Inconsistency between laws made by Parliament and laws made by the Legislatures of States

Article 231, Draft Constitution of India (1948)

(1) If any provision of a law made by the Legislature of a State is repugnant to any provision of a law made by Parliament which Parliament is competent to enact, or to any provision of any existing law regarding a matter with respect to which Parliament has power to make laws, then, subject to the provisions of clause (2) of this article, the law made by Parliament, whether passed before or after the law made by the Legislature of such State or, as the case may be, the existing law shall prevail and the law made by the Legislature of the State shall, to the extent of the repugnancy, be void.

(2) Where a law made by the Legislature of a State for the time being specified in Part I of the First Schedule with respect to one of the matters enumerated in the Concurrent List contains any provision repugnant to the provisions of an earlier law made by Parliament or any existing law with respect to that matter, then the law so made by the Legislature of such State shall, if it has been reserved for the consideration of the President and has received his assent, prevail:

Provided that nothing in this clause shall prevent Parliament from enacting at any time any law with respect to the same matter including a law adding to, amending, varying or repealing the law so made by the Legislature of the State.

Article 254, Constitution of India, 1950

(1) If any provision of a law made by the Legislature of a State is repugnant to any provision of a law made by Parliament which Parliament is competent to enact, or to any provision of an existing law with respect to one of the matters enumerated in the Concurrent List, then, subject to the provisions of clause (2), the law made by Parliament, whether passed before or after the law made by the Legislature of such State, or, as the case may be, the existing law, shall prevail and the law made by the Legislature of the State shall, to the extent of the repugnancy, be void.

⁠(2) Where a law made by the Legislature of a State specified in Part A or Part B of the First Schedule with respect to one of the matters enumerated in the Concurrent List contains any provision repugnant to the provisions of an earlier law made by Parliament or an existing law with respect to that matter, then, the law so made by the Legislature of such State shall, if it has been reserved for the consideration of the President and has received his assent, prevail in that State:

⁠Provided that nothing in this clause shall prevent Parliament from enacting at any time any law with respect to the same matter including a law adding to, amending, varying or repealing the law so made by the Legislature of the State.

Draft Article 231 (Article 254) was discussed on 13 June 1949. The Draft Article states what should be done if there is conflict or inconsistency between a State law and a Parliament law mentioned in the Concurrent List. When there is an inconsistency the Union law will override State law. There was no discussion on this Draft Article.

The Chairman of the Drafting Committee moved an amendment to add the words ‘or Part III’ after the words ‘Part I’ in the Draft Article. This amendment added other Indian states under the ambit of the Draft Article. This was done so that the Draft Article would apply to both Governor’s Provinces (Part I States) and other princely states (Part III States) uniformly. This amendment was adopted without any debate.

The Draft Article was adopted on 13 June 1949.

Subsequently, the Article was also amended by the Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act, 1956.