This document provides an overview of federalism as an aspect of constitutionalism in India. It discusses the key federal features of the Indian constitution, including the division of powers between the union and states. It outlines the legislative powers distributed between the union and states through the union list, state list, and concurrent list in the seventh schedule. It also discusses some of the principles for interpreting these lists, including the doctrines of colorable legislation and territorial nexus. The document serves as an introduction to federalism in India and the constitutional division of powers between the central and state governments.

1. KIIT LAW SCHOOL
KIIT UNIVERSITY
Bhubaneswar-751024
Federalism as an aspect of Constitutionalism
SUBMITTED TO Ms kyvalya Garikapati
Ms Aditi Singh
BY,
AKANKSHA VARMA
1583005
BALLB
4th
semester

2. ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This is to state that, I AKANKSHA VARMA of Roll no. 1583005 completed
my semester (fourth) project work for Interpretation of statutes on the topic
Federalism as an aspect of Constitutionalism
I hereby thank my teachers for supporting me throughout the work and
my friends for extending their support.

3. Contents
1. Introduction
2. Federal Features of the Indian Constitution
3.Relations between The Union and The States
3.1 Legislative Powers – Distribution b/w Union and
States.
A) Article 245 : Doctrine of Territorial Nexus
B) Article 246
4. Principles of Interpretations of the lists
A) Doctrine of Colorable Legislation
B) Principle of Pith and Substance
C) Principle of Harmonious Construction
5. Article 254 : Doctrine of Repungancy
6. Extraordinary legislative power of the Parliament
7 Executive powers between The Union and The States
8. Financial powers between The Union and The States

4. INTRODUCTION
Constitutionalism is "a complex of ideas elaborating the principle that the
authority of government derives from and is limited by a body of fundamental
law". A political organization is constitutional to the extent that it "contains
institutionalized mechanisms of power control for the protection of the interests
and liberties of the citizenry, including those that may be in the minority.
Constitutionalism’1
means limited government or limitation on government. It
is antithesis of arbitrary powers. Constitutionalism recognizes the need for
government with powers but at the same time insists that limitation be placed
on those powers. The antithesis of constitutionalism is despotism. A
government which goes beyond its limits loses its authority and legitimacy.
Therefore, to preserve the basic freedoms of the individual, and to maintain his
dignity and personality, the Constitution should be permeated with
‘Constitutionalism’; it should have some inbuilt restrictions on the powers
conferred by it on governmental organs.
Federalism is the mixed or compound mode of government, combining a
general government (the central or 'federal' government) with regional
governments (provincial, state, territorial or other sub/ unit governments) in a
single political system. Its distinctive feature, exemplified in the founding
example of modern federalism of the United States of America .
1
http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/article/constitutionalism-1699-1.html

5. Article 12
of the constitution declares that India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union
of States. Part XI of the Indian constitution defines the power distribution
between the federal government (the Centre or union) and
the States in India. This part is divided between legislative, administrative and
executive powers. The legislative section is divided into three lists: Union list,
States list and Concurrent list.
The constitutional powers devolved to each state are not the same. The state of
Jammu and Kashmir was accorded higher degree of federalism under Article
370 read with Appendix I {The Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir)
Order, 1954} of the Indian constitution.The Union Territories
of Delhi and Puducherry are accorded lesser degree of federalism under Article
239A and 239AA respectively and these territories are not included in the list of
states in Schedule I of the constitution. The other union territories are directly
governed by the union government.
2
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalism_in_India

6. Federal Features of the Indian Constitution
The main federal features of the Indian Constitution are as follows:
1. Written Constitution:
The Indian Constitution is a written document containing 395 Articles and 12
schedules, and therefore, fulfils this basic requirement of a federal government.
In fact, the Indian Constitution is the most elaborate Constitution of the world.
2. Supremacy of the Constitution:
India’s Constitution is also supreme and not the hand/ made of either the
Centre or of the States. If for any reason any organ of the State dares to violate
any provision of the Constitution, the courts of laws are there to ensure that
dignity of the Constitution is upheld at all costs.
3. Rigid Constitution:
The Indian Constitution is largely a rigid Constitution. All the provisions of the
Constitution concerning Union/ State relations can be amended only by the
joint actions of the State Legislatures and the Union Parliament. Such provisions
can be amended only if the amendment is passed by a two/ thirds majority of
the members present and voting in the Parliament (which must also constitute
the absolute majority of the total membership) and ratified by at least one/ half
of the States.
4. Division of Powers:

