Skip to content

CS Executive · Setting Up of Business, Industrial and Labour Laws · Constitution and Labour Laws

Karnataka passes a labour law on a Concurrent List subject that conflicts with a Central labour law already in force. The State Bill did not receive Presidential assent. What is the usual position?

The Central law prevails, and the State law is void to the extent of the repugnancy. Under Article 254(1), a conflicting State law on a Concurrent List subject yields to Parliament's law unless the State law received Presidential assent under Article 254(2), which did not happen here.

  1. AThe State law prevails because labour is a State matter
  2. BBoth laws apply equally in Karnataka
  3. CThe Central law prevails and the State law is void to the extent of repugnancyCorrect
  4. DThe State law prevails only for factories employing under 100 workers

Explanation

Under Article 254(1), where a State law on a Concurrent subject conflicts with a Parliamentary law, the Parliamentary law prevails and the State law is void to the extent of repugnancy. Under Article 254(2), a State law would prevail in that State only if it had received Presidential assent, which is absent 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