INDIAN FEDERALISM MT NOTES

Q1. Historical Evolution of federal features in India

ANS- India’s federal structure has evolved through various historical, legal, and political developments.
Unlike classical federal systems like the United States, India’s federalism is uniquely tailored to suit its
vast diversity and administrative needs. The evolution of federal features in India can be understood in
three major phases:
1. Pre-Independence Developments
The roots of Indian federalism can be traced to the British colonial rule, where different legislative
reforms gradually introduced federal elements.
a. Government of India Act, 1919 (Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms)
 Introduced dyarchy in provinces, dividing subjects into ‘Reserved’ (controlled by the Governor)
and ‘Transferred’ (controlled by elected Indian ministers).
 Though a step towards decentralization, the real power remained with the British authorities.
b. Government of India Act, 1935
 First attempt to introduce a true federal structure in India.
 Created three legislative lists:
o Federal List (Union subjects)
o Provincial List (State subjects)
o Concurrent List (Shared subjects between Centre and Provinces)
 Granted autonomy to provinces and proposed a federation of British India and Princely States
(though this was never implemented).
These reforms laid the foundation for provincial autonomy and inspired the future Indian Constitution's
federal framework.
2. Post-Independence Constitutional Development
After independence, the Constituent Assembly debated on whether India should adopt a rigid federal
system or a more flexible one. Given the country’s diversity and security concerns, the framers of the
Constitution opted for a quasi-federal structure, blending federal and unitary features.
Key Federal Features in the Constitution (1950)
 Division of Powers: Article 246 provides for a three-tier structure—Union List (central
authority), State List (regional autonomy), and Concurrent List (shared responsibility).
 Bicameralism: The Rajya Sabha represents states in the Parliament, ensuring their participation
in national decision-making.
 Independent Judiciary: The Supreme Court acts as the guardian of the Constitution and resolves
Centre-State disputes.
Unitary Bias in Indian Federalism
Unlike traditional federal systems, the Indian Constitution gives greater powers to the Centre, ensuring
national integrity and strong governance.
 Emergency Provisions (Article 352, 356, 360) allow the Centre to take control of states during
crises.
 Article 249 & 250 permit Parliament to legislate on State List subjects in the national interest.
 Article 356 (President’s Rule) enables the Centre to dissolve a state government if constitutional
machinery fails.
Thus, while India follows federal principles, it maintains unitary dominance in key areas to ensure
national stability.
3. Judicial Interpretation of Indian Federalism
The Supreme Court has played a key role in shaping the nature of Indian federalism.
 S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994): The Court ruled that federalism is a basic structure of the
Constitution, preventing arbitrary dismissal of state governments.
 State of West Bengal v. Union of India (1963): The Court reaffirmed that Indian federalism is
unique and not completely rigid, as states do not have complete sovereignty.
These rulings highlight that while India is federal in structure, it retains strong unitary features for
maintaining governance and unity.
Conclusion
Indian federalism has historically evolved from colonial governance to a unique blend of federal and
unitary features. While early reforms introduced provincial autonomy, post-independence constitutional
developments ensured a strong Centre with cooperative federalism.
In contemporary times, Centre-State relations continue to evolve, with increasing emphasis on
cooperative and competitive federalism, ensuring a balanced governance structure for India’s diverse
socio-political landscape.