7. In a federation, there should be clear division of powers so that the units and
the centre are required to enact and legislate within their sphere of activity and
none violates its limits and tries to encroach upon the functions of others. This
requisite is evident in the Indian Constitution.
The Seventh Schedule contains three Legislative Lists which enumerate subjects
of administration, viz., Union, State and Concurrent Legislative Lists. The Union
List consisted of 97 subjects, the more important of which are defence, foreign
affairs, railways, posts and telegraphs, currency, etc.
The State List consisted of 66 subjects, including, inter/ alia public order, police,
administration of justice, public health, education, agriculture etc. The
Concurrent List embraced 47 subjects including criminal law, marriage, divorce,
bankruptcy, trade unions, electricity, economic and social planning, etc.
The Union Government enjoys exclusive power to legislate on the subjects
mentioned in the Union List. The State Governments have full authority to
legislate on the subjects of the State List under normal circumstances. And both
the Centre and the State can’t legislate on the subjects mentioned in the
Concurrent List, The residuary powers have been vested in the Central
Government.
5. Independent Judiciary:
In India, the Constitution has provided for a Supreme Court and every effort has
been made to see that the judiciary in India is independent and supreme. The
Supreme Court of India can declare a law as unconstitutional or ultra Vires, if it
contravenes any provisions of the Constitution. In order to ensure the
impartiality of the judiciary, our judges are not removable by the Executive and
their salaries cannot be curtailed by Parliament.
6. Bicameral Legislature:

8. A bicameral system is considered essential in a federation because it is in the
Upper House alone that the units can be given equal representation. The
Constitution of India also provides for a bicameral Legislature at the Centre
consisting of Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha.

9. Relations between The Union and The States
A. Legislative powers
The power of the states and the Centre are defined by the constitution and the
legislative powers are divided into three lists.
Union List3
Union List consists of 100 items. For ex : defence, armed forces, arms and
ammunition, atomic energy, foreign affairs, war and peace, citizenship,
extradition, railways, shipping and navigation, airways, posts and telegraphs,
telephones, wireless and broadcasting, currency, foreign trade, inter/ state
trade and commerce, banking, insurance, control of industries, regulation and
development of mines, elections, audit of Government accounts, constitution
and organisation of the Supreme Court, High Courts and union public service
commission, income tax, custom duties and export duties, duties of excise,
corporation tax, taxes on capital value of assets, estate duty.
State List
State List consists of 61 items. For ex maintaining law and order, police forces,
healthcare, transport, land policies, electricity in state, village administration,
etc. The state legislature has exclusive power to make laws on these subjects.
But in certain circumstances, the parliament can also make laws on subjects
3
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalism_in_India

10. mentioned in the State list, then the Council of States (Rajya Sabha) has to pass
a resolution with 2/3rd majority that it is expedient to legislate on this state list
in the national interest.
Though states have exclusive powers to legislate with regards to items on the
State list, articles 249, 250, 252, and 253 state situations in which the federal
government can legislate on these items.
Concurrent List
Concurrent List consists of 52 items. Uniformity is desirable but not essential
on items in this list: Marriage and divorce, transfer of property other than
agricultural land, education, contracts, bankruptcy and insolvency, trustees and
trusts, civil procedure, contempt of court, adulteration of foodstuffs, drugs and
poisons, economic and social planning, trade unions, labour welfare, electricity,
newspapers, books and printing press, stamp duties.
Residuary Subjects
The subjects that are not mentioned in any of the three lists are known as
residuary subjects. However, there are many provisions made in the
constitution out side these lists permitting parliament or state legislative
assembly to legislate. Excluding the provisions of the constitution out side these
lists per Article 245, the power to legislate on residuary subjects (not mentioned
any where in the constitution), rests with the parliament exclusively per Article
248. Parliament shall legislate on residuary subjects following the procedure per
Article 368 as constitutional amendments.
In case the above lists are to be expanded or amended, the legislation should be
done by the Parliament under its constituent power per Article 368 with
ratification by the majority of the states. Federalism is part of the basic structure
of the Indian constitution which cannot be altered or destroyed through

11. constitutional amendments under the constituent powers of the Parliament
without undergoing judicial review by the Supreme Court.

