Article 246 of the Indian Constitution

Article 246 of the Indian Constitution defines the distribution of legislative powers between the Union and States in India. It is a crucial provision

Article 246 of the Indian Constitution: Legislative Powers

Article 246 of the Indian Constitution defines the distribution of legislative powers between the Union and States in India. It is a crucial provision under Part XI of the Constitution, which deals with the distribution of authority and responsibilities between the Union and the States. This article plays a significant role in ensuring that both the central and state governments have the necessary powers to legislate on matters that affect their jurisdictions.

---

Text of Article 246

Article 246 reads as follows:

1. Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing provisions of this Chapter, Parliament has exclusive power to make laws with respect to any of the matters enumerated in List I in the Seventh Schedule (Union List), and the Legislature of a State has exclusive power to make laws with respect to any of the matters enumerated in List II in the Seventh Schedule (State List).

2. Parliament and, subject to the provisions of this Constitution, the Legislature of a State also have power to make laws with respect to any of the matters enumerated in List III in the Seventh Schedule (Concurrent List), but the law made by Parliament shall prevail in case of inconsistency between the laws made by Parliament and the Legislature of a State.

3. The Parliament has the power to legislate with respect to matters enumerated in the Union List, Concurrent List, or even State List if a Proclamation of Emergency has been issued by the President, and during such an emergency, the executive power of the Union can extend to areas within the State List as well.

4. Parliament can also legislate for a State on matters in the State List if the State’s Legislature requests Parliament to do so through a resolution.

---

Explanation of Article 246

Article 246 of the Indian Constitution defines the legislative powers of the Parliament and the State Legislatures. It is a cornerstone provision that establishes the distribution of legislative authority in India's federal structure. It outlines which levels of government—Union and State—have the authority to make laws on various subjects listed in the Constitution.

Text of Article 246

Article 246 is divided into three clauses:

1. Clause 1:
   Parliament has exclusive power to make laws on matters enumerated in the Union List (List I) of the Seventh Schedule.

2. Clause 2:
   Both Parliament and State Legislatures have concurrent powers to make laws on matters enumerated in the Concurrent List (List III) of the Seventh Schedule.

3. Clause 3:
   The State Legislatures have exclusive power to make laws on matters enumerated in the State List (List II) of the Seventh Schedule.

4. Clause 4:
   Parliament has the authority to legislate on any matter relating to the Union Territories, regardless of whether it is in the Union List or State List.

---

Key Features of Article 246

1. Union List (List I):

   • Contains subjects of national importance that require uniform laws across the country, such as defense, foreign affairs, atomic energy, and currency.
   • Parliament has exclusive power to legislate on these matters.

2. State List (List II):

   • Contains subjects of local or state-specific importance, such as police, public health, agriculture, and trade within the state.
   • Only the State Legislatures can legislate on these subjects.

3. Concurrent List (List III):

   • Contains subjects of shared importance, such as education, marriage and divorce, bankruptcy, and forest management.
   • Both Parliament and State Legislatures can legislate on these matters.
   • In case of a conflict between Union and State laws on a Concurrent List subject, the Union law prevails.

4. Residual Powers:

   • Matters not enumerated in any of the three lists fall under the residual powers, which are vested in Parliament (Article 248).

---

Interpretation of Legislative Authority

1. Parliament's Supremacy on Union List:
   Parliament has exclusive jurisdiction to legislate on Union List subjects, ensuring national uniformity on key issues.

2. State Autonomy on State List:
   State governments have the autonomy to legislate on State List matters, reflecting the principle of federalism.

3. Concurrent Jurisdiction:
   The Concurrent List allows both levels of government to legislate, ensuring cooperative federalism. However, in case of conflict, Parliament's law prevails (Article 254).

4. Emergency Provisions and Article 246:
   During a national emergency (Article 352) or state emergency (Article 356), Parliament can legislate on State List matters. This ensures that legislative power is centralized during crises for effective governance.

---

Key Features of Article 246

1. Exclusive Powers of Parliament and State Legislatures:

   • Union List: Parliament exclusively legislates on matters under the Union List.
   • State List: State Legislatures exclusively legislate on matters under the State List.

2. Concurrent Power:

   • Both Parliament and State Legislatures have the power to legislate on matters under the Concurrent List.
   • However, in case of a conflict between Union and State law on the same matter, the law made by Parliament will prevail.

3. Emergency Powers:

   • In case of a Proclamation of Emergency, Parliament gains the power to legislate on matters in the State List as well.
   • During an emergency, the Union can exercise powers over areas that would normally be under State jurisdiction.

4. Resolution by States for Parliamentary Legislation:

   • If the Legislature of a State passes a resolution, Parliament can make laws on matters in the State List, as long as it is in the interest of that particular state.

---

Impact of Article 246

1. Division of Legislative Powers:
   Article 246 clearly divides legislative responsibilities between the central and state governments, ensuring that there is no overlap of authority.

2. Flexibility:
   The article provides a flexible framework for the Union and States to work together on matters that require joint legislation, especially in the Concurrent List. This flexibility ensures that there can be cooperation between the two levels of government.

3. Conflict Resolution:
   In case of a conflict between Union and State laws on matters in the Concurrent List, Article 246 ensures that Union laws will prevail, promoting uniformity and consistency in national legislation.

4. Empowering States during Emergencies:
   During a national emergency, Article 246 grants the Union government the power to make laws on subjects that would otherwise fall under State jurisdiction. This ensures national coherence during emergencies.

