Comprehension
The constitutional validity of the West Bengal Housing Industry Regulation Act, 2017 (WB-HIRA) was challenged on the basis that both WB-HIRA and a Parliamentary enactment, namely, the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA) are relatable to the legislative subjects contained in Entries 6 and 7 of List III (Concurrent List) of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India. WB-HIRA has neither been reserved for nor has it received Presidential assent under Article 254(2) of the Constitution of India, which was necessary since it was going to occupy the same field as the RERA, a law which had been enacted by the Parliament.
The State enactment contains certain provisions which are either directly inconsistent with the corresponding provisions of the Central enactment, or a virtual replica of the Central enactment; and Parliament having legislated on a field covered by the Concurrent List, it is constitutionally impermissible for the State Legislature to enact a law over the same subject matter by setting up a parallel legislation. The analysis indicates repugnancy between WB-HIRA and RERA. Undoubtedly, as Article 254(1) postulates, the legislation enacted by the State legislature is void “to the extent of the repugnancy”.
There is not only a direct conflict of certain provisions between the RERA and WB-HIRA, but also a failure of the State legislature to incorporate statutory safeguards in WB-HIRA, which have been introduced in the RERA for protecting the interest of the purchasers of real estate. For repugnancy under Article 254 of the Constitution, there is a twin requirement to be fulfilled: firstly, there has to be a “repugnancy” between a Central and State Act; and secondly, the Presidential assent has to be held as being non-existent.
The test for determining such repugnancy is to find out the dominant intention of both the legislations and whether such dominant intentions of both the legislations are alike or different. A provision in one legislation, in order to give effect to its dominant purpose, may incidentally be on the same subject as covered by the provision of the other legislation; but such partial or incidental coverage of the same area in a different context and to achieve a different purpose does not attract the doctrine of repugnancy. In order to attract the doctrine of repugnancy, both the legislations must be substantially on the same subject. Hence, WB-HIRA is repugnant to the RERA, and is hence unconstitutional.
The State enactment contains certain provisions which are either directly inconsistent with the corresponding provisions of the Central enactment, or a virtual replica of the Central enactment; and Parliament having legislated on a field covered by the Concurrent List, it is constitutionally impermissible for the State Legislature to enact a law over the same subject matter by setting up a parallel legislation. The analysis indicates repugnancy between WB-HIRA and RERA. Undoubtedly, as Article 254(1) postulates, the legislation enacted by the State legislature is void “to the extent of the repugnancy”.
There is not only a direct conflict of certain provisions between the RERA and WB-HIRA, but also a failure of the State legislature to incorporate statutory safeguards in WB-HIRA, which have been introduced in the RERA for protecting the interest of the purchasers of real estate. For repugnancy under Article 254 of the Constitution, there is a twin requirement to be fulfilled: firstly, there has to be a “repugnancy” between a Central and State Act; and secondly, the Presidential assent has to be held as being non-existent.
The test for determining such repugnancy is to find out the dominant intention of both the legislations and whether such dominant intentions of both the legislations are alike or different. A provision in one legislation, in order to give effect to its dominant purpose, may incidentally be on the same subject as covered by the provision of the other legislation; but such partial or incidental coverage of the same area in a different context and to achieve a different purpose does not attract the doctrine of repugnancy. In order to attract the doctrine of repugnancy, both the legislations must be substantially on the same subject. Hence, WB-HIRA is repugnant to the RERA, and is hence unconstitutional.
Question: 1
Which of the following is not an element of the twin requirement test to determine repugnancy under Article 254 of the Constitution of India?
Which of the following is not an element of the twin requirement test to determine repugnancy under Article 254 of the Constitution of India?
Show Hint
The twin requirement for repugnancy under Article 254 involves only the existence of repugnancy and the absence of Presidential assent, not the procedural steps of reservation or assent themselves.
Updated On: Aug 17, 2025
- Repugnancy between the Central Act and State Act within the Concurrent List.
- State Act has been reserved for the consideration of the President.
- State Act has received accent of the President.
- Both (B) and (C).
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is D
Solution and Explanation
Step 1: Understanding Article 254 twin test.
