Hoechst Pharmaceuticals Ltd. And ... vs State Of Bihar And Others on 6 May, 1983
"67. Article 254 of the Constitution makes provision
first, as to what would happen in the case of conflict
between a Central and State law with regard to the
subjects enumerated in the Concurrent List, and
secondly, for resolving such conflict. Article 254(1)
enunciates the normal rule that in the event of a
conflict between a Union and a State law in the
concurrent field, the former prevails over the latter.
Clause (1) lays down that if a State law relating to a
concurrent subject is repugnant' to a Union law
relating to that subject, then, whether the Union law
is prior or later in time, the Union law will prevail and
the State law shall, to the extent of such repugnancy,
be void. To the general rule laid down in clause (1),
clause (2) engrafts an exception viz. that if the
President assents to a State law which has been
reserved for his consideration, it will prevail
notwithstanding its repugnancy to an earlier law of
the Union, both laws dealing with a concurrent
subject. In such a case, the Central Act, will give way
to the State Act only to the extent of inconsistency
between the two, and no more. In short, the result of
obtaining the assent of the President to a State Act
which is inconsistent with a previous Union law
relating to a concurrent subject would be that the
State Act will prevail in that State and override the
provisions of the Central Act in their applicability to
that State only. The predominance of the State law
may however be taken away if Parliament legislates
under the proviso to clause (2). The proviso to Article
254(2) empowers the Union Parliament to repeal or
amend a repugnant State law, either directly, or by
itself enacting a law repugnant to the state law with
the respect to the 'same matter'. Even though the
subsequent law made by Parliament does not
expressly repeal a State law, even then, the State law
28
Amol D. Nawale
::: Uploaded on - 15/03/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 30/03/2024 10:13:05 :::
SA.699.2012.doc
will become void as soon as the subsequent law of
Parliament creating repugnancy is made. A State law
would be repugnant to the Union law when there is
direct conflict between the two laws. Such
repugnancy may also arise where both laws operate
in the same field and the two cannot possibly stand
together."