Q2. Different Forms of Governments: Unitary, Federal, and Confederation

ANS- Governments worldwide operate under different political structures based on power distribution
between the central and regional authorities. The three primary forms of government are Unitary,
Federal, and Confederation, each with distinct characteristics and functions.
1. Unitary Government
A unitary government is a system where all powers are concentrated in a single central authority, which
exercises complete control over the country. The central government may delegate powers to local
bodies, but these powers can be revoked at any time.
Characteristics of a Unitary Government:
 Single authority: The national government has supreme power and governs directly.
 No constitutional division of powers: Local governments operate at the discretion of the central
government.
 Uniform laws and policies: Ensures administrative consistency throughout the country.
 Flexible constitution: Since the central authority holds ultimate power, constitutional
amendments are easier.
Examples:
 United Kingdom: The British Parliament holds supreme authority, and local governments
function under its control.
 France, Japan, and China also follow the unitary system.
Advantages:
 Strong national unity and consistency in governance.
 Faster decision-making and policy implementation.
 Less administrative cost compazxred to federal structures.
Disadvantages:
 Local issues may be overlooked.
 Centralization can lead to bureaucratic inefficiencies.
 Risk of authoritarianism if power is concentrated excessively.
2. Federal Government
A federal government is a system where power is constitutionally divided between a central authority
and regional or state governments. Both levels operate independently in their respective spheres.
Characteristics of a Federal Government:
 Dual government system: Central and state governments exist with separate jurisdictions.
  Division of powers: Clearly defined by the Constitution (e.g., Union, State, and Concurrent Lists
in India).
 Supremacy of the Constitution: Both central and state governments derive power from the
Constitution.
 Independent judiciary: Courts resolve disputes between central and state governments.
Examples:
 India: Follows a quasi-federal model with a strong center.
 United States: A classic example of federalism, where states enjoy significant autonomy.
 Canada, Australia, and Germany also follow federal structures.
Advantages:
 Promotes local autonomy and governance.
 Protects regional diversity and cultural identities.
 Decentralization helps in efficient administration.
Disadvantages:
 Conflict of interest between central and state governments.
 Expensive governance due to multiple levels of administration.
 Slower decision-making due to power-sharing mechanisms.
3. Confederation Government
A confederation is the weakest form of political organization where independent states form an alliance
for mutual benefit while retaining full sovereignty. The central authority exists only for limited purposes
like defense and foreign affairs.
Characteristics of a Confederation:
 Loose union of independent states: Member states voluntarily join for specific functions.
 Weak central authority: The central body has no real power over the states.
 States retain sovereignty: They can withdraw from the confederation at any time.
 Decision-making is consensus-based: Unanimous approval is often required for policy decisions.
Examples:
 Articles of Confederation (USA, 1781-1789): The first U.S. government was a confederation
before adopting federalism in 1789.
 European Union (EU): A modern example where member countries cooperate but remain
sovereign.
 Switzerland (before 1848) was a confederation before transitioning into a federation.
Advantages:
 States retain full autonomy over internal matters.
 Prevents excessive centralization of power.
 Suitable for nations with diverse political systems.
Disadvantages:
 Weak central authority leads to inefficiency.
 Lack of uniform policies and slow decision-making.
 Conflicts between member states can destabilize the system.
Conclusion
Different forms of government exist based on the degree of power distribution between the central and
local units. While unitary governments ensure uniformity and control, federal systems balance central
and state powers, and confederations prioritize state sovereignty with a weak center. Each system has
its strengths and weaknesses, and the choice of governance depends on historical, social, and political
factors. India, with its quasi-federal model, incorporates elements of both unitary and federal systems,
ensuring a strong center while allowing regional autonomy.
Q3. Nature of Indian Federalism
ANS- The Indian Constitution establishes a unique federal structure that differs from classical federal
systems like the United States. Indian federalism is often described as “quasi-federal” because it
incorporates features of both federal and unitary governments. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar called it “a federation
with a strong centralizing tendency.” The Supreme Court, in various judgments, has also termed it as
"cooperative federalism with a strong center."
1. Federal Features of the Indian Constitution
Though India does not follow a strict federal model, it exhibits key federal characteristics:
 Dual government system: India has two levels of government—Union and State governments—
each with defined powers.
 Division of powers: The Seventh Schedule divides legislative powers between the Union (Union
List), States (State List), and both (Concurrent List).
 Written and rigid Constitution: The Indian Constitution is a written document, and its federal
provisions cannot be easily altered.
 Independent judiciary: The Supreme Court and High Courts act as guardians of the Constitution
and resolve disputes between the center and states.
 Bicameralism: The Rajya Sabha represents the states at the national level, ensuring their
participation in governance.
2. Unitary Features of the Indian Constitution
Unlike classical federations, India has several provisions that make the central government more
powerful than the states:
 Strong central government: The Union has dominance in legislative, executive, and financial
matters. The Parliament can legislate on state subjects under certain circumstances (Article 249,
250, 252, and 253).
 Single Constitution: Unlike the U.S., Indian states do not have their own constitutions. The same
Constitution governs both the Union and the States.
 Emergency provisions (Articles 352, 356, and 360): During a national, state, or financial
emergency, the Union government can assume control over state functions.
 Governor as the central agent: The Governor, appointed by the President, plays a crucial role in
state administration and can reserve state bills for the President’s consideration (Article 200).
 Unified judiciary: Unlike the U.S., where each state has its own judicial system, India has a single
integrated judicial structure with the Supreme Court at the top.
3. Quasi-Federal Nature of Indian Federalism
India's federalism does not fit strictly into either a federal or unitary model. It is often termed "quasi-
federal" due to its mix of federal and unitary features. The Supreme Court, in State of West Bengal v.
Union of India (1963), held that Indian federalism is not absolute but leans towards a centralized
structure. Similarly, in S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994), the Court reaffirmed that federalism is part
of the basic structure of the Constitution, but the Union remains superior.
4. Concept of Cooperative Federalism- While India’s federalism is centralized, it also promotes
cooperation between the Union and States in governance. Institutions like the Inter-State Council
(Article 263), Finance Commission (Article 280), and NITI Aayog facilitate coordination. The GST regime is
a notable example of cooperative federalism, where both the Union and States participate in tax
administration.
5. Conclusion
The nature of Indian federalism is unique and dynamic, combining federal principles with unitary
control. While it grants autonomy to states, the central government remains dominant, particularly in
times of emergency. The evolving jurisprudence on federalism has emphasized cooperation over
conflict, making India’s federal structure flexible yet effective in managing a vast and diverse nation.
Q4. Dominant Features of the Union Over the States
ANS- The Indian Constitution establishes a quasi-federal system where the Union holds more power
than the States. Unlike classical federalism, where both levels of government have equal status, the
Indian system ensures a strong Centre to maintain national unity and effective governance. The Union’s
dominance is reflected in legislative, executive, financial, and emergency provisions.
1. Legislative Supremacy of the Union
 Union List & Residuary Powers (Article 246 & 248):
Parliament has exclusive power over subjects in the Union List (97 items), such as defense,
foreign affairs, and atomic energy. It also holds residuary powers to legislate on matters not
mentioned in any list.
 Concurrent List (Article 254):
Both Parliament and State Legislatures can make laws on subjects in the Concurrent List (52
items). However, in case of a conflict, Union law prevails over state law.
 Legislation on State List (Articles 249, 250, 252 & 253):
Parliament can make laws on subjects in the State List (66 items) under special circumstances:
o Article 249: If the Rajya Sabha passes a resolution stating that a subject in the State List
is of national importance, Parliament can legislate on it.
o Article 250: During a National Emergency, Parliament gets the power to legislate on
state subjects.
o Article 252: If two or more states request Parliament, it can make laws for them, which
other states may later adopt.
o Article 253: To implement international treaties, Parliament can legislate on state
subjects without state consent.