---

Judicial Interpretation of Article 246

The Indian judiciary has played a critical role in interpreting Article 246 to resolve conflicts and clarify the distribution of legislative powers between the Union and the States. Over the years, several landmark judgments have provided insights into the scope, limitations, and interplay of legislative lists under the Constitution. Below are key judicial interpretations of Article 246:

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

• Key Issue: Can the Union acquire state property for public purposes?
• Judgment:
  • The Supreme Court upheld the supremacy of Parliament on subjects in the Union List, ruling that the Union could acquire property even if it belonged to a State.
  • The Court emphasized that the Union's legislative competence on Union List subjects overrides State List concerns if there is a conflict.
  • This case reinforced the dominance of the Union in India's quasi-federal structure.

---

2. Hoechst Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. State of Bihar (1983)

• Key Issue: Conflict between the Drug Price Control Order (a Union law under the Essential Commodities Act) and a State law imposing additional taxes on drugs.
• Judgment:
  • The Supreme Court ruled that Parliament's law prevails over State law in cases of conflict between the Union and State Lists or between Union and Concurrent List laws.
  • The judgment clarified that when a Union law is made under an entry in the Union List, it cannot be overridden by a State law, even if the State law deals with a subject in the State List.

---

3. SR Bommai v. Union of India (1994)

• Key Issue: Federalism and the scope of the Union's powers during emergencies.
• Judgment:
  • The Supreme Court ruled that federalism is a basic structure of the Constitution, but emphasized that the Union's powers are paramount when national interests are at stake.
  • This interpretation reinforced the supremacy of Union legislation under Article 246 in cases of emergency or breakdown of constitutional machinery in a State.

---

4. ITC Ltd. v. State of Karnataka (1985)

• Key Issue: Whether the State Legislature could regulate the production and sale of cigarettes, given that tobacco is listed under the Union List.
• Judgment:
  • The Supreme Court held that subjects in the Union List must be strictly interpreted to ensure Parliament’s exclusive legislative power.
  • The Court ruled that the regulation of tobacco fell under the Union List, invalidating the State's legislation.

---

5. Union of India v. Harbhajan Singh Dhillon (1971)

• Key Issue: Whether Parliament could legislate on residuary matters not mentioned in any of the three lists.
• Judgment:
  • The Court upheld Parliament's authority under Article 248 to legislate on residuary matters, reinforcing its supremacy in areas not explicitly assigned to the State or Concurrent Lists.
  • This judgment clarified that Article 246 must be read alongside Article 248 to determine Parliament’s legislative competence.

---

6. Tika Ramji v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1956)

• Key Issue: Conflict between Union and State laws on sugarcane regulation.
• Judgment:
  • The Supreme Court upheld the validity of the State law, noting that sugarcane cultivation (an agricultural subject) falls under the State List.
  • This case highlighted that legislative power is distributed based on the primary subject matter of the law, even if the State law has incidental effects on Union List matters.

---

7. Gujarat University v. Krishna Ranganath (1963)

• Key Issue: Overlapping jurisdiction between Union and State laws regarding education.
• Judgment:
  • The Court held that higher education falls under the Union List, while elementary and secondary education are part of the State List.
  • This judgment emphasized that when subjects overlap between the Union and State Lists, the Union List takes precedence.

---

8. Federation of Hotel and Restaurant Associations of India v. Union of India (1989)

• Key Issue: Whether the Union could levy taxes on "luxuries" through the Expenditure Tax Act, despite "luxuries" being a State List subject.
• Judgment:
  • The Supreme Court ruled that the Union's residuary powers under Article 248 and its taxation powers in the Union List allowed it to impose the tax.
  • This case reiterated the supremacy of Parliament's authority on taxation matters under the Union List.

---

Key Principles Derived from Judicial Interpretations

1. Doctrine of Pith and Substance:

   • When there is a conflict between Union and State legislation, the judiciary examines the true nature and substance of the law to determine which level of government has legislative competence.

2. Principle of Harmonious Construction:

   • If both Union and State laws are valid and overlap, the judiciary strives to harmonize them without invalidating either, unless they are irreconcilable.

3. Union Supremacy:

   • In cases of direct conflict between Union and State laws, Union laws prevail, especially on matters in the Concurrent List (Article 254).

4. Residual Powers:

   • Residuary subjects not mentioned in any of the three lists fall under Parliament's exclusive legislative authority, as interpreted in Article 248.

---

Significance of Judicial Interpretations

1. Clarification of Legislative Powers:
   Judicial decisions under Article 246 have clarified the boundaries of legislative competence, ensuring the smooth functioning of India’s federal structure.

2. Resolving Conflicts:
   The judiciary acts as a referee in resolving disputes between the Union and States, maintaining constitutional harmony.

3. Strengthening Federalism:
   By interpreting Article 246 and related provisions, the judiciary has upheld the principles of cooperative and competitive federalism, balancing State autonomy with Union supremacy.

4. Dynamic Interpretation:
   Judicial interpretations have adapted to evolving circumstances, such as technological advancements and globalization, ensuring the relevance of Article 246 in modern governance.

The judicial interpretation of Article 246 is pivotal in maintaining the balance of power in India's federal framework. The courts have consistently upheld Parliament's supremacy in matters of national importance while protecting the autonomy of States in local governance. By interpreting Article 246 alongside other provisions like Article 248 and the Seventh Schedule, the judiciary ensures that India's legislative structure remains flexible and robust to meet the country's dynamic needs.

---

Conclusion

Article 246 of the Indian Constitution is a fundamental provision that ensures a clear division of legislative powers between the Union and State governments. This article is crucial in maintaining the federal structure of India while allowing the necessary flexibility for cooperation on matters of national importance. The distribution of powers between the Union and the States has helped India in its governance, while also ensuring that there is coordination and consistency in the legislative framework across the country.