As per Ivor Jennings, India is “a federation with a strong centralising tendency.” The 7th Schedule is a reflection of this tendency.
Contentious Issues regarding Distribution of Legislative Powers
Concurrent List repugnancy – Eg- Education (Concurrent List, Entry 25) – Centre’s NEET law vs Tamil Nadu’s opposition to it.
Residuary powers with the Union
Under Article 249, Rajya Sabha can empower Parliament to legislate on State List subjects. Eg- Essential Commodities Act (food items, agricultural produce).
During National Emergency (Art. 250) or President’s Rule (Art. 356), Parliament can legislate on State subjects.
Principle of Federal Supremacy
In cases of irreconcilable conflict, Union law prevails over State law.
Judicial Validation–
Union of India v. H.S. Dhillon (1972) – Parliament has residuary powers.
State of Karnataka v. Union of India (1977) – Union’s primacy in matters of national importance.
State of West Bengal v. Union of India (1963) – SC upheld Parliament’s power to acquire State property.
Zameer Ahmed Latifur Rehman Sheikh v. State of Maharashtra (2010) – SC ruled that a central money laundering law overrides conflicting State law under Article 254(1).
Protects national unity and uniformity in crucial subjects.
Principle of Harmonious Construction
Courts attempt to reconcile conflicts so that both Union and State laws can function simultaneously.
Judicial Validation–
In C.B. Boarding and Lodging v. State of Mysore (1970), the SC upheld the State’s power to levy tax on lodging houses, even though taxation on income was a Union subject.
State of Rajasthan v. G. Chawla (1959) – Both Centre and State laws upheld through harmonious interpretation.
Hoechst Pharmaceuticals v. State of Bihar (1983) – Repugnancy avoided through reconciliation.
Preserves federal balance and safeguards state autonomy.
“Federalism is not a monolith; it is a dialogue between self-rule and shared rule.” Both Union & States are creatures of the Constitution