Article 254(1) provides that if there is inconsistency between a Central and a State law on a subject in the Concurrent List, the Central law prevails and the State law is void to the extent of repugnancy.
Step 2: Twin requirement.
The two conditions for repugnancy are:
1. There must be repugnancy between a Central and a State law.
2. The Presidential assent for the State law must be non-existent (i.e., not obtained under Article 254(2)).
Step 3: Application to options.
Options (B) and (C) refer to “reserved for consideration” and “received assent” — these are not part of the definition of repugnancy itself but rather exceptions to it. Hence, both together are not elements of the twin test. \[ \boxed{\text{D}} \]
Article 254(1) provides that if there is inconsistency between a Central and a State law on a subject in the Concurrent List, the Central law prevails and the State law is void to the extent of repugnancy.
Step 2: Twin requirement.
The two conditions for repugnancy are:
1. There must be repugnancy between a Central and a State law.
2. The Presidential assent for the State law must be non-existent (i.e., not obtained under Article 254(2)).
Step 3: Application to options.
Options (B) and (C) refer to “reserved for consideration” and “received assent” — these are not part of the definition of repugnancy itself but rather exceptions to it. Hence, both together are not elements of the twin test. \[ \boxed{\text{D}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 2
Which of the following statements regarding Entry 7 of List III (Concurrent List) of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India is untrue?
Which of the following statements regarding Entry 7 of List III (Concurrent List) of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India is untrue?
Show Hint
Always check the Seventh Schedule lists — agricultural land is generally in the State List, not the Concurrent List.
Updated On: Aug 17, 2025
- Contract relating to carriage of goods falls under Entry 7 of the Concurrent List.
- Contract relating to agriculture land falls under Entry 7 of the Concurrent List.
- Contract relating to agency falls under Entry 7 of the Concurrent List.
- Contract relating to partnership falls under Entry 7 of the Concurrent List.
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is B
Solution and Explanation
Step 1: Understanding Entry 7 of List III.
Entry 7 of the Concurrent List covers matters such as contracts including those relating to partnership, agency, carriage of goods, and other specified commercial transactions.
Step 2: Application to options.
- (A), (C), and (D) are correct inclusions under Entry 7.
- (B) is incorrect — contracts relating to agricultural land are covered under the State List (List II), not Entry 7 of the Concurrent List. \[ \boxed{\text{B}} \]
Entry 7 of the Concurrent List covers matters such as contracts including those relating to partnership, agency, carriage of goods, and other specified commercial transactions.
Step 2: Application to options.
- (A), (C), and (D) are correct inclusions under Entry 7.
- (B) is incorrect — contracts relating to agricultural land are covered under the State List (List II), not Entry 7 of the Concurrent List. \[ \boxed{\text{B}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 3
Where the State legislature enacts an Act on a subject vested to State legislature by the Constitution of India, if incidentally, the provisions of such a State Act operates on a subject which is exclusively vested to the Parliament, such incidental coverage of the same area shall attract the test of:
Where the State legislature enacts an Act on a subject vested to State legislature by the Constitution of India, if incidentally, the provisions of such a State Act operates on a subject which is exclusively vested to the Parliament, such incidental coverage of the same area shall attract the test of:
Show Hint
The doctrine of pith and substance saves legislation if its core subject is within the legislature’s competence, even with incidental encroachment into another list.
Updated On: Aug 17, 2025
- Repugnancy
- Pith and substance
- Colourable legislation
- Superior legislation
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is B
Solution and Explanation
Step 1: Understanding the doctrine.
The doctrine of “pith and substance” is used to determine the true nature and character of legislation when a law appears to overlap into another list’s subject matter.
Step 2: Application in this scenario.
If the State law’s pith and substance falls within a State subject, it is valid, even if it incidentally touches upon a subject in the Union List.
Step 3: Why not other options.
- (A) Repugnancy applies to conflicts in Concurrent List subjects, not List I vs List II incidental overlaps.
- (C) Colourable legislation involves legislative fraud in enacting something indirectly that one cannot do directly.
