DR.

RAM MANOHAR LOHIYA

NATIONAL LAW
UNIVERSITY,
LUCKNOW.

SUBJECT: -
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW IInd
FINAL PROJECT
Role of judiciary in resolving
legislative relationship
between union-state
Conflict

SUBMITTED TO:
SUBMITTED BY:
Ms. ANKITA YADAV HIMANSHU
VERMA
 ASST. PROF(LAW) SECTION- A ,
ROLL NO -57
DR. R.M.L. NLU ,LUCKNOW
SEMESTER -- IV

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
It is my greatest pleasure to be able to present this project of Constitutional law IInd. I found
it very interesting to work on this project. I would like to thank Ms. Ankita Yadav Assistant
Prof., Faculty of law, Dr. Ram Maohar lohiya National Law University for providing me with
such an interesting project topic, for his unmatched efforts in making learning an enjoyable
process, for his immense sincerity for the benefit of his students and for his constant
unconditional support and guidance.

I would also like to thank my librarian for helping me in gathering data for the project. Above
all, I would like to thank my parents, who from such a great distance have extended all
possible moral and motivated support for me and have always advised me to be honest in my
approach towards my work.

I hope the project is upto the mark and is worthy of appreciation.

Himanshu Verma

Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University, Lucknow

INTRODUCTION
The question of Centre-State relations did not arise for a long time and the original
Constitutional scheme worked very well. In 1957, the possibility of Centre-State tension
arose with the formation of the first non-Congress Communist State Government in Kerala.
However the ministry did not last long. The Centre-State relations viewed as a straight fight
over turf came sharply in focus after the fourth general elections which were widely
considered as having opened up a new chapter in federal processes. Fourth General Election
(1967) radically altered the party position in a number of States and the problem assumed
importance. While they no doubt constitute, a convenient benchmark, in reality a series of
socio-economic and political changes during the sixties provide the backdrop for
understanding the subsequent phases. Mention is made about coming into power of the first
major regionalist partyDMK. The DMK Government on assuming power did not like the
idea of a strong Centre and constantly tried for greater State autonomy. The more serious
conflict was witnessed in West Bengal in 1969 under the chief Minister ship of Jyoti Basu.
Finally, the internal crisis of the Congress party and the emergence of dissident splinter
groups followed by the great split contributed significantly to raising the level of
consciousness regarding inadequacies of the federal system. The social realities of the north-
eastern region had been clamoring for attention and recognition for a long time and the 425
creation of separate States there was the last major exercise in federal restructuring.
A politicized and discerning electorate welcomed the emergence of regional alternatives to a
party whose State leaders had ceased to command respect because of their ineffectual
representation in Central policy making forums. State electorates showed reluctance to
surrender to the Centre, through party channels, the limited Constitutional autonomy they
enjoyed in ordering their own affairs. The persistence and intensification of multi-party
federalism over the last decade have raised serious doubts regarding the viability of the old
centralist regulatory conception of federal management. Over concentration of powers had
generated a need for decentralization and it is argued that stronger States would ultimately
strengthen the Centre. The widening gap between fast track India, that has already entered the
hi-tech age and is predominantly centralist in orientation, and the other India which
constitutes the bulk of the constituencies in the States, has added a new dimension to the
federal policy. The major area of Centre-State irritants in India relates to the legislative sphere
of the Constitution. The distribution of legislative powers between the Center and the States
is the sine-qua-non of a federal Constitution.

LEGISLATIVE RELATIONS BETWEEN THE

UNION AND THE STATES

[Articles 245 to 293]

The Indian Constitution provides for a new kind of federalism to meet India's peculiar
needs. In the matter of distribution of powers, the Framers followed the pattern of the
Government of India Act, 1935, which had laid the foundation for a federal set-up for the
Nation. The scheme as envisaged in the Act of 1935, has not been adopted in the Constitution
in every respect, but the basic framework is the same. India is said to have adopted a loose
federal structure.

