The Doctrine of Federal Supremacy ensures that in conflicts between Union and State laws, the Union law prevails, maintaining constitutional balance.

MEANING AND EXPLANATION

In India’s quasi-federal structure, both Union and State governments derive authority from the Constitution. The Doctrine of Federal Supremacy addresses conflicts between Union and State laws, ensuring national coherence. Article 246 of the Constitution delineates legislative powers through three lists in the Seventh Schedule:

• Union List: Subjects exclusively for Parliament, such as defense and foreign affairs.

• State List: Subjects for State Legislatures, like police and public health.

• Concurrent List: Subjects where both can legislate, including criminal law and marriage.

In Concurrent List conflicts, Article 254 stipulates that Union law prevails unless the State law, having received Presidential assent, overrides the Union law within that state. However, Parliament can supersede such State laws by enacting new legislation.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The Government of India Act, 1935, introduced a federal structure with separate legislative lists, influencing the current constitutional framework. Post-independence, the framers adopted this model, embedding the supremacy of Union laws to maintain national unity.

COMPARISON WITH OTHER COUNTRIES

In the United States, the Supremacy Clause (Article VI) establishes federal law as the supreme law, overriding state laws. Similarly, in Canada, federal laws prevail in conflicts with provincial laws. India’s model aligns with these systems but incorporates unique features to address its specific socio-political context.

LEGAL PROVISIONS AND PROCEDURES

• Article 246: Allocates legislative subjects between Union and States.

• Article 254: Addresses inconsistencies between Union and State laws on Concurrent List subjects, granting precedence to Union laws.

• Seventh Schedule: Details the Union, State, and Concurrent Lists, specifying subjects under each jurisdiction.

CASE LAWS AND PRECEDENTS

• State of West Bengal v. Union of India, AIR 1963 SC 1241: The Supreme Court held that the legislative and executive powers of States are subject to the Union’s supreme powers, emphasizing the Constitution’s centralized nature.

• Hoechst Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. State of Bihar, AIR 1983 SC 1019: The Court clarified that in cases of repugnancy between Union and State laws on Concurrent List subjects, Union law prevails unless the State law has received Presidential assent.

• S.R. Bommai v. Union of India, AIR 1994 SC 1918: This case reinforced the principles of federalism and the conditions under which State governments can be dismissed, underscoring the balance between Union and State powers.

DOCTRINES AND PRINCIPLES

• Doctrine of Pith and Substance: Determines the true nature of legislation to ascertain under which list it falls, used when a law’s subject matter is disputed.

• Doctrine of Colorable Legislation: Prevents legislatures from enacting laws that, while appearing to be within their jurisdiction, in reality, encroach upon the domain of another legislature.

MAXIMS

• Lex superior derogat legi inferiori: A higher law overrides a lower one; in this context, Union laws supersede State laws in case of conflict.

AMENDMENTS AND ADDITIONS

The 42nd Amendment Act of 1976 transferred five subjects from the State List to the Concurrent List, enhancing Union authority in certain areas. These subjects include education, forests, and administration of justice.

CRITICISM AND APPRECIATION

While the Doctrine of Federal Supremacy ensures national unity and legal uniformity, critics argue it may undermine State autonomy. However, proponents assert that it is essential for maintaining the integrity and sovereignty of the nation, preventing legal chaos and ensuring cohesive governance.

FLOWCHART: RESOLUTION OF CONFLICT BETWEEN UNION AND STATE LAWS

graph TD
A[Conflict Between Union and State Law] --> B{Subject Matter}
B -->|Union List| C[Union Law Prevails]
B -->|State List| D[State Law Prevails]
B -->|Concurrent List| E{Consistency Check}
E -->|Consistent| F[Both Laws Operate]
E -->|Inconsistent| G[Union Law Prevails]
G -->|State Law with Presidential Assent| H[State Law Prevails in that State]
H --> I[Parliament May Override by New Law]

TABLE: COMPARISON OF LEGISLATIVE POWERS

CONCLUSION

The Doctrine of Federal Supremacy is pivotal in India’s constitutional framework, ensuring a harmonious balance between Union and State legislations. It upholds the supremacy of Union laws in conflicts, maintaining national integrity while respecting the federal structure. Understanding this doctrine is essential for comprehending the legislative dynamics and the interplay of powers within the Indian legal system.

REFERENCES

1. State of West Bengal v. Union of India, AIR 1963 SC 1241.
2. Hoechst Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. State of Bihar, AIR 1983 SC 1019.
3. S.R. Bommai v. Union of India, AIR 1994 SC 1918.
4. Constitution of India, Articles 246 and 254.
5. The Constitution (Forty-Second Amendment) Act, 1976.
6. “Principle of Federal Supremacy in India,” Leverage Edu.