- (D) “Superior legislation” is not a standard constitutional doctrine in this context.
\[ \boxed{\text{B}} \]
The doctrine of “pith and substance” is used to determine the true nature and character of legislation when a law appears to overlap into another list’s subject matter.
Step 2: Application in this scenario.
If the State law’s pith and substance falls within a State subject, it is valid, even if it incidentally touches upon a subject in the Union List.
Step 3: Why not other options.
- (A) Repugnancy applies to conflicts in Concurrent List subjects, not List I vs List II incidental overlaps.
- (C) Colourable legislation involves legislative fraud in enacting something indirectly that one cannot do directly.
- (D) “Superior legislation” is not a standard constitutional doctrine in this context.
\[ \boxed{\text{B}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 4
The word ‘assent’ used in Article 254 (2) of the Constitution of India means:
The word ‘assent’ used in Article 254 (2) of the Constitution of India means:
Show Hint
Presidential assent under Article 254(2) is not a mere formality — it is a conscious constitutional act enabling a State law to prevail despite Central law repugnancy.
Updated On: Aug 17, 2025
- A constitutional formality of obtaining consent of the President for promulgating a new Act.
- An express agreement of mind to what is proposed by the State Legislature by enacting a new law on the same subject on which the Central law already exists.
- An express agreement of mind to what is proposed by the State Legislature regarding repugnancy.
- Both (B) and (C).
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is D
Solution and Explanation
Step 1: Understanding Article 254(2).
Article 254(2) allows a State law on a Concurrent List subject to prevail over an inconsistent Central law in that State if it has received Presidential assent.
Step 2: Meaning of ‘assent’.
In constitutional usage, ‘assent’ here means an express agreement by the President to what is proposed by the State Legislature — particularly in cases where a new State law overlaps with an existing Central law or is repugnant to it.
Step 3: Application to options.
- (B) captures assent in terms of same-subject overlap.
- (C) captures assent in the context of resolving repugnancy.
Thus, both (B) and (C) together reflect the full meaning. \[ \boxed{\text{D}} \]
Article 254(2) allows a State law on a Concurrent List subject to prevail over an inconsistent Central law in that State if it has received Presidential assent.
Step 2: Meaning of ‘assent’.
In constitutional usage, ‘assent’ here means an express agreement by the President to what is proposed by the State Legislature — particularly in cases where a new State law overlaps with an existing Central law or is repugnant to it.
Step 3: Application to options.
- (B) captures assent in terms of same-subject overlap.
- (C) captures assent in the context of resolving repugnancy.
Thus, both (B) and (C) together reflect the full meaning. \[ \boxed{\text{D}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 5
Article 254 (2) of the Constitution of India applies to the matters enumerated in:
Article 254 (2) of the Constitution of India applies to the matters enumerated in:
Show Hint
Repugnancy issues under Article 254 arise only in the Concurrent List, where both Parliament and State Legislatures have law-making power.
Updated On: Aug 17, 2025
- The Union List
- The State List
- The Concurrent List
- The Union List and the State List
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is C
Solution and Explanation
Step 1: Scope of Article 254.
Article 254 applies only when there is repugnancy between Central and State laws on matters in the Concurrent List (List III).
Step 2: Why not Union or State List.
Union List subjects are exclusively Parliament’s domain — no scope for State-Central conflict. State List subjects are generally exclusive to States unless Parliament legislates under special powers (Articles 249–252), but such cases don’t invoke Article 254(2).
Step 3: Conclusion.
Therefore, Article 254(2) applies to Concurrent List subjects only. \[ \boxed{\text{C}} \]
Article 254 applies only when there is repugnancy between Central and State laws on matters in the Concurrent List (List III).
Step 2: Why not Union or State List.
Union List subjects are exclusively Parliament’s domain — no scope for State-Central conflict. State List subjects are generally exclusive to States unless Parliament legislates under special powers (Articles 249–252), but such cases don’t invoke Article 254(2).
Step 3: Conclusion.