The Seventh Schedule to the Constitution divides the subjects of legislation under
three lists, viz. Union, State and Concurrent List.

The Union List (List 1) contains as many as 97 items and comprises of the subjects
which affect the entire country and are of general interest and admit of uniform laws for the
whole of the country. These matters lie within the exclusive legislative competence of the
Union Parliament. The State List (List II) enumerates 66 items and comprises of subjects of
local or State interest and as such lie within the legislative competence of the State
Legislatures. The Concurrent List (List III) enumerates 47 items, with respect to which, both
Union Parliament and the State Legislatures have concurrent power of legislation. 3 The
Constitution also confers power on the Union Parliament to make laws with respect to the
matters enumerated in the State List under special circumstances. Besides, the Constitution
vests power in the Union Government to control the exercise of legislative power by the State
Legislatures in certain matters. The residuary powers of legislation are vested in the Union
Parliament. The question of Centre-State relations did not arise for a long time and the
original Constitutional scheme worked very well. In 1957, the possibility of Centre-State
tension arose with the formation of the first non-Congress Communist State Government in
Kerala. However the ministry did not last long. The Centre-State relations viewed as a
straight fight over turf came sharply in focus after the fourth general elections which were
widely considered as having opened up a new chapter in federal processes.

This Chapter has been classified as under

1. Legislative Relations

2. Administrative Relations

3. Financial Relations

LEGISLATIVE RELATIONS
The Constitution of India makes a two-fold distribution of legislative powers:

(a) With respect to territorial jurisdiction and

(b) With respect to subject-matter of legislation

TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION (Article 245)

'As regards the territorial jurisdiction, Article 245 (1) provides : "Subject to the
provisions of this Constitution, Parliament may make laws for the whole or any part of the
territory of India, and the Legislature of a State may make laws for the whole or any part of
the State."

Doctrine of Territorial Nexus:

Article 245 (1) implies that the State law would be void if it is given extra-territorial
operation, i.e., it is applied to subjects or objects located outside the territory of that State.
However, many times the State laws having extra-territorial operation have been held valid. It
is done by the application of the "Doctrine of Territorial Nexus".
 The doctrine was evolved by the Privy Council in Wallace Bros, and Co. Ltd. v.
Income Tax Commissioner, Bombay 1. In this case, a company which was registered in
England appointed an agent in Bombay. Through that agent the company carried on its
business within the territory of India. In a year, the company out of its total profit of Rs. 2.4
million, earned Rs. 1.7 million by carrying its business within the territory of India. The
Indian Income Tax Authorities sought to tax the entire income of the company. The company
contended that the Indian Income Tax Act, 1939 could not be applied to it as it was subject of
the English laws. The Privy Council however upheld the levy of tax by applying the
"doctrine of territorial nexus". The doctrine explains: it is not essential that the object to
which the law is applied should be physically located within the boundaries of the State
making the law. It is enough if there is a sufficient territorial nexus between the object and
the State making the law;

"The Supreme Court of India applied the doctrine in State of Bombay v. R.M.D.C2. In this
case, the State of Bombay enacted the Bombay Lotteries and Prize Competitions (Control
and Tax) Act, 1948. The Act levied a tax on lotteries and prize competitions. The Act
amended in 1952 sought to tax prize competitions contained in newspapers. Tax was imposed
under this Act on the income of the respondent company, conducting a prize competition
(Crossword Puzzle) through a paper named "Sporting Star" printed and published in
Bangalore. The paper had wide circulation in the territory of Bombay. A large number of
people from the territory of Bombay subscribed to the Crossword Puzzle. Keeping in view
the number of subscribers, the respondent company opened its collecting booths within the
territory of Bombay, from where the forms for appearing in the crossword puzzle were to be
issued, fees collected and the results declared. The whole of the activity relating to the
Crossword Puzzle was thus completed within the territory of Bombay. Taking into
consideration these facts, the Supreme Court upheld the. tax imposed on the company. The
Court held that there existed a sufficient territorial nexus to enable the Bombay State to tax
the respondent. For the application of the doctrine there must be

(a) A sufficient nexus between the State making the law and the object of law. The nexus must
be real and not illusory; and

1 (1943) 45 BOMLR 929

2 1957 AIR 699

(b) The liability sought to be imposed must be pertinent to that connection.

