India is a federal country with a unitary bias, and the Constitution of India provides for a division of powers not only in legislation but also in administration. Administrative relations are designed to promote coordination, cooperation, and effective control, especially in areas where the Centre and States must work together. Articles 256 to 263 of the Constitution deal with administrative relations between the Union and the States.

1. Distribution of Executive Power:

Article 162 – Extent of Executive Power of the State:

The executive power of a State extends to matters in the State List and Concurrent List (subject to the Centre’s supremacy).
It is limited by the executive power of the Union, which may extend even into State matters under certain situations.

Article 73 – Extent of Executive Power of the Union:

The executive power of the Union extends to matters in the Union List.
In cases of Concurrent List, it is limited unless Parliament expressly provides otherwise.

2. Centre’s Control over State Administration:

Article 256 – Compliance with Union Laws:

The executive power of every State must ensure compliance with Central laws.
The Union can issue directions to the States in this regard.

Article 257 – Control of the Union over States in Certain Cases:

States must not impede the executive power of the Union.
The Union can issue directions to States in areas like construction and maintenance of communication systems, protection of railways, etc.

Article 258 – Delegation of Union’s Functions to States:

The President may, with the consent of the Governor, entrust Union functions to a State Government or its officers.
This ensures efficient administration and flexibility.

Article 258A (inserted by 7th Amendment, 1956):

A State may also entrust functions to the Union, with the consent of the President.

3. Full Faith and Credit (Article 261):

All acts, records, and judicial proceedings of the Centre and States must be given full faith and credit throughout the territory of India.

4. Mechanisms for Coordination and Cooperation:

A. Inter-State Council (Article 263):

Established to resolve inter-state disputes and promote cooperation and coordination.
Can investigate and discuss subjects of common interest.
Constitutionally provided, but was set up in 1990 based on the Sarkaria Commission recommendations.

B. Zonal Councils (Statutory Bodies under the States Reorganisation Act, 1956):

Five Zonal Councils (North, South, East, West, Central) promote regional cooperation.
Encourage discussion on matters like economic planning, border disputes, and inter-state transport.

C. NITI Aayog:

A non-constitutional but highly influential body replacing the Planning Commission.
Acts as a think tank and coordinates Centre-State development agendas through Governing Council comprising Chief Ministers and Lieutenant Governors.

D. All-India Services (Article 312):

Includes IAS, IPS, and IFS.
Officers are recruited and trained by the Union but serve at both Union and State levels.
Ensures uniformity, efficiency, and integration in administration.

5. Emergency Situations and Administrative Control:

During National Emergency (Article 352):

The Union gets the authority to direct all State executives.
Parliament may make laws on any State subject.

During President’s Rule (Article 356):

State executive powers are assumed by the President.
The Union directly administers the State.

6. Judicial Interpretation and Support for Coordination:

In State of Rajasthan v. Union of India (1977), the Supreme Court upheld the Centre’s power to issue directions, reinforcing administrative supremacy in cases of national importance.
The judiciary often encourages a collaborative approach rather than confrontation.

Conclusion:

The Indian Constitution ensures a strong administrative framework to maintain coordination between the Centre and the States. Through constitutional provisions, cooperative institutions like the Inter-State Council, Zonal Councils, and mechanisms like All-India Services and delegation of functions, the system ensures a balance between autonomy and unity. Though the Centre enjoys more administrative powers, the aim is not domination but cooperation and effective governance in a diverse and large country like India.

3. Explain the Financial Relations between the Centre and the States. How are Revenues Distributed and What Roles do the Finance Commission and GST Council Play?

Introduction:

The Indian Constitution establishes a quasi-federal structure, where the distribution of financial powers between the Centre and the States is crucial for maintaining the balance of responsibilities and autonomy. Part XII (Articles 268 to 293) of the Constitution deals with financial relations between the Union and the States. The Constitution ensures that both levels of government have separate sources of revenue, while also creating mechanisms for sharing and distributing financial resources equitably.

1. Distribution of Taxation Powers (Article 246 with Seventh Schedule):

The power to levy taxes is divided between the Centre and the States through the Union List and the State List in the Seventh Schedule.