2. Executive Control of the Union Over States

 Governor as Union’s Representative:
The Governor is appointed by the President and acts as the Union's agent in states. He can
withhold assent to state bills, reserve them for the President’s approval, or even recommend
President’s Rule under Article 356.
 Union’s Power to Give Directives (Articles 256 & 257):
The Union can direct states to ensure compliance with laws and policies. If a state fails to follow
them, the President can intervene.
 Control over All India Services:
Key administrative services like IAS, IPS, and IFS are controlled by the Centre, ensuring uniform
administration. Though officers serve in states, their appointments, transfers, and disciplinary
actions are under the Union’s control.

3. Financial Dependency of States on the Union

 Union’s Control Over Taxation:
The Centre collects major taxes like Income Tax, Excise Duty, and Customs Duty, while states
have limited revenue sources like Stamp Duty and Land Revenue.
 Grants-in-Aid (Article 275):
The Union provides grants-in-aid to financially weaker states, making them dependent on
Central assistance.
 Borrowing Restrictions (Article 293):
States cannot borrow money without the Union’s approval if they owe debt to the Centre. This
limits their financial independence.
  GST Regime and Its Impact:
The Goods and Services Tax (GST) has further centralized financial control, as tax revenue is
shared between the Centre and States based on GST Council decisions, where the Centre holds
significant influence.

4. Emergency Provisions and Union’s Absolute Control

 National Emergency (Article 352):
o Declared during war, external aggression, or armed rebellion.
o The Centre can legislate on all state subjects, and the state governments function under
Union control.
 State Emergency (Article 356) – President’s Rule:
o If a state’s constitutional machinery fails, the President can dissolve the state
government and take direct control.
o The Governor administers the state on behalf of the President, and Parliament makes
laws for the state.
 Financial Emergency (Article 360):
o The Union takes control of state finances.
o The President can direct states to reduce government expenditure, revise salaries, and
even take other necessary actions.

5. Judicial and Parliamentary Control Over States

 Single Integrated Judiciary (Article 141):
o The Supreme Court’s decisions are binding on all states, ensuring uniformity in law.
o States cannot have separate judicial systems like in the USA.
 Parliament’s Power to Alter State Boundaries (Article 3):
o Parliament can create, merge, alter, or abolish states without requiring the state’s
consent.
o This provision highlights the unitary tilt in Indian federalism.

Conclusion
Indian federalism leans towards a centralized structure, ensuring national stability and coordination.
However, in recent years, cooperative federalism has emerged to balance Centre-State relations
through mechanisms like NITI Aayog, GST Council, and financial commissions. While the Union remains
dominant, there is a growing emphasis on power-sharing and collaboration to promote good
governance.

Q5.Judicial Perspectives on Indian Federalism

The Indian Constitution provides a framework that blends federalism with strong unitary features,
creating a system that allows for both the autonomy of the states and central control in matters of
national importance. The judiciary plays a central role in interpreting the Constitution and resolving
conflicts between the Union and the States, often taking a stand that reflects the evolving nature of
Indian federalism.

1. Constitutional Structure of Indian Federalism

The Constitution does not use the term "federalism" explicitly, but the division of powers between the
Union and States in the Seventh Schedule reflects a federal structure. The powers are divided into:
 Union List (List I): Subjects on which only the Union Government can legislate.
  State List (List II): Subjects on which only State Governments can legislate.
 Concurrent List (List III): Subjects on which both Union and States can legislate, but Union law
prevails in case of conflict (Article 254).
However, Articles like Article 1 (describing India as a Union of States) and provisions like Article 356
(imposing President’s Rule) show the unitary character of the Indian system, where the Centre has
overriding powers. The judiciary plays a critical role in interpreting these provisions to ensure that the
balance of power is maintained, thus safeguarding the federal structure.

2. Judicial Role in Defining Indian Federalism

The Indian judiciary has been instrumental in shaping federalism by interpreting the Constitution and
ensuring a balance of power between the Centre and the States. The Supreme Court is often called upon
to resolve conflicts and offer interpretations that impact the federal structure.
A. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)
This landmark case established the Basic Structure Doctrine, which holds that certain fundamental
principles of the Constitution, such as federalism, cannot be altered even by constitutional amendments.
In this case, the Supreme Court emphasized that federalism is part of the basic structure of the Indian
Constitution and cannot be dismantled by the Parliament through amendments. This case solidified the
idea that the Constitution’s federal nature must be preserved and maintained.
B. S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994)
In this case, the Supreme Court dealt with the issue of the misuse of Article 356 (President's Rule) by the
Union to dismiss state governments. The Court ruled that the President’s Rule should be subject to
judicial review to ensure it is not used arbitrarily. The ruling strengthened state autonomy, stating that
President’s Rule cannot be imposed unless there is objective material evidence of a breakdown of
constitutional machinery. This decision highlighted the federal balance, restricting the Union’s power
over the States.

3. Evolving Judicial Trends and Federalism in India

In more recent cases, the judiciary has adopted a more flexible approach to Indian federalism, stressing
the importance of cooperative federalism, where both the Centre and the States are encouraged to
work together, especially in governance and economic matters.
Government of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India (2018 & 2023)
This case involved the issue of governance in Delhi, where the Supreme Court held that the Delhi
government has executive control over the Delhi Police, and the Centre’s powers must be limited to its
role. The Court reinforced the idea of state autonomy in matters concerning local administration,
limiting the Union’s interference in Delhi’s legislative functions. This case illustrated a growing trend
towards ensuring that the federal structure respects state powers in areas of local governance.
GST Council Cases (2016 - onwards)
In the cases involving the Goods and Services Tax (GST), the judiciary highlighted the importance of
cooperative federalism, where the GST Council was formed as a constitutional body to foster dialogue
between the Union and States on indirect tax matters. The Supreme Court underscored the importance
of consultation and cooperation in implementing national tax policies that impact both levels of
government. These decisions emphasized the evolving nature of Indian federalism as one that adapts to
modern needs while ensuring that the Union and States collaborate for effective governance.