Parliamentary Law Having Extra-Territorial Operation [Article 245 (2)]:

Clause (2) of Article 245 declares that Union Parliament may make a law having extra-
territorial operation and such a law would not be void on the ground of having extra-
territorial operation.

In A.H. Wadia v. Income Tax Commissioner 3, the Gwalior Government had loaned
at Gwalior large sums of money to a company in British India on the mortgage of debentures
over property in British India. The interest on loan was payable at Gwalior. It was taxed
under the Indian Income Tax Act. Upholding the levy the Federal Court held that in case of a
sovereign Legislature, the question of extra-territoriality of any enactment could never be
raised in the Municipal Courts as a ground for challenging its validity. The legislation might
offend the rules of International law, it might not be recognised by foreign courts or there
might be practical difficulties in enforcing them. These have been held to be questions of
policy with which the domestic tribunals are not concerned.

DISTRIBUTION OF SUBJECT- MATTER OF LEGISLATION (Article

246):

Article 246 provides that the Union Parliament may make laws with respect to the matters
contained in Union List and a State Legislature may make laws with respect to the matters
contained in the State List. As regards the matters contained in the Concurrent List, both

3 (1949) 51 BOMLR 287

Union Parliament and the State Legislatures are vested with concurrent powers of legislation.
The Constitution gives autonomy to the Centre and the States within their respective fields.

Principles of Interpretation:

The distribution of subject-matter cannot be claimed to be scientifically perfect and

there happens to be overlappings between the subjects enumerated in the three lists. In such
cases, question arises with regard to the constitutionality of the enactment, which lies within
the domain of judiciary. For that, the Courts apply various principles of interpretation. Some
of these are discussed below)

(1) Presumption of Constitutionality

The Apex Court in Public Service Tribunal Bar Association v. State of U.P 4.,
wherein, upholding the U.P. Public Services (Tribunal) Act, 1976, as amended from time to
time, challenged as violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, ruled that, while
examining the challenge to the constitutionality of an enactment, it was imperative upon the
Courts to be conscious to start with the presumption regarding the constitutional validity of
the legislation. The Court should try to sustain its validity to the extent possible. It should
strike down the enactment only when it is not possible to sustain it. Further, that the burden of
proof is upon the shoulders of the incumbent who challenges it.

(2) Each Entry to be interpreted Broadly

The express words employed in an "Entry" would ne incidental and ancillary matters so as
to make the legislation fundamental principle of Constitutional Law is that everything exercise
of power is included in the grant of power. The judicial opin; -giving a large and liberal
interpretation to the scope of the Entries. Eacz. should thus be given widest possible and most
liberal interpretation.

(3) Doctrine of Pith and Substance

Many times, a law passed by a Legislature with respect to a matter, within its legislative
competence, encroaches upon another matter, outside its competence. In such a case, the
question with regard to the constitutionality of the law is to be determined by applying the

4 (2000) 3 UPLBEC 2553

doctrine of pith and substance. The doctrine flows from the words "with respect to" in Article
246.

The doctrine was applied by the Privy Council in Profulla Kumar Mukerjee v.
Bank of Commerce, Khulna5. In this case, the Bengal Money Lender Act, 1946 fixed the
maximum rate of interest and the maximum amount of interest, which could be recovered by a
money-lender from his debtor. The Privy Council held that the Act was, in pith and substance,
a law in respect of "money lending" and "money-lenders"a State subject, and was valid, even
though it incidentally trenched on "promissory notes", a Central subject.