12. Legislative Powers – Distribution b/w Union
and States
The Federal system means division of power b/w Centre and States. The
Constitution being federal divides all powers (Legislative Powers, Financial and
Executive) b/w centre and states except judicial powers due to independence of
judiciary.
Article 245- Doctrine of Territorial Nexus
Article 2454
/ Extent of laws made by parliament and by the legislatures of
states/
1) Subject to the provisions of this constitution, Parliament may make laws for
the whole or any part of the territory of India,and the legislature of a state may
make laws for the whole or any part of the state.
2) No law made by parliament shall be deemed to be invalid on the ground that
it would have extra/ territorial operation.
Subject to the provisions of this constitution,this phrase means that the power
enjoyed by the parliament to make laws for the whole or any part of the
territory of India will be read in subject to other provisions of the constitution.In
4
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/574894/

13. other words, this power is not absolute. Other provisions like the distribution of
powers, fundamental rights and other provisions of the constitution as
interpreted by the courts.
“Extra/ territorial operation” – Law made to operate outside territorial limits
of India.
State laws would be void if it has extra territorial operation i.e., takes effect
outside the state. However,there is one exception to this general rule. A state
law of extra- territorial operation will be valid if there is sufficient nexus
between the object and the state. This is clarified by the case State of Bombay vs.
R.M.D.C.
The Doctrine of Territorial nexus can be invoked under the following
circumstances-
1. Whether a particular state has extra territorial operation.
2. If there is a territorial nexus between the subject matter of the Act and the
state making the law.
It signifies that the object to which the law applies need not be physically
located within the territorial boundaries of the state,but must have a sufficient
territorial connection with the state.
A state may levy a tax on a person, property ,object or transaction not only
when it is situated within its territorial limits,but also when it has a sufficient
and real territorial connection with it.
Parliament is empowered to make laws for extra territorial operation. It means
legislation or legal protection for any Indian resident and their property
anywhere in the world.

14. Cases:
1. State of Bombay v. RMDC5
FACTS :-
The Respondent was not residing in Bombay but he conducted
Competitions with prize money through a newspaper printed and published
from Banglore having a wide circulation in Bombay. All the essential activities
like filling up of the forms, entry fees etc for the competition took place in
Bombay. The state govt. sought to levy tax the respondent for carrying on
business in the state.
ISSUE :/ Whether respondent i.e the organizer of the competition, who was
outside the state of Bombay, could be validly taxed under the Act.
Judgement :- It was held that there existed a sufficient territorial nexus to
enable the Bombay Legislature to tax the respondent as all the activities which
the competitor is ordinarily expected to undertake took place mostly within
Bombay.
2. Case: Tata Iron & Steel Company vs. Bihar State6
The State of Bihar passed a Sales Tax Act for levy of sales tax.
ISSUE :/ whether the sale was concluded within the state or outside if the
goods were produced, found and manufactured in the state .
5
AIR 1957 SC 699
6
AIR 1958 SC 482

15. Judgement : The court held there was sufficient territorial nexus and upheld
the Act as valid. Whether there is sufficient nexus between the law and the
object sought to be taxed will depend upon the facts and circumstances of a
particular case.
It was pointed out that sufficiency of the territorial connection involved a
consideration of two elements/
a) the connection must be real and not illusory
b) the liability sought to be imposed must be pertinent to that
Connection.

16. Article 2467
: Subject-matter of laws made by parliament
and by the legislatures of states.
• Union List( list 1)/ Parliament has exclusive power to legislate with respect to
any of the matters enumerated in list 1 notwithstanding anything contained in
clauses (2) and (3).
• State list( list II)/ The state legislature has exclusive power to make laws with
respect to any of the matter enumerated in list II.( subject to clause 1 and II).
• Concurrent list (list III)/ Both parliament and the state legislature have
concurrent powers of legislation with respect to any of the matters enumerated
in this list.
Parliament has power to make laws with respect to any matter for any part of
the territory of India not included in a State notwithstanding that such matter is
a matter enumerated in the State List.
7
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/77052/

17. Explanation:
Notwithstanding anything contained…. ( the non obstante clause in art.246(1)
provides for predominance or supremacy of Union Legislature.This power is not
encumbered by anything contained in clauses 2 and 3 for these clauses
themselves are expressly limited and made subject to the non obstante clause
in art.246(1)
The words “notwithstanding anything contained in clauses 2 and 3, in article
246(1) and the words “subject to clause 1 and 2 in article 246(3) lay down the
principle of federal supremacy which means that in case of inevitable conflict
between Union and state powers, The Union Power as enumerated in list I shall
prevail over the State power as enumerated in lists II and III.And in case of
overlapping between lists II and III ,the former shall prevail.

18. PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION OF
LISTS
A. Principle of Colourable Legislation
The doctrine of colourability is the idea that when the legislature wants to
do something that it cannot do within the constraints of the constitution, it
colours the law with a substitute purpose which will still allow it to accomplish
its original goal.
Maxim: “Quando aliquid prohibetur ex directo, prohibetur et per obliqum”
which means what cannot be done directly cannot also be done indirectly.
The rule relates to the question of legislative competency to enact a law.
Colourable Legislation does not involve the question of bonafides or malfides. A
legislative transgression may be patent, manifest or direct or may be disguised,
covert or indirect. It is also applied to the fraud of Constitution.
In India ‘the doctrine of colorable legislation’ signifies only a limitation
of the law making power of the legislature. It comes into picture while the
legislature purporting to act within its power but in reality it has transgressed
those powers. So the doctrine becomes applicable whenever legislation seeks to
do in an indirect manner what it cannot do directly. If the impugned legislation
falls within the competence of legislature, the question of doing something
indirectly which cannot be done directly does not arise.
In our Constitution, this doctrine is usually applied to Article 246 which
has demarcated the Legislative competence of the Parliament and the State

19. Legislative Assemblies by outlining the different subjects under list I for the
Union, List II for the States and List III for the both as mentioned in the seventh
schedule.
This doctrine comes into play when a legislature does not possess the
power to make law upon a particular subject but nonetheless indirectly makes
one. By applying this principle the fate of the Impugned Legislation is decided.
Important Case Laws
Case 1: KC Gajapati v. State of Orissa8
Facts: The petitioners were the owners of estates. The Orissa state Legislature
enacted the “Orissa State Estates Abolition Act, 1952” whose primarily
purpose of the Act is to abolish all zamindary and other proprietary estates and
interests in the State of Orissa and after eliminating all the intermediaries, to
bring riots or the actual occupants of the lands in direct contact with the State
Government the compensation would be calculated at a certain number of
years purchase of the net annual income of the estate during the previous
agricultural year, that is to say, the year immediately preceding that in which the
date of vesting falls. The other sum payable as income/ tax in respect of any
other kind of income derived from the estate would also be included in the
deductions. The amount of compensation thus determined is payable in 30
annual equated installments commencing from the date of vesting and an
opinion is given to the State Government to make full payment at any time.
Issue
Whether “Orissa State Estates Abolition Act”, 1952 is a piece of colourable
legislation?
Legal Proposition
That the doctrine of colourable legislation does not involve any question
of bonafides or malafides on the part of the legislature. The whole doctrine
resolves itself into the question of competency of a particular legislature to
8
AIR 1953 SC 375

20. enact a particular law. If the legislature is competent to pass a particular law,
the motives which impelled it to act are really irrelevant9
. On the other hand, if
the legislature lacks competency, the question of motive does not arise at all.
Whether a statute is constitutional or not is thus always a question of power
“Malice or motive is beside the point, and it is not permissible to suggest
parliamentary incompetence on the score of malafides. A distinction, however,
exists between a legislature which is legally important like the British Parliament
and the laws promulgated by which could not be challenged on the ground of
incompetency, and a legislature which enjoys only a limited or a qualified
jurisdiction.
Judgment
The validity of this provision has been challenged on the ground that it is
a piece of colourable legislation which comes within the principle enunciated by
the majority of this court in the Bihar case10
. It is difficult to appreciate this
argument of the learned counsel. It is not a legislation on something which is
non/ existent or unrelated to facts. It cannot also be seriously contended that
what section 37 provides for, is not giving of compensation but of negativing the
right to compensation as the learned counsel seems to suggest. There is no
substance in this contention and we have no hesitation in overruling it. The
result is that all the points raised by the learned counsel for the appellants fail
and the appeals are dismissed. Having regard to some important constitutional
questions involved in these cases which needed clearing up, we direct that each
party should bear his own costs in these appeals. Appeal dismissed.
9
MP Jain, Indian Constitutional Law, Wadwa Nagpur, 5th
Ed., 537
10
State of Bihar vs. Maharaja Kameshwar Singh & ors, 1955 SCR 889