A. Union List (List I) – Centre’s Tax Powers:

Customs duties
Excise duties on manufactured goods (except alcohol)
Corporation tax
Income tax (except on agricultural income)
Service tax (before GST)
Central GST (under GST regime)

B. State List (List II) – States’ Tax Powers:

Land revenue
Taxes on agricultural income
Stamp duty (except in union territories)
State excise (on alcohol, etc.)
Property tax
State GST

C. Concurrent List (List III):

No taxes are mentioned; tax powers are exclusive to either the Union or the States.

2. Types of Taxes and Their Distribution:

(i) Taxes Levied by the Union but Collected and Appropriated by the States (Article 268):

Stamp duties and excise on medical and toilet preparations.

(ii) Taxes Levied and Collected by the Union but Assigned to States (Article 269):

Taxes on the sale or purchase of goods (now subsumed under GST).
Inter-State trade taxes – Article 269A (after GST) – Shared between Centre and States.

(iii) Taxes Levied and Collected by the Union and Distributed Between the Centre and the States (Article 270):

Income tax and Union excise duties (except a few specific taxes).
Divided based on the recommendation of the Finance Commission.

(iv) Taxes Levied and Collected by States:

All taxes under State List belong exclusively to States.

3. Grants-in-Aid (Article 275 & 282):

Article 275 – Statutory Grants:

Parliament may provide grants-in-aid to States in need, especially for scheduled areas and tribal welfare.

Article 282 – Discretionary Grants:

Both Union and States may give grants for public purposes, even beyond their legislative competence.

4. Role of the Finance Commission (Article 280):

The Finance Commission is a constitutional body that plays a vital role in allocating financial resources between the Centre and the States.

Functions:

Recommends distribution of net tax proceeds between Centre and States.
Determines grants-in-aid to States from the Consolidated Fund of India.
Evaluates the financial performance of States and fiscal needs.
Reviews debt and fiscal discipline of the States.

Constitution of the Finance Commission:

Appointed by the President every five years.
Consists of a Chairman and four other members.

Example – 15th Finance Commission (2021–2026):

Recommended 41% of the divisible pool to States.
Recommended performance-based incentives for power sector reforms, health, etc.

5. Role of the GST Council (Article 279A):

The Goods and Services Tax (GST) has transformed financial relations significantly.

Background:

GST was introduced through the 101st Constitutional Amendment Act, 2016.
It subsumes several Central and State indirect taxes into one.

Article 279A – GST Council:

A constitutional body that governs GST policy, ensures coordination, and resolves disputes.

Composition:

Chairperson: Union Finance Minister
Members: Union Minister of State for Finance, Finance Ministers of all States

Functions:

Recommends tax rates, exemptions, and thresholds under GST.
Resolves issues related to inter-state trade (IGST).
Ensures a unified tax structure and cooperative federalism.

Revenue Distribution under GST:

CGST (Central GST): Collected by Centre.
SGST (State GST): Collected by States.
IGST (Integrated GST): Collected by Centre but shared with States.

6. Borrowing Powers (Articles 292 and 293):

Centre (Article 292): Can borrow on the security of the Consolidated Fund of India.
States (Article 293): Can borrow but must get Centre’s consent if they owe loans to the Centre.

7. Issues in Centre-State Financial Relations:

Vertical imbalance: Centre collects more but spends less on State subjects.
Dependency on Union: States rely on grants and devolution.
Delay in GST compensation: A major concern post-GST regime.
Revenue uncertainty during economic crises (like COVID-19).

Conclusion:

The financial relations between the Centre and the States are a blend of constitutional allocation, statutory provisions, and institutional mechanisms like the Finance Commission and GST Council. While the Centre has wider taxing powers, the Constitution ensures equitable sharing of revenue. The roles of the Finance Commission and GST Council are crucial in ensuring fiscal federalism, cooperation, and financial discipline, keeping the Indian Union strong yet flexible.

4. Critically Evaluate the Role of Cooperative Federalism in Ensuring Effective Cooperation and Coordination Between the Centre and the States. Illustrate with Examples.

Introduction:

India’s federal structure is unique—it is quasi-federal, combining the features of both federal and unitary governments. Although the Constitution provides for a division of powers, cooperation and coordination between the Centre and the States are essential to achieve national goals. This idea is encapsulated in the concept of Cooperative Federalism—a political arrangement in which both levels of government work in harmony rather than in conflict.

Meaning of Cooperative Federalism:

Cooperative federalism refers to a system where the Centre and States work together to:

Formulate and implement policies,
Share resources and responsibilities,
Respect each other’s roles and constitutional boundaries.