(4) Doctrine of Colorable Legislation

Many times, a Legislature makes a law with respect to a matter outside its legislative
competence by giving to the legislation a different colour so as to bring it within its
competence. In such cases, the courts apply the doctrine of "pith and substance" in order to
determine the true nature, character or the real pith and substance of the law. If after such
investigation, it is found that the pith and substance of the law pertains to a matter outside the
legislative competence of the Legislature enacting the law, then the law would be held invalid
and the different colour given to that law, would not protect it.

ln S.S. Bola v. B.D. Sardana6, the constitutionality of the Haryana Service Engineers
Class I, Public Works Department (B & R Branch), (PWD) and (Irrigation Branch) Act, 1
995, regulating the inter se seniority of direct recruits and promotees in each of the services,
given retrospective effect from 1st day of November, 1966, the date on which the State of
Haryana was formed was upheld as intra vires the Legislature, and that it was not a
colourable piece of legislation. The Supreme Court said that colourable legislation had
reference only to the legislative competence and not to the power as such. Explaining the rule,
the Court observed that colourable legislation would emerge only when a Legislature had no
power to legislate on an item either because it was not included in the List assigned to it or on
account of limitations imposed either under Part III of the Constitution or any other power
under the Constitution.

5 (1947) 49 BOMLR 568

6 [2010] 6 S.C.R. 857

(5) Doctrine of Incidental and Ancillary Powers

The doctrine explains that when a Legislature is given plenary power to legislate on a
particular subject there must also be an implied power to make laws incidental to the exercise
of such power. Expressions 'incidental' and 'ancillary' powers mean the powers which are
required to be exercised for the proper and effective exercise of legislative powers expressly
conferred.

The Gujarat Gas (Regulation of Transmission, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2001 was
passed by the State w.r.t. Entry 25 of List II, which reads as "Gas and Gas Works". Natural
Gas including Ldquified Natural Gas" is a Union subject covered by Entry 53 of List I.
Answering the reference made by the President of India under Article 143(1) a five-Judge
Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Association of Natural Gas v. Union of
India7,said that the provision of the Gujarat Act relating to natural gas and CNG were ultra
vires the State Legislature.

(6) Rule of Harmonious Construction

It has been held to, be the duty of the Courts to harmoniously construe different
provisions of any Statute, Rule or Regulation, if possible, and to sustain the same rather than
striking down the provision outright.

The rule of harmonious construction is invoked in cases there is found to be some

ambiguity in provisions of a Statute. Or, where the provisions of a Statute seem to be
inconsistent or repugnant with each other. In such a case, the rule requires the Court,
interpreting the provisions of the Statute, to so interpret these provisions that all the
provisions survive in harmony with each other.

Repugnancy Between a Union Law and a State Law (Article 254):

Article 254 (I) provides : "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,

7 2004 (6) ALD 99 SC,

 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 repugnancy, be void".

Article 254 (1) enumerates the rule that in the event of a conflict between a Union and
State law the former prevails. The Union law may have been enacted prior to the State law or
subsequent to the State Law.

Test of Repugnancy

The Supreme Court in Deep Chand v. State of Uttar Pradesh8, laid down the following
tests for determining the repugnancy between the Union Law and a State Law

(a) There may be inconsistency in the actual terms of the two Statutes, i.e., when one says "do"
and the other says "do not".

(b) When both the State and the Union Laws seek to exercise their powers over the same
subject-matter.

(c) Though, there may be no direct conflict, a State Law will be inoperative because the
Union Law is intended to be a complete, exhaustive code.

In Baijnath v. State of Bihar9, Parliament passed the Mines and Minerals

(Regulation & Development) Act, 1957 under Entry 54 of the Union List, declaring to take
under Union's control, the regulation of mines and the development of minerals to the extent
provided in the Act. In 1964, the Bihai Legislature enacted the Bihar Land Reforms
(Amendment) Act, 1964 amending the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950.

