A brief on Doctrine of Repugnancy | Important Acts and Laws for Judiciary Exams PDF Download

Introduction

The Constitution is referred to as the supreme law of the land because it forms the foundation of the legal system, ensuring clarity and avoiding confusion. Article 254 of the Indian Constitution, focusing on the Doctrine of Repugnancy, resolves conflicts between Central and State legislation.

Evolution of Doctrine of Repugnancy

The Doctrine of Repugnancy in the Indian Constitution, inspired by the American federal system, clarifies the distribution of legislative powers between the Centre and the States. It emphasizes the supremacy of Parliament in making laws for the entire country.

Salient Features of Doctrine of Repugnancy

The Doctrine aims to prevent conflicting laws, ensuring uniformity and coherence in the legal framework. Key features include addressing direct conflicts, delineating jurisdiction between Centre and State, and establishing Parliament's supremacy in case of repugnancy.

Important Judgments on Doctrine of Repugnancy

• M. Karunanidhi v. Union of India: This landmark judgment underscores that in case of conflict between laws on the Concurrent List, Central law prevails.
• Bharat Hydro Power Corporation Ltd. v. State of Assam: Courts emphasize harmonizing conflicting Centre-State legislations when they do not pertain to the same list.
• Grand Kakatiya Sheraton Hotel and Towers Employees & Workers Union v. Srinivasa Resorts Ltd: State legislation can override Centre's laws with President's assent, limited to the specific conflict.
• National Engineering Industries Ltd. v. Shri Kishan Bhageri: The judiciary clarifies that either Centre or State law prevails in case of repugnancy.

Use of Doctrine of Repugnancy in Covid-19 Times

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Centre's lockdown order raised questions on the balance of power between Centre and States. Entry 21 of the Concurrent List empowered the Centre to legislate on infectious diseases, validating the lockdown.

Critical Analysis of Article 254(1)

• MP. Jain highlighted the limitation of restricting Article 254(1) to conflicts within the Concurrent List, suggesting that conflicts can arise even if laws fall under different lists.
• Conflicts may occur when both the Center and State have the authority to legislate on the same subject within the same list or even across different lists.
• Most judgments focus on conflicts within List III (Concurrent List) when discussing the Doctrine of Repugnancy.

Power of Parliament vs. State in Making Laws

• The doctrine emphasizes Parliament's authority over the State in legislating under List III (Concurrent List).
• It is crucial to understand the balance of power between the Center and State to avoid conflicting legislation.

Conclusion

• The framers of the Constitution initially characterized it as a Federal Constitution. However, later scholars, including prominent jurists like K.C. Wheare, have described it as a Quasi-Federal Constitution. This designation arises from the fact that while the Constitution does allocate powers to both the central and state governments, it also allows for one legislature to prevail over another in cases of conflict.
• In the case of Tika Ram vs State of Uttar Pradesh, the Supreme Court clarified the Doctrine of Repugnancy, stating that it applies when state laws are not in conflict with existing central laws. In other words, for Parliament to enact a law repealing a state law, there must have been an earlier central law in place. This judgment underscores the significance of Article 254 of the Constitution in governing the relationship between the central and state governments. The Doctrine of Repugnancy reaffirms the federal nature of our Constitution, which has proven beneficial in many cases reviewed by the court.
• It remains to be seen whether the interpretation of the Doctrine of Repugnancy will evolve in response to the challenges that the judiciary will face in the coming years. However, its role in maintaining the balance between the Centre and the States is crucial and will continue to be so in the future.