Therefore, Article 254(2) applies to Concurrent List subjects only. \[ \boxed{\text{C}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 6
In case of inconsistency between a law made by Parliament and a law made by the Legislature of a State, the law made by the Legislature of the State shall:
In case of inconsistency between a law made by Parliament and a law made by the Legislature of a State, the law made by the Legislature of the State shall:
Show Hint
Repugnancy under Article 254 does not nullify an entire State law — only the inconsistent portions are void.
Updated On: Aug 17, 2025
- Completely be void.
- To the extent of the repugnancy, be void.
- At the discretion of the Parliament, be void.
- At the discretion of the Court, be void.
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is B
Solution and Explanation
Step 1: Article 254(1) rule.
Where a State law conflicts with a Central law on a Concurrent List subject, the Central law prevails and the State law is void only to the extent of the repugnancy.
Step 2: Meaning of “extent of the repugnancy”.
The part of the State law that is not inconsistent remains valid and enforceable. Only overlapping or conflicting provisions are struck down.
Step 3: Application to options.
Option (B) correctly reflects this constitutional limitation. Options (A), (C), and (D) misstate the rule or add non-existent discretion. \[ \boxed{\text{B}} \]
Where a State law conflicts with a Central law on a Concurrent List subject, the Central law prevails and the State law is void only to the extent of the repugnancy.
Step 2: Meaning of “extent of the repugnancy”.
The part of the State law that is not inconsistent remains valid and enforceable. Only overlapping or conflicting provisions are struck down.
Step 3: Application to options.
Option (B) correctly reflects this constitutional limitation. Options (A), (C), and (D) misstate the rule or add non-existent discretion. \[ \boxed{\text{B}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Top Questions on Constitutional Laws
- Which article of the Indian Constitution abolishes untouchability?
- CUET (PG) - 2025
- Mass Communication and Journalism
- Constitutional Laws
- Which part of the Indian Constitution deals with the Fundamental Rights?
- CUET (PG) - 2025
- Mass Communication and Journalism
- Constitutional Laws
- During which period was the 'Meri Mati Mera Desh' programme held?
- CUET (PG) - 2025
- Mass Communication and Journalism
- Constitutional Laws
Match List-I with List-II
- CUET (PG) - 2025
- LLM
- Constitutional Laws
- Identify the descending order in which the following sources of International law are mentioned in Article 38 (1) of the statute of International Court of Justice: (A) Judicial Decisions
(B) General Principles of International Law
(C) Treaties
(D) International Customs Choose the correct answer from the options given below:- CUET (PG) - 2025
- LLM
- Constitutional Laws
View More Questions
Questions Asked in CLAT PG exam
- The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘Nil Ratan Kundu and another v. Abhijit Kundu’ 2008(3) Apex Court Judgements 232 (SC), while granting the custody to the maternal grandparents observed: In our judgement, the law relating to custody of a child is fairly well settled and it is this. In deciding a difficult and complex question as to custody of minor, a Court of law should keep in mind relevant statutes and the rights flowing therefrom. But such cases cannot be decided solely by interpreting legal provisions. It is a humane problem in live in relationship and is required to be solved with human touch. A Court while dealing with custody cases, is neither bound by statutes nor by strict rules of evidence or procedure nor by precedents. In selecting proper guardian of a minor, the paramount consideration should be the welfare and well-being of the child. In selecting a guardian, the Court is exercising parens patriae jurisdiction and is expected, may bound, to give due weight to a child’s ordinary comfort, contentment, health, education, intellectual development and favorable surroundings. But over and above physical comforts, moral and ethical values cannot be ignored. They are equally, or we may say, even more important, essential and indispensable consideration. If the minor is old enough to form an intelligent preference or judgement, the Court must consider such preference as well, though the final decision should rest with the Court as to what is conducive to the welfare of the minor.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘Gaurav Nagpal v. Semedha Nagpal’-(2009)1 SCC 42, while giving paramount importance to the welfare of the child, which should include moral and ethical values, besides ethical well-being, observed as under:
When the court is confronted with conflicting demands made by the parents, each time it has to justify the demands. The Court has not only to look at the issue on legalistic basis, in such matters human angles are relevant for deciding those issues. The Court then does not give emphasis on what the parties say, it has to exercise a jurisdiction which is aimed at the welfare of the minor. As observed recently in Mausami Moitra Ganguli case, the Court has to give due weightage to the child’s ordinary contentment, health, education, intellectual development and favorable surroundings, but over and above physical comforts, the moral and ethical values have also to be noted. They are equal if not more important than the others.
