Skip to content

CS Professional · Labour Laws and Practice · Constitution and Labour Laws

A State legislature enacts a labour welfare law on a Concurrent List subject that conflicts with an earlier Central law on the same subject. The State Bill was NOT reserved for the President's assent. Under Article 254(1), what is the position?

The Central law prevails and the State law is void only to the extent of the repugnancy. Article 254(1) gives Parliament's law supremacy on Concurrent List subjects, and the exception in Article 254(2) does not apply because the State Bill never received the President's assent.

  1. AThe State law prevails because labour is a State subject
  2. BThe Central law prevails and the State law is void to the extent of repugnancyCorrect
  3. CBoth laws operate equally and the employer may choose
  4. DThe State law is void in its entirety, even in non-conflicting parts

Explanation

Under Article 254(1), where a State law on a Concurrent subject is repugnant to a Parliamentary law, the Parliamentary law prevails and the State law is void only to the extent of repugnancy. Option D is wrong because only the conflicting part is void. The Article 254(2) exception needs the President's assent, which was not obtained here.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Constitution and Labour Laws shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Constitution and Labour LawsFree diagnostic mock

More Constitution and Labour Laws questions