Exception [Article 254 (2)]:

Clause (2) of Article 254 contains an exception to the rule of repugnancy contained in
Article 254 (1). The Clause (2) provides : "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

8 1959 AIR 648

9 1970 AIR 1436

 been reserved for the consideration of the President and has received his assent, prevail in
that State".

Clause (2) of Article 254 provides for curing of repugnancy which would otherwise
invalidate a State law, which is inconsistent with a Union law or an existing law. A law so
enacted, cannot be challenged on the plea that it lacks legislative competence. 26 In order that
the State law should prevail in that State, the following conditions must be satisfied

(i) there must be in existence a Union law;

(ii) subsequent to the Union law, the State Legislature enacts a law with respect to a matter in the
Concurrent List; and

(iii) the State law having been reserved for the consideration of the President, has received his
assent thereto.

Subsequent Union Law [Proviso to Article 254 (2)]

Proviso to Article 254 (2). provides 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".

Predominance of the Union Power- NON- OBSTANTE CLAUSE (Article

246):

Article 246 provides :

(Notwithstanding anything in clauses (2) and (3), Parliament has exclusive power to make
laws with respect to any of the matters enumerated in List I in the Seventh Schedule (in this
Constitution referred to as the "Union List").

Notwithstanding anything in clause (3), Parliament, and, subject to clause (1), the
Legislature of any State also, have power to make laws with respect to any of the matters
enumerated in List III in the Seventh Schedule {in this Constitution referred to as the ,
"Concurrent List").

Subject to clauses (1) and (2), the Legislature of any State has exclusive power to
make laws for such State or any part thereof with respect to any of the matters enumerated in
List II in the Seventh Schedule (in this Constitution referred to as the "State List.")
'Parliament has power to make laws with respect to any matter for any part of the territory of
India not included in a State, notwithstanding that such matter is a matter enumerated in the
State List.

. Article 246 contains the non-obstante clause. Article 246, not only talks about distribution
of powers, but also explains the supremacy of powers.

It must thus be noted that if the legislative powers of the Union and State Legislatures,
which are enumerated in Lists I and II of the Seventh Schedule, cannot fairly be reconciled,
the former will prevail. Though, every attempt would be made to reconcile the conflict but if
it is irreconcilable, the Central legislation shall prevail. Thus, if a subject happens to be
included both in List I and List II, it would be the Parliament alone which will be competent
to legislate on that subject.

Again, if there is a conflict between List II and List III, it is Union power with respect to
List III, which shall prevail.

The opening words of Clause (3) of Article 246, i.e., "subject to clauses (1) and (2)"
expressly secure the predominance of the Union List and Concurrent List over the State List.

Thus, Parliament's power to legislate with respect to any matter contained whether in
List I or List III would have predominance over State Legislature's power to legislate with
respect to any matter in the State List. Again, while Parliament's power to legislate on matters
in List III has predominance over State -Legislature's power to legislate on matters in the
State List, but State Legislature's power to legislate on matters in List III is subjected to
Parliament's power to legislate on matters in List I.

In State of Karnataka v. Vishwabarathi House Building Co-operative Society10 the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, for the creation of quasi-judicial authorities at the District,
State and Central levels, to provide momentum to the consumer movement.

10 2003(1) SCR 397

 Upholding the constitutional validity of the impugned Act, a Bench of three learned
Judges of the Supreme Court held that Parliament had legislative competence to provide for
creation of special courts and tribunals, by virtue of Clause (2) of Article 246 of the
Constitution read with Entry 11-A of List III which read as "Administration of justice;
constitution and organisation of all courts except the Supreme Court and the High Courts".

RESIDUARY POWERS OF LEGISLATION (Article 248):

Article 248 provides :

'Parliament has exclusive power to make any law with respect to any matter not enumerated
in the Concurrent List or State List.

Such power shall include the power of making any law imposing a tax not mentioned
in either of these Lists. Article 248, thus, confers residuary powers of legislation exclusively
on the Union Parliament. Articles 248 is to be read with Entry 97 of Union List which reads as
: "Any other matter not enumerated in List II or List III including any tax not mentioned in
either of those Lists".The Goa, Daman and Diu (Opinion Poll) Act, 1966 was enacted by
Parliament in the exercise of its residuary powers.