It is based on mutual respect, consultation, collaboration, and consensus-building.

Constitutional Basis for Cooperative Federalism:

Article 1: India is a “Union of States” – recognizing the role of States.
Articles 245–263: Distribution of powers with provisions for collaboration.
Article 263: Inter-State Council – promotes coordination.
Article 280: Finance Commission – ensures financial cooperation.
Article 279A: GST Council – model of cooperative federalism.

Mechanisms Promoting Cooperative Federalism:

1. Inter-State Council (Article 263):

A constitutional body established to promote coordination and cooperation on common issues.
Discusses subjects of national importance, such as law and order, river water sharing, education, etc.

2. Finance Commission (Article 280):

Recommends the division of tax revenue between the Centre and the States.
Aims to reduce fiscal disparities and promote financial cooperation.

3. GST Council (Article 279A):

Comprising Union and State Finance Ministers.
A real-time example of cooperative federalism in tax administration.
Ensures joint decision-making and consensus on GST rates, exemptions, etc.

4. NITI Aayog:

Replaced the Planning Commission in 2015.
Works as a platform for collaborative policy-making with Chief Ministers as part of the Governing Council.
Promotes competitive and cooperative federalism.

5. Zonal Councils (under States Reorganisation Act, 1956):

Encourage discussion and cooperation among States in a region on matters like security, infrastructure, and development.

Examples of Cooperative Federalism in Practice:

✅ 1. GST Implementation:

A landmark example where both levels of government gave up their taxation powers for a unified tax system.
Jointly administered by the GST Council, showing consensus-based governance.

✅ 2. COVID-19 Pandemic Response:

Coordination between the Centre and States on lockdown protocols, vaccine distribution, health infrastructure, and relief measures.
Although challenges arose, the crisis highlighted the importance of joint action.

✅ 3. Jal Shakti Abhiyan (Water Conservation Mission):

Involves collaboration between the Centre and States to manage water resources, recharge groundwater, and improve irrigation.

✅ 4. Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao Yojana:

A tripartite effort by Central, State, and local governments to address the declining child sex ratio and promote education for girls.

Challenges to Cooperative Federalism:

Centralization of Powers: Excessive use of Article 356 or central agencies may reduce trust.
Political Conflicts: Different party governments at the Centre and States sometimes cause friction.
Fiscal Dependency: States often complain about insufficient devolution of funds and delays in GST compensation.
One-size-fits-all Policies: National schemes may ignore local needs.

Judicial Endorsement:

The Supreme Court of India has repeatedly emphasized the importance of cooperative federalism.
In State of West Bengal v. Union of India (1963), the Court upheld the need for unity, but with cooperative relations.
In S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994), the Court emphasized federalism as a part of the basic structure of the Constitution.

Conclusion:

Cooperative federalism is not just a theoretical ideal but a practical necessity in a country as vast and diverse as India. It ensures that the Centre and States function together, not in competition but in collaboration, to address complex national issues. While mechanisms like the GST Council, NITI Aayog, and Inter-State Councils are steps in the right direction, there is a need for greater trust, transparency, and shared responsibility to strengthen the spirit of cooperative federalism in India.

5. What is the Significance of the Inter-State Council and Zonal Councils in Centre-State Relations? Discuss their Constitutional Basis and Functional Effectiveness.

Introduction:

The Indian federal system is characterized by a strong Centre, but it also incorporates various mechanisms to ensure coordination and cooperation between the Centre and the States. Two important institutional arrangements for this purpose are the Inter-State Council (ISC) and the Zonal Councils. These bodies are designed to promote consultation, coordination, and collaboration on issues of common interest and national importance.

I. Inter-State Council (ISC)

A. Constitutional Basis:

The Inter-State Council is established under Article 263 of the Constitution of India.
It is not a permanent body; it is constituted by the President if it appears to him that the public interest requires it.

B. Article 263 – Functions of the Inter-State Council:

The President may establish a Council for the following purposes:

Investigating and discussing subjects of common interest between the Union and States or among States.
Making recommendations on any such subject for better policy and coordination.
Deliberating on disputes between States.

C. Establishment and Composition:

The Inter-State Council was established in 1990 based on the recommendations of the Sarkaria Commission.
It is a recommendatory body, not a decision-making body.

Members:

Chairman: Prime Minister of India
Members: Chief Ministers of all States and Union Territories with legislatures, Union Cabinet Ministers (especially Home, Finance, Defence, etc.)
Permanent Secretariat: Located in the Ministry of Home Affairs.