21. B. Principle of pith and substance
Pith means ‘true nature’ or essence of something and substance means
‘the most important or essential part of something’. The basic purpose of
this doctrine is to determine under which head of power or field i.e. under
which list (given in the seventh schedule) a given piece of legislation falls.
Union & State Legislatures are supreme within their respective fields.
They should not encroach into the field reserved to the other. If a law passed by
one trespasses upon the field assigned to the other—the Court by applying Pith
& Substance doctrine, resolve the difficulty &declare whether the legislature
concerned was competent to make the law.
If the pith & substance of law (i.e. the true object of the legislation)
relates to a matter within the competence of the legislature which enacted
it ,it should be held intra vires though the legislature might incidentally
trespass into matters not within its competence. The true character of the
legislation can be ascertained by having regard—to the enactment as a whole
/ / to its object – to the scope and effect of its provisions.
Case: State of Bombay vs. FN Balsara11
Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 which prohibited sale & possession of liquors
in the State, was challenged on the ground that it incidentally encroached upon
Imports & Exports of liquors across custom frontier a Central subject. It was
contended that the prohibition, purchase, use, possession and sale of liquor will
affect its import. The court held that act valid because the pith & substance fell
under Entry 8 of State List and not under Entry 41 of Union List.
11
AIR 1951 SC 318

22. C. Principle of Harmonious Construction
The doctrine or the rule of harmonious construction is adopted when there is a
conflict between two or more statues or between the parts or provisions of the
statues. As per this doctrine the courts try to avoid conflicts between the
provisions of the statutes. The doctrine follows a very simple rule that every
statute has made for a purpose and specific intent as per law and it should be
read as a whole and interpreted accordingly. Thus the provisions are so
interpreted that the conflict between the two statues or its provisions is avoided
and each of them is given effect. For this purpose, the scope and meaning of
one may be restricted so as to give meaning also to the other. So, The aim of the
courts are:/
i) An interpretation which makes the enactment consistent.
ii) A construction which avoids inconsistency or repugnancy between the
various sections or parts of the statute. However, in the case in which it shall be
impossible to harmonize both the provisions, the court’s decision shall prevail.
The Supreme Court laid down five principles of rule of Harmonious Construction
in the landmark case of Commissioner12
Of Income Tax vs M/S Hindustan Bulk
Carriers on 17 December, 2000
1.The courts must avoid a head on clash of seemingly contradicting provisions
and they must construe the contradictory provisions so as to harmonize them.
2.The provision of one section cannot be used to defeat the provision contained
in another unless the court, despite all its effort, is unable to find a way to
reconcile their differences.
12
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/688236/

23. 3.When it is impossible to completely reconcile the differences in contradictory
provisions, the courts must interpret them in such as way so that effect is given
to both the provisions as much as possible.
4.Courts must also keep in mind that interpretation that reduces one provision
to a useless number or a dead lumbar, is not harmonious construction.
5. To harmonize is not to destroy any statutory provision or to render it
ineffective.

24. ARTICLE 254 : Doctrine of Repungancy
It is Article 254 of the Constitution of India that firmly entrenches the Doctrine
of Repugnancy in India. According to Black’s Law Dictionary, Repugnancy
could be defined as “an inconsistency or contradiction between two or more
parts of a legal instrument (such as a statute or a contract)”.
Supreme Court’s Interpretation of Doctrine of Repugnancy
Article 254 has been beautifully summarized by the Supreme Court in M.
Karunanidhi v. Union of India13
. The court said that:
“1. Where the provisions of a Central Act and a State Act in the Concurrent List
are fully inconsistent and are absolutely irreconcilable, the Central Act will
prevail and the State Act will become void in view of the repugnancy.
2. Where however a law passed by the State comes into collision with a law
passed by Parliament on an Entry in the Concurrent List, the State Act shall
prevail to the extent of the repugnancy and the provisions of the Central Act
would become void provided the State Act has been passed in accordance with
clause (2) of Article 254.
3. Where a law passed by the State Legislature while being substantially within
the scope of the entries in the State List entrenches upon any of the Entries in
the Central List, the constitutionality of the law may be upheld by invoking the
doctrine of pith and substance if on an analysis of the provisions of the Act it
appears that by and large the law falls within the four corners of the State List
and entrenchment, if any, is purely incidental or inconsequential.
13
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1716282/