(Extracts from Jaswinder Singh and Another vs Surjit Singh, AIR 2010 (NOC) 425 (P. & H.))- CLAT PG - 2025
- Family Laws
- The Companies Act, 2013 does not deal with insolvency and bankruptcy when the companies are unable to pay their debts or the aspects relating to the revival and rehabilitation of the companies and their winding up if revival and rehabilitation is not possible. In principle, it cannot be doubted that the cases of revival or winding up of the company on the ground of insolvency and inability to pay debts are different from cases where companies are wound up under Section 271 of the Companies Act, 2013. The two situations are not identical. Under Section 271 of the Companies Act, 2013, even a running and financially sound company can also be wound up for the reasons in clauses (a) to (e). The reasons and grounds for winding up under Section 271 of the Companies Act, 2013 are vastly different from the reasons and grounds for the revival and rehabilitation scheme as envisaged under the IBC. The two enactments deal with two distinct situations and in our opinion, they cannot be equated when we examine whether there is discrimination or violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. For the revival and rehabilitation of the companies, certain sacrifices are required from all quarters, including the workmen. In case of insolvent companies, for the sake of survival and regeneration, everyone, including the secured creditors and the Central and State Government, are required to make sacrifices. The workmen also have a stake and benefit from the revival of the company, and therefore unless it is found that the sacrifices envisaged for the workmen, which certainly form a separate class, are onerous and burdensome so as to be manifestly unjust and arbitrary, we will not set aside the legislation,solely on the ground that some or marginal sacrifice is to be made by the workers. We would also reject the argument that to find out whether there was a violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India or whether the right to life under Article 21 Constitution of India was infringed, we must word by word examine the waterfall mechanism envisaged under the Companies Act, 2013, where the company is wound up in terms of grounds (a) to (e) of Section 271 of the Companies Act, 2013; and the rights of the workmen when the insolvent company is sought to be revived, rehabilitated or wound up under the Code. The grounds and situations in the context of the objective and purpose of the two enactments are entirely different.
(Extracted, with edits and revision, from the judgement in Moser Baer Karamchari Union Thr. President Mahesh Chand Sharma v. Union of India and Ors, 2023 SCC Online SC 547)- CLAT PG - 2025
- Company Law
- The elements of tort of negligence consist in – (a) duty of care; (b) duty is owed to the plaintiff; (c) the duty has been carelessly breached. Negligence does not entail liability unless the exacts a duty in the given circumstances to observe care. Duty is an obligation recognised by law to avoid conduct fraught with unreasonable risk of damage to others. The question whether duty exists in a particular situation involves determination of law. Hence, three ingredients are necessary for the existence of a duty of care: (i) foreseeability of the damage, (ii) proximity of relationship between the parties; and (iii) whether it is “just, fair and reasonable” that the law should impose a duty of care. In Caparo Industries Plc. v. Dickman, 1990 2AC 605, the court held that breach of duty is concerned with the standard of care that ought to have been adopted in the circumstances and whether the defendant’s conduct fell below that standard i.e., whether he was careless.
The court while quoting Rajkot Municipal Corporation v. Manjulben Jayantilal Nakum, 1997 stated that as a tort, negligence consists of legal duty to take care and breach of that duty. Duty determines whether the type of loss suffered by the plaintiff in the particular way in which to occurred can ever be actionable. The division of negligence into duty, breach and consequent damage is convenient for the purpose of exposition but it can be confusing because the issues will often overlap. The process of determining a breach of duty involves three steps: First, it is necessary to ascertain the qualities of the reasonable person, given the qualities attributed to him, would have taken in the circumstances. The factors that are permissible to take into account in this regard are prescribed by law, but the amount of care that the reasonable person would have taken is a question of fact. Thirdly, it must be determined whether the defendant took less care than the reasonable person would have taken.