LEGISLATION FOR UNION TERRITORIES (ARTICLE 246(4)):

Clause (4) of Article 246 confers unqualified power of legislation on the Union Parliament.
With regard to Union Territories, there is no distribution of legislative power, since specified
in the resolution, it shall be lawful for Parliament to make laws for the whole or any part of
the territory of India.

CIRCUMSTANCES WHEN THE UNION PARLIAMENT CAN MAKE

LAWS ON THE SUBJECTS CONTAINED IN THE STATE LIST:

1. Power of Parliament to legislate in National interest (Article 249)

Parliament may make laws under Article 249 (1) only with respect to suitable State
matters as are specified in the resolution passed by the Council of States.

Such a resolution passed under Clause (1) normally lasts for one year but it may be
renewed as many times as deemed necessary. Every time resolution is passed, it shall remain
in force for one year only.
 Laws passed by Parliament under a resolution passed under Clause (I) Article 249,
would cease to have effect on the expiration of a period of six mont after the resolution has
ceased to operate11.

Article 249 has been used a few times. The Supply and Prices of Goods Act, 1952 and
the Evacuee Interest (Separation) Act, 1951 are the instance

2. Power of Parliament to legislate during operation of Proclamation of

Emergency (Article 250)

3. Article 250 (1) provides that "Parliament shall, while a proclamation Emergency
is in operation, have power to make laws for the whole or any pi of the territory of
India with respect to any of the matters enumerated in t State List".

The Proclamation of Emergency referred to in this Article must be proclamation which

may be made under Article 352.

When a proclamation of Emergency is in operation, Parliament can en; laws with respect
to all the three Legislative Lists in Schedule VII. It can ma laws conferring powers and
imposing duties on the Union and its Officers respect of all the Lists.

Laws made under Article 250 (I), however, would cease to have effect the expiration of
a period of six months after the Proclamation has ceased operate.

Article 251 clarifies that Articles 249 and 250 do not restrict the Legislature of a State
to make laws with respect to matters with respect to which Parliament is empowered to
legislate under these Articles. However in case the two laws, i.e., Parliamentary law and
State law, are repugnant each other, it is the law made by Parliament which will prevail
and the Sti law shall be void to the extent of the repugnancy, that to for the period specific
therein.

4. Parliament's Power to legislate with the Consent of the States (Article

252)

Article 252 (1) provides that when all the Houses of Legislatures of two more States have
passed resolutions to the effect that it shall be desirable tl any of the matters in the State List

11 https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_India/Part_X
should be regulated in such States Parliament by law, it shall be lawful for Parliament to pass
an Act for regulat that matter.

The resolution must be passed by the Houses of at least two St Legislatures before
Parliament gets empowered to legislate under Article 2 (1). The resolution may be passed by
the simple majority. An Act so pass by Parliament shall have operation within the territories of
only such States. However, the Act so enacted may be adopted by other States by passing
resolution in the Houses of their Legislatures for that purpose.

Clause (2) of Article 252 provides that such Act as passed by Parliament under Clause (1),
may be amended or repealed by an Act of Parliament passed or adopted in the like manner, i.e.,
the procedure provided in Clause (1) for its enactment.

In case an Act passed by the Parliament in exercise of its legislative powers under
Article 252 pursuant to the resolutions passed by the Houses of Legislatures of various States, is
repealed by the Parliament, the Repealing Act would not be applicable to the State, unless said
State passes another resolution, approving and adopting the Repealing Act.

The Estate Duty Act, 1952, the Prize Competitions Act, 1955, the Urban Land (Ceiling &
Regulation) Act, 1976, and the Transplantation of Human Organs Act, 1994, are some laws
passed by Parliament under Article 252 (I)12.