D. Significance of the Inter-State Council:

Forum for Dialogue: Offers a platform for Centre and States to discuss policies and resolve differences through dialogue.
Policy Coordination: Helps harmonize policies across States and between States and Centre.
Conflict Resolution: Aims to resolve inter-state disputes peacefully.
Promotes Cooperative Federalism: Strengthens the consultative process, especially in matters of concurrent jurisdiction.

E. Functional Effectiveness – Achievements and Limitations:

✅ Achievements:

Provided a platform for discussing sensitive issues like water disputes, internal security, education policy, etc.
Strengthened Centre-State cooperation in planning and development.

❌ Limitations:

Meetings are infrequent and sometimes irregular.
Non-binding recommendations – not enforceable.
Lacks statutory backing; depends on the political will of the Union government.

II. Zonal Councils

A. Legal Basis:

Zonal Councils are statutory bodies established under the States Reorganisation Act, 1956 (Sections 15–22).
Not constitutional bodies but play a significant advisory role in promoting cooperation.

B. Composition of Zonal Councils:

There are five Zonal Councils:

Northern Zonal Council
Southern Zonal Council
Eastern Zonal Council
Western Zonal Council
Central Zonal Council

(Note: The North-Eastern Council (NEC) is a separate statutory body established in 1971.)

Members of Zonal Councils:

Chairperson: Union Home Minister
Vice-Chairman: Chief Minister of the host state (on rotation)
Members: Chief Ministers, Governors, two ministers from each state, and administrators of Union Territories in the zone.

C. Objectives and Functions:

Promote regional cooperation on issues like transport, border security, power supply, inter-state water disputes, economic and social planning.
Act as a forum for discussion on inter-state issues.
Help in coordinated policy formulation and implementation at the regional level.

D. Significance in Centre-State Relations:

Platform for Dialogue: Facilitates communication between States and the Centre on region-specific problems.
Encourages Unity in Diversity: Builds consensus on issues affecting multiple States.
Reduces Political Tension: Offers non-judicial mechanism for resolving inter-state conflicts.

E. Functional Effectiveness – Achievements and Challenges:

✅ Achievements:

Zonal Councils have discussed important issues like Naxalism, internal security, illegal migration, cybercrime, and health infrastructure.
Have contributed to peaceful inter-state coordination, particularly in border areas.

❌ Challenges:

Limited executive powers—only advisory in nature.
Meetings are infrequent.
Lack of public visibility and awareness.

III. Comparative Summary:

Feature	Inter-State Council	Zonal Councils
Legal Basis	Article 263 (Constitutional)	States Reorganisation Act, 1956
Establishment	Discretionary (by President)	Statutorily established (5 zones)
Nature	Recommendatory	Advisory
Head	Prime Minister	Union Home Minister
Focus	National-level coordination	Regional-level cooperation
Frequency of Meetings	Irregular	More regular, but still needs improvement

Conclusion:

The Inter-State Council and Zonal Councils play a critical role in ensuring dialogue, coordination, and consensus between the Centre and the States. Although they are advisory and non-binding, they embody the spirit of cooperative federalism. To improve their effectiveness, meetings must be held more frequently, recommendations must be taken seriously, and they should be strengthened with better institutional and financial support. In a complex democracy like India, such mechanisms are vital for maintaining national unity with federal diversity.

6. Examine the Judicial Interpretation of Centre-State Relations by the Supreme Court. How has the Judiciary Influenced the Evolution of Indian Federalism?

Introduction:

The Constitution of India lays down a federal structure with a strong unitary bias. While it clearly demarcates legislative, administrative, and financial powers between the Centre and the States, conflicts and ambiguities in Centre-State relations have been inevitable. In such scenarios, the Supreme Court of India, as the guardian and interpreter of the Constitution, plays a pivotal role in interpreting these relations and shaping the contours of Indian federalism.

Judicial Role in Interpreting Centre-State Relations:

The judiciary’s interpretations have reinforced the federal structure, while also ensuring that the balance of power is maintained between the Centre and the States. The judiciary has clarified the scope and limits of power, resolved disputes, and developed several doctrines to harmonize the division of powers.

Key Judicial Pronouncements and Their Impact:

1. State of West Bengal v. Union of India (1963)

Issue: Can the Centre acquire State property without the State’s consent?