Conclusion
The Indian judiciary has consistently played an essential role in defining and protecting the federal
structure. Through its judgments, it has ensured that both the Union and States function within their
constitutional limits, balancing state autonomy with central authority. Over time, judicial interpretations
have reflected the flexibility of Indian federalism, moving towards a model of cooperative federalism
that fosters collaboration between the Union and States, which is crucial for the country’s democratic
and administrative stability.

Q6. Cooperative Federalism in India

ANS- Cooperative federalism refers to the collaboration and coordination between the Union and State
governments to achieve common objectives and resolve issues that affect the entire country. In contrast
to competitive federalism, where each level of government may act independently, cooperative
federalism emphasizes joint action and mutual consultation in decision-making processes.
In India, cooperative federalism is not only a constitutional concept but a practical necessity, especially
given the country's diverse socio-economic conditions, its complex federal structure, and the need to
address both local and national challenges effectively. The Indian federal system has evolved in a way
that emphasizes the need for the Centre and States to work together, particularly in matters where
national integration, economic development, and governance are concerned.

1. Constitutional Basis of Cooperative Federalism

Although the Constitution of India primarily outlines a unitary federal structure, it also fosters
cooperative relationships between the Union and States through various provisions:
 Article 263: It allows the President to establish inter-state councils to resolve disputes and
promote cooperation between States and the Centre. This promotes dialogue and coordination
in matters of national importance.
 Article 280: This article provides for the establishment of the Finance Commission, which
ensures a fair distribution of financial resources between the Centre and States, based on the
principles of equity and proportionality.
 Article 246 and the Seventh Schedule: The division of subjects between the Union and the
States in the Union List, State List, and Concurrent List requires cooperation, particularly in areas
listed in the Concurrent List, where both the Union and the States can legislate.

2. Key Features of Cooperative Federalism in India

 Inter-Governmental Dialogue: One of the core features of cooperative federalism in India is the
intergovernmental dialogue fostered through institutions like the Inter-State Council (Article
263) and Finance Commission (Article 280). These bodies provide a platform for both the Union
and State governments to discuss, negotiate, and resolve issues of national importance,
including resource allocation, taxation, and development.
 Centralization with Cooperation: While the Constitution has unitary provisions such as Article
356 (President’s Rule), it also requires that the Union and States cooperate on key national
matters, like the coordinated implementation of national policies (such as the Goods and
Services Tax (GST) or environmental regulations).
 Role of the Union Government: The Union government plays a pivotal role in shaping policy,
particularly in economic matters, through policy coordination and administrative guidance.
However, it must do so in a manner that consults and respects the powers of States, particularly
on matters affecting their local governance.
 Financial Cooperation: Financial cooperation between the Union and States is a crucial aspect of
cooperative federalism. The Finance Commission regularly recommends the distribution of taxes
and grants to States based on factors like population, needs, and fiscal capacity. The GST Council
is another example where both Union and State representatives must come together to discuss
and decide on tax policies affecting the entire nation.
3. Judicial Interpretation of Cooperative Federalism
The judiciary in India has been instrumental in strengthening the concept of cooperative federalism
through its rulings, particularly in matters that require collaborative action between the Union and
States. Some important judicial pronouncements include:
A. S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994)
The Supreme Court in this case emphasized the importance of cooperative federalism and held that
Article 356 (President's Rule) should not be invoked arbitrarily by the Union to dismiss state
governments. The Court held that the Union should cooperate with States and that President’s Rule
should be subject to judicial review to prevent misuse of central powers. This judgment reinforced the
principle of federal balance and encouraged collaboration.
B. Union of India v. State of Tamil Nadu (2014)
In this case, the Supreme Court emphasized cooperation between the Union and the States for the
implementation of the National Food Security Act (NFSA). The Court noted that both the Union and
States must work together to ensure effective delivery of services, reflecting the cooperative nature of
India’s federal system.
C. GST Council Case (2017)
In the Goods and Services Tax case, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the GST
Council and emphasized that cooperative federalism is essential in the implementation of national
economic policies. The Court stated that the Union and States must collaborate to develop a cohesive
and uniform tax structure, which is crucial for the country's economic development.

4. Cooperative Federalism in Practice

In practice, cooperative federalism is visible in several key areas:
 Environmental Regulations: Both the Union and States have roles in framing and implementing
environmental laws, such as air and water pollution control, where central guidance is necessary
but must be carried out with state-level cooperation.
 Disaster Management: Effective disaster management, especially in times of natural calamities,
requires close coordination between the Union and State governments, as seen during the
COVID-19 pandemic, where the Centre and States collaborated on policies related to health,
lockdowns, and vaccines.
 Economic Development and Infrastructure: Large infrastructure projects often require
cooperation between the Union, States, and local governments, such as in the case of smart
cities, highways, and power distribution.

Conclusion
Cooperative federalism in India is essential for maintaining a balance between Union control and State
autonomy while promoting nation-building. Although the Indian Constitution reflects a centralizing
tendency, it also facilitates cooperation, collaboration, and consultation between the Centre and States
in matters of national and regional importance. The role of the judiciary, through landmark judgments,
has helped define the contours of cooperative federalism, ensuring that both levels of government
function as partners rather than adversaries.