(Extracts from Managing Director, Kerala Tourism Development Corporation Limited v. Deepti Singh and Ors., 2019 SC)- CLAT PG - 2025
- Law of Torts
- Live-in relationship, as such, as already indicated, is a relationship which has not been socially accepted in India, unlike many other countries. In Lata Singh v. State of U.P. [(2006) 5 SCC 475: (2006) 2 SCC (Cri) 478] it was observed that a live-in relationship between two consenting adults of heterosexual sex does not amount to any offence even though it may be perceived as immoral. However, in order to provide a remedy in civil law for protection of women, from being victims of such relationship, and to prevent the occurrence of domestic violence in the society, first time in India, the DV Act has been enacted to cover the couple having relationship in the nature of marriage, persons related by consanguinity, marriages, etc. We have few other legislations also where reliefs have been provided to woman placed in certain vulnerable situations. Section 125 Cr.P.C. of course, provides for maintenance of a destitute wife and Section 498-A IPC is related to mental cruelty inflicted on women by her husband and in-laws. Section 304-B IPC deals with the cases relating to dowry death. The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 was enacted to deal with the cases of dowry demands by the husband and family members. The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 provides for grant of maintenance to a legally wedded Hindu wife, and also deals with rules for adoption. The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 refers to the provisions dealing with solemnisation of marriage also deals with the provisions for divorce. For the first time, though, the DV Act, Parliament has recognised a “relationship in the nature of marriage” and not a live-in relationship simpliciter. We have already stated, when we examine whether a relationship will fall within the expression “relationship in the nature of marriage” within the meaning of Section 2(f ) of the DV Act, we should have a close analysis of the entire relationship invariably, it may be a question of fact and degree, whether a relationship between two unrelated persons of the opposite sex meets the tests judicially evolved.
(This extract is taken from Indra Sarma v. V.K.V. Sarma, (2013) 15 SCC 755)- CLAT PG - 2025
- Family Laws
- The environmental rule of law, at a certain level, is a facet of the concept of the rule of law. But it includes specific features that are unique to environmental governance, features which are sui generis. The environmental rule of law seeks to create essential tools such as conceptual, procedural and institutional, to bring structure to the discourse on environmental protection. It does so to enhance our understanding of environmental challenges of how they have been shaped by humanity’s interface with nature in the past, how they continue to be affected by its engagement with nature in the present and the prospects for the future, if we were not to radically alter the course of destruction which humanity’s actions have charted.
The environmental rule of law seeks to facilitate a multi-disciplinary analysis of the nature and consequences of carbon footprints and in doing so it brings a shared understanding between science, regulatory decisions and policy perspectives in the field of environmental protection. It recognises that the “law” element in the environmental rule of law does not make the concept peculiarly the preserve of Lawyers and Judges. On the contrary, it seeks to draw within the fold all stakeholders in formulating strategies to deal with current challenges posed by environmental degradation, climate change and the destruction of habitats. The environmental rule of law seeks a unified understanding of these concepts. There are significant linkages between concepts such as sustainable development, the polluter pays principle etc. The universe of nature is indivisible and integrated. The state of the environment in one part of the earth affects and is fundamentally affected by what occurs in another part. Every element of the environment shares a symbiotic relationship with the others. It is this inseparable bond and connect which the environmental rule of law seeks to explore and understand in order to find solutions to the pressing problems which threaten the existence of humanity. The environmental rule of law is founded on the need to understand the consequences of our actions going beyond local, State and national boundaries. The rise in the oceans threatens not just maritime communities. The rise in temperatures, dilution of glaciers and growing desertification have consequences which go beyond the communities and creatures whose habitats are threatened. They affect the future survival of the entire eco-system. The environmental rule of law attempts to weave an understanding of the connections in the natural environment which make the issue of survival a unified challenge which confronts human societies everywhere.
(Extract from Pragnesh Shah v. Arunkumar Sharma (2022) 11 SCC 493 )- CLAT PG - 2025
- Environmental Law
View More Questions