5. Legislation for giving effect to International Agreements (Article 253)

Article 253 provides : "Parliament has power to make any law for the whole or any part of the
territory of India for implementing any treaty, agreement or convention with any other country
or countries or any decision made at any ' International Conference, Association or other body".

Article 253 exhibits that in implementing a treaty, agreement or convention with another
country, the limitations imposed by Articles 245 and 246 are lifted and the entire field of
legislation, in that respect, is open to the Union Parliament.41

6. Parliament's Power to Legislate Under (Article 356)

12 shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/jspui/bitstream/10603/132443/11/11_chapter%206.pdf
 Article 356 provides that after the President has declared that the Government in a State
cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution, he may by
Proclamation further declare that the powers of the Legislature of that State shall be
exercisable by or under the authority of Parliament

Having been so authorised Parliament may make laws with respect to any or all the matters
contained in the State List. Laws so made by Parliament would be operative in that State only.
Such laws would continue in force until amended or repealed by appropriate Legislature, i.e.,
either by Parliament during the operation of Proclamation made under Article 356 or by the
State Legislature after such Proclamation ceases to operate.

Requirements as to Recommendations and Previous Sanctions of the

President or the Governor (Article 255):

There are certain Bills, such as Money Bills or Financial Bills which can be introduced in
the Legislature with the prior recommendations of the President or the Governor, as the case
may be. Article 255 provides that if such recommendations or sanctions have not been taken, the
Acts so enacted or any provision in such Act, shall not be invalid by reason of non-compliance of
this procedural requirement. But, such an Act would be unenforceable until the infirmity is
cured. It stands cured if the Act is assented to by the President in cases where the
recommendations required were that of the President. Where the recommendations required
were that of the Governor, the infirmity may be cured if the Act is assented to by the
Governor or the President.

Critical Evaluation of Centre - State Relations

Factors responsible for tension between centre and the states

i. Partial role of Governors

ii. Role of Bureaucracy

iii. Misuse of Article 356

iv. Constitutional Amendments to make the centre strong

v. Financial problems of the state

vi. Arbitrary use of the Central Reserve Police

 vii. Provision to reserve Laws passed by the state legislature for the approval of
the President

viii. Centralized planning

ix. Finance Commission An agency of central government

x. Disputes among different states

Need to Re-evaluate Centre State Relations

i. More powers to the state

ii. Residuary powers to the state

iii. Reform in the office of Governor

iv. Not to hold the Bills passed by the State Legislatures

v. Delete Article 356 & 249

vi. Equal representation of states in council of states (Rajya Sabha)

vii. Financial Autonomy to States

viii. Reforms in all India services

CONCLUSION
Thus from the scheme of distribution of legislative powers between the Union and the
States it is quite evident that the framers have given more powers to the Union Parliament
as against the States. The States are not vested with exclusive jurisdiction even over the
subjects assigned to the States by the Constitution and thus it makes the states to some
extent subordinate to the Centre. Indeed this is a clear departure from the strict application
of federal principle followed in America and Australia. Now if take role of judiciary
Professor Baxi has stated that the judicial process at the Supreme Court level is a peculiar
species of political process and constitutional adjudication is essentially part of political
activity and this could be taken as one why the Supreme Court is not taking the issue of
such public importance whereas another can be "judicial reticence". But whatsoever may
be reason, the author is of the view that the Supreme Court is entrusted with the powers to
adjudicate and decide the federal disputes and it should discharge its duties irrespective of
bars created by the legislature.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Avasthi, A.P, Indian Government and Politics, Narain Agarwal, Agra, 2001.

Badyal, J.S, Indian Government and Politics, Raj Publishers, Jalandhar,

2013.

Constitution of India 12th edition by Mahendra P. Singh

www.lawmin.nic.in/ncrwc/finalreport/v1ch8.htm

www. shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/86844/11/11_chapter%203.pdf

www.publishyourarticles.net/knowledge-hub/...is...relation...union...states.../4612/