Q7. The Doctrine of Territorial Nexus

The Doctrine of Territorial Nexus is an important principle under Indian federalism that deals with the
Union's power to legislate on matters in the State List when there is a territorial connection between the
subject matter of legislation and the Union’s jurisdiction. This doctrine allows the Union Government to
enact laws affecting the territory of a state, even if the subject of legislation falls under the State List.
Concept and Origin:
The doctrine emerged from the Indian Constitution, specifically Article 245, which provides for
legislative competence. It grants the Union Parliament power to make laws for the whole of India or any
part of it, while State Legislatures can make laws for their respective states. However, the Territorial
Nexus Doctrine extends the Union’s legislative competence beyond merely Union List subjects by
allowing it to legislate on State List subjects if there is a territorial connection.
The doctrine was first formally established in the case of State of Bihar v. Union of India (1952), where
the Supreme Court held that the Union could legislate on matters of state jurisdiction if the matter had a
territorial nexus with Union Territory or affected inter-state commerce, trade, or other Union interests.
Application:
The territorial nexus allows the Union Government to pass laws on issues that would typically be within
the State List when the issue affects the Union or other states. For example:
 Trade and Commerce: The Union Parliament may regulate trade and commerce between states
(which may involve State List subjects) because of the territorial nexus of inter-state commerce.
 Union Territories: The Union can also legislate on matters that primarily affect Union Territories
but may have a spillover effect on other states.
Case Laws:
1. State of Bihar v. Union of India (1952): The Supreme Court ruled that the Union Government
could legislate on matters of the State List if the subject matter of the legislation had a territorial
nexus with Union Territory or affected national interest.
2. Union of India v. H.S. Dhillon (1972): The court further expanded the doctrine, stating that even
when a law affects a State List subject, if the matter has a territorial connection with the Union
or concerns inter-state commerce, the Union can exercise legislative powers.
Significance:
 Union-State Relations: The doctrine provides a mechanism to balance the powers of the Union
and States, ensuring that national interests are maintained even in areas that may be primarily
the domain of the States.
 Flexibility in Legislation: It allows the Union Parliament to legislate effectively in situations
where national issues affect the States, facilitating a unified response to such matters.
Conclusion:
The Doctrine of Territorial Nexus is a vital concept in Indian federalism, allowing the Union Government
to legislate on certain matters in the State List based on a territorial connection. It strengthens the
federal structure by ensuring national interests can be safeguarded while maintaining the division of
powers between the Union and the States. The doctrine thus upholds the dynamic nature of federalism
in India, adapting to practical needs while preserving the essence of the Constitution.

Q8.Scheme of Distribution of Legislative Powers between Union and States

The scheme of distribution of legislative powers between the Union and the States is a foundational
principle of Indian federalism. This division ensures that both the Union and the States have their
respective areas of legislative jurisdiction, as defined by the Seventh Schedule of the Indian Constitution.
It aims to create a balance of power, allowing both levels of government to operate independently in
their designated domains while also ensuring the supremacy of the Union in certain crucial matters.
Constitutional Framework:
The Seventh Schedule of the Indian Constitution sets out the framework for the distribution of
legislative powers. The Schedule contains three lists:
 1. Union List (List I):
This list contains subjects on which only the Union Parliament can legislate. These are matters of
national importance and concern, such as defense, foreign affairs, banking, communications,
and currency. The Union has exclusive authority over these subjects, ensuring a uniform policy
across the country.
2. State List (List II):
This list includes subjects on which only the State Legislatures can legislate. These are matters
that directly affect the daily lives of people in a specific state, such as police, public health,
education, agriculture, and local government. States have exclusive jurisdiction over these
matters, allowing them to cater to their local needs and circumstances.
3. Concurrent List (List III):
The subjects in this list can be legislated by both the Union Parliament and the State
Legislatures. However, in case of a conflict, the Union law prevails. The subjects here include
areas such as criminal law, marriage and divorce, education, and trade unions. The concurrent
jurisdiction allows both levels of government to legislate on overlapping issues, but Union law
takes precedence in case of inconsistency.
Articles Related to Distribution:
 Article 245: This article provides the territorial jurisdiction of the laws made by the Union and
the States. It specifies that the Union can make laws for the whole of India or any part of it,
while the States can only make laws for their respective territories.
 Article 246: This article enumerates the legislative powers of the Union and the States with
reference to the Union, State, and Concurrent Lists. It gives the Union Parliament exclusive
authority over the Union List, while the States can legislate on the State List.
 Article 248: This article deals with residuary powers, meaning that any matter not covered in the
three lists falls under the Union's jurisdiction. The Union Parliament has the power to legislate
on any subject that is not included in the Union or State Lists.
Exceptions and Special Provisions:
1. Parliament's Power over State List:
Under Article 249, Parliament can legislate on a subject in the State List if the Rajya Sabha
passes a resolution stating that it is in the national interest to do so. Additionally, under Article
252, Parliament can legislate on State List subjects if two or more states request it.
2. Governor's Role:
Under Article 213, the Governor of a State can promulgate ordinances on subjects in the State
List when the Legislature is not in session, provided the ordinance is ratified by the Legislature
within six weeks.
Interplay Between Union and State Laws:
The interaction between Union and State laws often leads to questions of conflict and supremacy. While
the Constitution provides a clear scheme, it also acknowledges that in certain cases, Union laws will
override state laws:
 Article 254: If there is a conflict between a Union law and a State law on the same subject in the
Concurrent List, the Union law prevails. However, if the State law has received the President’s
assent, it will prevail over the Union law.
Significance:
 Ensuring Autonomy: The distribution of powers ensures that States have control over matters of
local importance, allowing them to address regional needs and preferences.
 Uniformity and National Interest: The Union List ensures that certain matters of national
importance, such as defense and foreign policy, are uniformly regulated across all states,
preventing fragmentation.
  Flexibility and Cooperation: The Concurrent List allows both levels of government to legislate
on matters of mutual interest, promoting cooperation and flexibility in governance.
Conclusion:
The scheme of distribution of legislative powers between the Union and the States under the Indian
Constitution reflects a carefully balanced federal system that seeks to accommodate the needs of both
national unity and state autonomy. While the Union holds supreme authority on matters of national
importance, the States retain the power to legislate on matters that directly affect their local concerns.
The Concurrent List ensures that both governments can act together on overlapping issues, promoting
cooperative federalism. This framework of distribution is essential in ensuring a harmonious relationship
between the Union and the States in India's federal structure.