Held:

The Supreme Court ruled that Parliament can legislate even on matters affecting the States, including acquisition of property.
The Court emphasized that India is not a compact of sovereign states; rather, it is a Union of States.
Impact: Strengthened the unitary features of the Constitution.

2. S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994)

Issue: Challenge to the imposition of President’s Rule in several States under Article 356.

Held:

The Court held that federalism is a part of the basic structure of the Constitution.
The President’s Rule is subject to judicial review.
It laid down strict guidelines to prevent its misuse for political reasons.

Impact:

Protected State autonomy and reinforced federal values.
Judiciary became a check against arbitrary use of central powers.

3. Keshavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)

Held:

Established the Basic Structure Doctrine.
Federalism was held to be one of the essential features of the Constitution.

Impact:

Limited Parliament’s power to alter the federal structure through constitutional amendments.
Preserved the core of Centre-State division of powers.

4. UCO Bank v. Dipak Debbarma (2017)

Held:

In case of overlapping legislation, Parliament’s law prevails over State law in the Concurrent List.
Applied Article 254 and the Doctrine of Repugnancy.

Impact:

Reaffirmed the constitutional mechanism for resolving legislative conflicts.

5. State of Karnataka v. Union of India (1977)

Issue: Whether Centre can inquire into the functioning of a State Government.

Held:

Though the Constitution is federal in form, it is unitary in spirit.
Centre can inquire into State matters only under specific constitutional authority.

Impact:

Emphasized mutual respect and limitations in Centre-State relations.

Judicial Doctrines Developed:

The judiciary has evolved various legal doctrines to interpret and resolve Centre-State issues:

1. Doctrine of Pith and Substance:

Used when there is a conflict between laws enacted by the Centre and States. If the true subject matter (pith and substance) of the law falls within the domain of the legislature, it is valid—even if it incidentally encroaches upon the other’s field.

✅ Example: State of Bombay v. F.N. Balsara (1951)

2. Doctrine of Colourable Legislation:

If a legislature enacts a law disguised as falling under its jurisdiction, but in reality it is not, the court will strike it down.

✅ Example: K.C. Gajapati Narayan Deo v. State of Orissa (1953)

3. Doctrine of Harmonious Construction:

In case of conflict between laws made by Centre and States, efforts are made to interpret them harmoniously so that both can co-exist.

✅ Example: Hoechst Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. State of Bihar (1983)

4. Doctrine of Repugnancy (Article 254):

In the Concurrent List, if both the Centre and State make laws on the same subject, and there is a conflict:

Centre’s law prevails, unless the State law has received Presidential assent.

Judiciary’s Role in Maintaining Federal Balance:

Acts as a neutral arbiter between the Centre and States.
Protects State autonomy while upholding national unity.
Provides a constitutional check on excessive centralization or arbitrary state actions.
Encourages cooperative federalism through balanced interpretations.

Critical Evaluation:

✅ Positive Aspects:

Protected federalism through basic structure doctrine.
Prevented political misuse of central powers (e.g., Article 356).
Clarified the scope of legislative powers using doctrines like pith and substance, repugnancy.
Upheld the role of institutions like the Finance Commission, GST Council, etc., in promoting cooperative federalism.

❌ Limitations:

At times, the judiciary has upheld central dominance, reducing State autonomy.
In cases like West Bengal v. Union of India, it undermined State property rights.
The effectiveness of judicial interpretation depends on compliance by political actors.

Conclusion:

The judiciary has played a seminal role in interpreting and evolving Centre-State relations in India. Through landmark judgments and legal doctrines, it has struck a balance between national unity and State autonomy, strengthening the federal character of the Constitution. While the Constitution leans toward a strong Centre, judicial interpretation has ensured that this power is not arbitrary, and that the principle of federalism is respected and preserved.

7. Discuss the Major Doctrines Evolved by the Judiciary in Interpreting Centre-State Relations, such as the Doctrine of Pith and Substance, Colourable Legislation, and Harmonious Construction.

Introduction:

The Indian Constitution provides for a federal structure with a division of legislative powers between the Centre and the States, mainly through the Seventh Schedule. However, the exercise of legislative powers often leads to overlapping and conflict. To resolve such issues and ensure smooth functioning of Indian federalism, the Supreme Court of India has evolved several important judicial doctrines. These doctrines provide interpretative tools to adjudicate constitutional conflicts and determine the validity of laws passed by the Centre and States.