Q9.Parliament’s Power to Legislate on the State List

ANS- The Indian Constitution outlines a federal structure of governance where legislative powers are
divided between the Union and the States. The Seventh Schedule of the Constitution details this
distribution, with the Union List (List I) granting exclusive legislative powers to Parliament, the State List
(List II) granting exclusive powers to State Legislatures, and the Concurrent List (List III) allowing both to
legislate on shared matters. However, Parliament can legislate on matters within the State List under
specific circumstances, overriding the general principle of state autonomy.
Legal Framework for Parliamentary Power over the State List
1. Article 249 – Power to legislate on State List in National Interest:
Under Article 249, Parliament can legislate on a matter in the State List if the Rajya Sabha passes
a resolution by a resolution of resolution by a resolution of resolution by a special majority (i.e.,
at least two-thirds of members present and voting) declaring that it is necessary for national
interest. This empowers Parliament to legislate on matters which are otherwise within the
exclusive jurisdiction of the States, but only in cases of national importance. Examples include
issues like protection of natural resources or interstate trade and commerce that require
uniformity across the country.
2. Article 250 – Legislation During National Emergency:
In times of a national emergency (under Article 352), Parliament gains the authority to legislate
on any matter in the State List. The power to legislate on State List matters is temporarily
extended to Parliament, thereby overriding the federal balance during emergencies. This
provision allows the Union to take charge of critical areas like law and order, communications,
and resource management during national crises.
3. Article 252 – Legislation at the Request of States:
Under Article 252, Parliament can legislate on matters in the State List if two or more States pass
a resolution requesting such legislation. This provision is an example of cooperative federalism,
where states collaborate with the Union for uniformity on certain issues. Once Parliament
enacts such a law, it applies only to the requesting States, unless other States also opt to adopt
the law later.
4. Article 253 – Implementation of International Treaties:
Parliament may legislate on any matter in the State List under Article 253 to implement an
international treaty, agreement, or convention. This ensures that India's obligations under
international law can be fulfilled, regardless of whether the subject matter lies within the State
List. For instance, legislation on environmental protection may be required to comply with
international agreements like the Paris Agreement on climate change.
5. Article 368 – Constitutional Amendment:
Article 368 gives Parliament the power to amend the Constitution, which includes altering the
division of legislative powers between the Union and the States. Such an amendment can
 expand or limit the Union's power over State List subjects. In this way, Parliament can extend its
legislative authority into areas that were originally intended to remain within the States’
jurisdiction, though such amendments require a special procedure.
Impact on Indian Federalism
While the Constitution sets out a balance of power between the Union and the States, these provisions
demonstrate that Parliament has the authority to intrude into State matters under specific conditions.
This creates a flexible federal system, where the Union has overriding power in cases of national
importance, emergencies, or international obligations. However, it also limits the States' autonomy to
some extent, especially in cases where their legislative independence can be curtailed by Parliament's
superior power.
Case Laws on Parliament’s Power to Legislate on State List:
1. State of Rajasthan v. Union of India (1977): In this case, the Supreme Court clarified that the
Union can legislate on the State List if the conditions of Article 249 (i.e., the passage of a
resolution by the Rajya Sabha) are met. The Court also held that the Union's power under this
provision is not limited to specific subject matters but can extend to any area within the State
List as long as the resolution is passed.
2. S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994): This landmark judgment emphasized the cooperative
nature of federalism in India. The Court ruled that while Parliament can legislate on the State
List during a national emergency, such powers should be exercised in a manner that maintains
the balance between the Union and the States. The Court asserted that the Union should avoid
overstepping its boundaries and undermining the autonomy of States.
Conclusion
The Parliament's power to legislate on the State List is a crucial feature of Indian federalism. It reflects
the flexibility of the federal system, ensuring that the Union can take charge of national matters,
particularly in cases where uniformity or national interest is at stake. However, this power is exercised
under well-defined provisions and conditions, with the aim of balancing state autonomy and national
cohesion.