1. Doctrine of Pith and Substance

Meaning:

The Doctrine of Pith and Substance is used to determine the true nature or main object of a law when there is an overlap between the Centre and State legislations.

Principle:

If the substance (main purpose) of the law falls within the jurisdiction of the legislature that enacted it, the law will be valid, even if it incidentally encroaches upon the domain of the other legislature.

Origin:

This doctrine was adopted from Canadian constitutional law.

Objective:

To uphold the legitimacy of legislation and prevent invalidation of laws based on minor or incidental overlaps.

Key Case Law:

State of Bombay v. F.N. Balsara (1951):
- A prohibition law was challenged for incidentally affecting import-export, a Union subject.
- The SC upheld the law, stating that its pith and substance was prohibition, which was within State jurisdiction.
State of Rajasthan v. G. Chawla (1959):
- Held that incidental encroachment on another list is permissible as long as the dominant subject falls within the legislature’s domain.

2. Doctrine of Colourable Legislation

Meaning:

This doctrine is based on the Latin maxim: “What cannot be done directly, cannot be done indirectly.”

Principle:

If a legislature lacks the power to legislate on a subject, it cannot do so indirectly by disguising it as something else.
The court looks beyond the form and examines the real substance of the law.

Objective:

To prevent fraud on the Constitution by restraining legislative overreach.

Key Case Law:

K.C. Gajapati Narayan Deo v. State of Orissa (1953):
- The Court ruled that if a law is only a camouflage to legislate on a subject outside the legislature’s authority, it will be declared invalid.
R.S. Joshi v. Ajit Mills (1977):
- Emphasized that the colour of the law cannot conceal its real purpose if it violates constitutional limits.

3. Doctrine of Harmonious Construction

Meaning:

The Doctrine of Harmonious Construction is used when there is a conflict between two provisions of the Constitution, or laws made by the Centre and State on the same subject in the Concurrent List.

Principle:

The judiciary interprets the provisions in a way that gives effect to both, avoiding conflict and repugnancy.
The goal is to harmonize laws rather than invalidate them.

Objective:

To preserve the legislative intent and avoid nullifying either law unnecessarily.

Key Case Law:

S.C. Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India (2016):
- The Court emphasized the importance of interpreting constitutional provisions in a harmonious manner to uphold democratic values.
Hoechst Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. State of Bihar (1983):
- Reiterated the principle of harmonious construction to resolve conflicts between central and state laws in the Concurrent List.

4. Doctrine of Repugnancy (Article 254)

Meaning:

When both Parliament and State Legislatures legislate on the same subject in the Concurrent List, and there is a conflict, the doctrine of repugnancy applies.

Constitutional Basis:

Article 254(1): If there is inconsistency between a Central law and a State law on the same subject, the Central law prevails.
Article 254(2): However, if the State law has received the President’s assent, it prevails in that State.

Objective:

To provide a clear mechanism for resolving legislative conflicts in the Concurrent List.

Key Case Law:

M. Karunanidhi v. Union of India (1979):
- Laid down tests to determine repugnancy, including whether there is direct conflict or occupies the same field.

5. Doctrine of Occupied Field

Meaning:

When a Central law occupies a subject matter completely, a State law on the same subject becomes inoperative, even if there is no direct conflict.

Application:

This doctrine is applied in conjunction with Article 254 and the Doctrine of Repugnancy.

Key Case Law:

Tika Ramji v. State of U.P. (1956):
- Court held that if Parliament has comprehensively legislated on a subject, States cannot make conflicting laws.

Conclusion:

These judicial doctrines play a vital role in interpreting Centre-State relations and resolving legislative conflicts in India’s federal structure. They ensure that laws are valid, competent, and harmonious with the Constitution. The doctrines of Pith and Substance, Colourable Legislation, and Harmonious Construction enable courts to maintain the delicate balance of power between the Union and the States and uphold the principle of cooperative federalism.

Through these doctrines, the judiciary ensures that legislative powers are exercised within constitutional limits, while also fostering functional flexibility in a complex, multi-tiered democracy like India.

8. Compare and Contrast the Legislative, Administrative, and Financial Powers of the Centre and the States. In What Ways is Indian Federalism Unique or Biased Towards the Centre?