Q10.Inconsistency Between Laws Passed by Parliament and State Legislature, and Distribution of
Executive Powers
ANS- The Indian Constitution provides a complex system of federalism where legislative and executive
powers are distributed between the Union and the States. Sometimes, conflicts arise between laws
passed by the Parliament (Union Legislature) and the State Legislature. Additionally, the distribution of
executive powers between the Union and the States often leads to questions of jurisdiction and
authority.
Inconsistency Between Laws Passed by Parliament and State Legislatures
1. Concurrent List and Inconsistency:
Under the Seventh Schedule of the Indian Constitution, the Concurrent List (List III) contains
matters on which both the Union and the States can legislate. However, when there is an
inconsistency between a law made by Parliament and one made by a State Legislature on a
matter in the Concurrent List, Article 254 of the Constitution governs the situation.
o Article 254(1): If a law made by a State Legislature is inconsistent with a law made by
Parliament, the Union law prevails. The State law becomes void to the extent of the
inconsistency. This provision ensures uniformity in matters of national importance, as
Union laws are considered paramount in case of conflict.
o Article 254(2): If the State law has received President's assent, then the State law can
prevail over the Union law, even in the case of inconsistency. This provision gives the
 States some autonomy, allowing them to pass laws that can take precedence over Union
laws if the President approves.
Example:
In the case of R. v. Union of India (1981), the Supreme Court held that in case of a conflict between a
Union law and a State law under the Concurrent List, the Union law will take precedence unless the
President specifically assents to the State law.
2. Overlapping Jurisdictions:
The Union and States have distinct areas of power through their respective lists (Union, State,
and Concurrent Lists). However, there can be overlaps where the laws passed by the Parliament
and the State legislature may have conflicting provisions on the same subject. This can lead to
confusion about which law is to be followed.
Distribution of Executive Powers
1. Article 73 – Executive Power of the Union:
Under Article 73, the executive power of the Union extends to matters on which Parliament has
the power to legislate. In other words, the Union has the authority to execute laws made by
Parliament and to make any executive decisions necessary for the enforcement of those laws.
The executive power of the Union is extensive and can be used for all matters in the Union List
and Concurrent List.
Example: The Union Government can issue directives to enforce laws or take decisions in national
matters such as defense, foreign affairs, or matters involving interstate cooperation.
2. Article 162 – Executive Power of the States:
Similarly, Article 162 grants the States the executive power to implement laws made by their
respective Legislatures. The States also have the power to take decisions and issue orders on
matters that are under their jurisdiction as per the State List or Concurrent List, but only to the
extent of the subject matter falling within their domain.
Example: States can pass and enforce laws relating to matters such as agriculture, health, and local
governance, which are typically under their control.
3. Conflict between Executive Powers:
Sometimes, conflicts arise when there is a need for both the Union and States to act on the
same matter, especially in the Concurrent List. In such cases, the Union may have superior
executive power in case the matter falls under national interest or if the law passed by
Parliament is inconsistent with the State law. This can result in situations where Union laws
override or take precedence over State laws, leading to a centralization of authority.
4. Article 256 – Obligation of States to Implement Union Laws:
Article 256 states that all States are obligated to implement laws passed by Parliament and
adhere to Union directives. If a State fails to do so, the Union Government can take necessary
actions to enforce these laws, which reinforces the supremacy of the Union in matters of
national importance.
Example: If a State fails to implement a national law on taxation or criminal procedures, the Union
Government can intervene and take over enforcement to maintain uniformity.
Conclusion
In the context of Indian federalism, inconsistencies between the laws made by Parliament and State
Legislatures are resolved primarily by the Union Law prevailing in cases of conflict, unless the President
assents to the State law. The distribution of executive powers between the Union and States is also
defined by specific Articles, with the Union holding supreme executive power in certain areas, especially
during conflicts or national emergencies. While this framework maintains cooperative federalism, it also
ensures centralized authority in cases where uniformity or national interest is at stake.
Q11.Inter-Governmental Delegation of Powers
ANS- The concept of inter-governmental delegation of powers refers to the transfer or delegation of
specific powers or functions between different levels of government—particularly between the Union
and the State Governments under the Indian federal structure. This delegation can occur for various
administrative, functional, or operational purposes, and it is crucial for the smooth functioning of federal
governance.
The Indian Constitution allows for inter-governmental delegation of powers in certain contexts, enabling
one level of government (either Union or State) to delegate its powers or functions to another level. This
ensures effective governance, especially in areas where the expertise or resources of one level of
government may be more appropriate than the other.
Legal Framework for Delegation of Powers
1. Article 256:
Article 256 mandates that the States must implement the laws made by Parliament and take
necessary steps for the enforcement of Union laws. It also empowers the Union Government to
issue directions to the States in matters related to the implementation of laws. While this is not
strictly a delegation of powers, it can be considered a form of executive delegation, where the
Union directs the States on how to execute Union laws.
2. Article 257:
Article 257 provides that the Union Government may, if necessary, issue directions to the States
for the governance of certain matters, particularly when the Union is concerned with the
implementation of its laws. These directions may pertain to the maintenance of public order,
cooperation in enforcement of laws, or ensuring the compliance of State authorities with Union
mandates.
3. Delegation of Legislative Powers (Article 245):
Article 245 empowers Parliament to make laws for the whole or any part of India, and it allows
Parliament to delegate certain legislative functions to subordinate authorities. This includes
matters that may be delegated to the States by Parliament for better administration. This
delegation could involve enabling States to enact laws on specific subjects within the Concurrent
List under the supervision or framework provided by the Union.
4. Delegation of Executive Powers:
The Union may delegate certain executive functions to the States or vice versa. For example, in
areas like local governance, police administration, or tax collection, the State Government often
carries out functions on behalf of the Union Government, especially in areas like administration
of central laws. This form of delegation ensures that local governments have the capacity to
implement national policies effectively.
o Example: Under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime, both the Union and the
States delegate responsibilities for administration, collection, and compliance
enforcement, which requires cooperation between the Union and State taxation
authorities.
5. Delegation in Matters of National Concern:
In times of national emergency or when dealing with matters that have national significance
(such as war, defense, or foreign affairs), the Union Government may delegate certain powers to
the States to ensure smooth coordination and management. In such cases, centralization of
executive powers temporarily takes place, and some State authorities act under the supervision
or direction of the Union.
6. Cooperative Federalism:
The delegation of powers is often part of the concept of cooperative federalism in India. Under
 this framework, both the Union and the States work together to implement national policies or
resolve issues that require joint action. For example, disaster management, environmental
regulations, or public health policies require inter-governmental cooperation, where the Union
and States may delegate or share responsibilities.
Case Law Example
State of West Bengal v. Union of India (1963)
In this case, the Supreme Court highlighted that the Union Government can delegate certain executive
functions to the States, especially in areas where the implementation of Union laws needs cooperation
from the States. The Court stressed that such delegation does not violate the Constitution as long as it is
consistent with the distribution of powers between the Union and States.
Conclusion
The inter-governmental delegation of powers in India facilitates efficient governance by allowing one
level of government (either Union or State) to transfer or share responsibilities with another. This
delegation is often vital for the implementation of laws, administration of policies, and the effective
functioning of governance across different levels. While such delegation is allowed under the
Constitution, it operates within the bounds set by the division of powers between the Union and the
States and is often shaped by the principles of cooperative federalism.

Q12.Centre’s Directive to State & Other Constitutional Provisions

ANS- In the Indian federal system, the Union Government (Centre) has the power to issue directions to
State Governments under certain constitutional provisions to ensure the proper functioning of
governance, maintain national interests, or ensure compliance with Union policies and laws. The
Constitution of India grants the Centre the authority to issue such directives, often in the context of
national concerns, emergency situations, or in matters of inter-governmental relations.
Key Constitutional Provisions Governing the Centre’s Directive to States
1. Article 256 - Obligation of States to Implement Laws:
Article 256 mandates that States must implement the laws made by Parliament. It emphasizes
the obligation of States to ensure that Union laws are effectively enforced. The Union
Government can issue directions to the States to implement laws passed by Parliament or to
take necessary measures to give effect to such laws. This provision ensures uniformity in the
application of laws across the country.
o Example: The Union may direct the States to adopt specific measures to implement
national education policies or environmental laws passed by Parliament.
2. Article 257 - Power of the Union to Issue Directions:
Article 257 allows the Union Government to issue directions to the State Governments for the
maintenance of national interests. These directions are generally related to the administration
of laws and the governance of specific subjects. The Union can issue directions for the
maintenance of law and order, fiscal measures, or any matter where the States may not be
acting in the Union’s best interest.
o Example: The Union Government can direct a State to take steps to implement
national security measures or to follow certain policies for the maintenance of public
order.
3. Article 258 - Power of the Union to Delegate Executive Functions:
Article 258 provides that the Union Government may, by an agreement with the States,
delegate its executive functions to a State. This provision allows the Centre to share or delegate
certain executive powers to the States for effective governance. However, the delegation is
subject to the terms and conditions set by the Centre.
 o Example: The Centre may delegate the administration of a specific Union law to a
State, provided there is an agreement between both levels of government.
4. Article 355 - Duty of the Union to Protect States:
Article 355 imposes a duty on the Union Government to protect the States from external
aggression and internal disturbances. If a State fails to maintain order or faces internal
instability, the Centre can take direct action to restore normalcy, often through the deployment
of Central Forces or other forms of intervention. This article also provides the Union with the
authority to issue directives to restore order and security.
o Example: In times of communal violence or insurgency, the Centre may issue
directives for the deployment of Central Armed Police Forces or the imposition of
President's Rule (Article 356).
5. Article 356 - President’s Rule (Dissolution of State Government):
Article 356 allows the President of India to impose President's Rule in any State if the President
believes that the governance of that State cannot be carried out in accordance with the
provisions of the Constitution. This effectively means that the State Government is dissolved,
and the Union Government takes over the administration of the State.
o Example: In situations where the elected State Government fails to comply with
constitutional provisions or the State Assembly is unable to function, the President
can invoke Article 356 and direct the Union Government to administer the State.
6. Article 365 - Failure to Comply with Directions of the Union:
Article 365 deals with the situation where a State fails to comply with the directions issued by
the Union Government under the Constitution. If the Union believes that a State is not
complying with its constitutional duties or directives, the Union may take the matter before the
President. If the President is satisfied, he may declare that the State Government cannot
function in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution, leading to the imposition of
President's Rule under Article 356.
o Example: If a State refuses to implement a Union law, the Centre can invoke Article
365 and potentially recommend the imposition of President’s Rule.
Case Law Examples
1. S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994)
The Supreme Court held that the President's Rule (imposition of Central control in a State under
Article 356) should not be used arbitrarily. It emphasized that such a power should be exercised
with utmost caution and only when necessary, ensuring that it is not misused for political
purposes. The Court stressed that the President’s Rule could be challenged in the courts if it was
found to be unconstitutional or lacking justification.
2. Union of India v. State of Rajasthan (1977)
The Supreme Court clarified that under Article 257, the Union has the authority to issue
directives to the State, particularly when the State is unable to act in matters of national
importance. The Court held that the Union's directive is legally binding, provided it is issued
within the constitutional framework.
Conclusion
The Centre's directive power over the States under various constitutional provisions ensures the unity
and integrity of the country, especially in matters of national importance. These provisions enable the
Union Government to issue directions for the implementation of Union laws, the maintenance of law
and order, and securing the national interest. However, the use of such powers is often subject to
judicial review, especially in matters relating to the imposition of President’s Rule or the delegation of
executive functions. The overarching principle behind these provisions is to balance federal autonomy
with the need for a unified governance structure in critical situations.