Introduction:

India is often described as a “quasi-federal” or “federal with a unitary bias” system. While the Constitution provides a structure resembling federalism—division of powers between the Centre and the States—it also incorporates unitary features to maintain the unity and integrity of the nation. The distribution of legislative, administrative, and financial powers reflects this dual nature. A comparative analysis of these powers helps understand the unique character of Indian federalism.

I. Legislative Powers

Constitutional Provisions:

Governed by Article 245 to 255 and the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution.

Three Lists in the Seventh Schedule:

List	Authority	Number of Subjects	Examples
Union List (List I)	Centre (Parliament)	100 (originally 97)	Defence, Foreign Affairs, Atomic Energy
State List (List II)	States (State Legislatures)	61 (originally 66)	Police, Public Health, Agriculture
Concurrent List (List III)	Both Centre and States	52 (originally 47)	Education, Forests, Criminal Law

Centre’s Supremacy:

In case of conflict in Concurrent List, the Central law prevails (Article 254).
Parliament can legislate on State List under special circumstances:
- Article 249: Rajya Sabha resolution (national interest)
- Article 250: During Emergency
- Article 252: States request Parliament to legislate
- Article 253: For implementing international treaties

II. Administrative Powers

Constitutional Provisions:

Detailed in Articles 256 to 263.

Distribution:

Area	Centre	States
Executive Jurisdiction	Over Union List	Over State List and Concurrent List
Supervision and Directions	Can issue directions to States (Art. 256 & 257)	Must comply with Union laws
Delegation of Functions	Can entrust functions to States (Art. 258)	States may also entrust to Centre (Art. 258A)

Mechanisms of Coordination:

All-India Services (IAS, IPS): Officers serve both Centre and States.
Inter-State Council (Art. 263): Promotes cooperation.
Zonal Councils: Regional forums for dialogue.
NITI Aayog: Platform for cooperative and competitive federalism.

III. Financial Powers

Constitutional Provisions:

Articles 268 to 293 in Part XII of the Constitution.

Taxation and Revenue Division:

Type of Tax	Authority	Beneficiary
Union List Taxes	Centre	Centre (e.g., Income Tax, Customs)
State List Taxes	States	States (e.g., Property Tax, Excise on Alcohol)
Concurrent/Shared (e.g., GST)	Both (via GST Council)	Revenue is shared

Finance Commission (Art. 280):

Recommends tax devolution, grants-in-aid, and distribution of resources.
Ensures fiscal balance between Centre and States.

Grants:

Article 275: Statutory grants for specific purposes.
Article 282: Discretionary grants.

GST Council (Article 279A):

Joint body of Centre and States.
Recommends GST rates, exemptions, and revenue sharing.

IV. Comparison of Powers at a Glance:

Power Type	Centre	States	Centre’s Dominance?
Legislative	Full control over Union List; override powers in Concurrent List	Limited to State List and shared Concurrent List	✅ Yes
Administrative	Supervisory role; can direct States	Executive control over State subjects	✅ Yes
Financial	Greater taxation powers; control over major revenues	Dependent on transfers, grants, and GST share	✅ Yes

V. Uniqueness and Central Bias in Indian Federalism

A. Unitary Features in a Federal Structure:

Single Constitution: No separate State Constitutions (except J&K formerly).
Single Citizenship: No dual citizenship.
Unequal Representation in Rajya Sabha: Unlike equal representation in US Senate.
Strong Centre in Emergencies: State autonomy virtually suspended under Articles 352, 356, 360.
Governor’s Role: Appointed by Centre, can influence State politics.
All-India Services: Controlled by Centre but work in States.
Parliament’s Power to Alter State Boundaries (Article 3).

B. Judicial Acknowledgment of Central Bias:

State of West Bengal v. Union of India (1963): Recognized Parliament’s supremacy.
S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994): Emphasized that federalism is a basic structure, limiting misuse of Article 356.

C. Towards Cooperative Federalism:

Despite the unitary tilt, recent trends (e.g., NITI Aayog, GST Council) promote cooperative federalism, where the Centre and States work together as partners in development.

Conclusion:

The Indian Constitution creates a unique federal model, where the powers are clearly divided, yet heavily tilted towards the Centre, especially during emergencies and in financial matters. While States have significant roles in local governance, the supremacy of Parliament, the dependency on financial transfers, and the scope of administrative directions ensure that the Centre retains dominant authority. However, through mechanisms like the Finance Commission, GST Council, and NITI Aayog, India is moving towards a more collaborative and cooperative federalism, which is essential for inclusive national development.