25. 4. Where, however, a law made by the State Legislature on a subject covered by
the Concurrent List is inconsistent with and repugnant to a previous law made
by Parliament, then such a law can be protected by obtaining the assent of the
President under Article 254(2) of the Constitution. The result of obtaining the
assent of the President would be that so far as the State Act is concerned, it will
prevail in the State and overrule the provisions of the Central Act in their
applicability to the State only.
Such a state of affairs will exist only until Parliament may at any time make a law
adding to, or amending, varying or repealing the law made by the State
Legislature under the proviso to Article 254.
Now, the conditions which must be satisfied before any repugnancy could arise
are as follows:
1. That there is a clear and direct inconsistency between the Central Act and the
State Act.
2. That such an inconsistency is absolutely irreconcilable.
3. That the inconsistency between the provisions of the two Acts is of such
nature as to bring the two Acts into direct collision with each other and a
situation is reached where it is impossible to obey the one without disobeying
the other.”
Thereafter, the court laid down following propositions in this respect:
“1. That in order to decide the question of repugnancy it must be shown that
the two enactments contain inconsistent and irreconcilable provisions, so that
they cannot stand together or operate in the same field.
2. That there can be no repeal by implication unless the inconsistency appears
on the face of the two statutes.

26. 3. That where the two statutes occupy a particular field, but there is room or
possibility of both the statutes operating in the same field without coming into
collision with each other, no repugnancy results.
4. That where there is no inconsistency but a statute occupying the same field
seeks to create distinct and separate offences, no question of repugnancy arises
and both the statutes continue to operate in the same field.”
Further in the case of Govt. of A.P. v. J.B. Educational Society14
, the court held
that:
“1. There is no doubt that both Parliament and the State Legislature are
supreme in their respective assigned fields. It is the duty of the court to
interpret the legislations made by Parliament and the State Legislature in such a
manner as to avoid any conflict. However, if the conflict is unavoidable, and the
two enactments are irreconcilable, then by the force of the non obstante clause
in clause (1) of Article 246, the parliamentary legislation would prevail
notwithstanding the exclusive power of the State Legislature to make a law with
respect to a matter enumerated in the State List.
2. With respect to matters enumerated in List III (Concurrent List), both
Parliament and the State Legislature have equal competence to legislate. Here
again, the courts are charged with the duty of interpreting the enactments of
Parliament and the State Legislature in such manner as to avoid a conflict. If the
conflict becomes unavoidable, then Article 245 indicates the manner of
resolution of such a conflict.”
The Court also said that:
14
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/665682/

27. 1. Where the legislations, though enacted with respect to matters in their
allotted sphere, overlap and conflict. Second, where the two legislations are
with respect to matters in the Concurrent List and there is a conflict. In both the
situations, parliamentary legislation will predominate, in the first, by virtue of
the non obstante clause in Article 246(1), in the second, by reason of Article
254(1).
2. Clause (2) of Article 254 deals with a situation where the State legislation
having been reserved and having obtained President's assent, prevails in that
State; this again is subject to the proviso that Parliament can again bring a
legislation to override even such State legislation.

28. Extraordinary Legislative Powers of Parliament
1. National Interest – If Rajya Sabha passed a resolution by a majority of not less
than 2/3rd present and voting that it is necessary in national interest to make
law on any matter enumerated in State List then Parliament can pass a law on
that subject. Such resolution remains in effect for 1yr but can be renewed. The
law cease to have effect on expiration of 6months after such resolution ceased
to be in force.
2. National Emergency – In case of Proclamation of Emergency, the Parliament can
extend its legislative powers to make laws on state subjects but such laws cease to
have effect on expiration of 6months after proclamation cease to operate. Either in
national interest or emergency, if any provision of a law made by legislature is in
repugnancy or in conflict with Parliament law then latter shall prevail till its
existence.
3. On Request of State Legislatures – If any resolution passed by all legislatures of
two or more states by declaring that it shall be lawful for the Parliament to pass an
act on any matter included in state list for those state then such act passed by
parliament shall apply to those state or any other state which passed resolution
even after enactment of that act. But such law can be amended or repealed by the
Parliament only and not by concerned states.
4. International Agreements – The Parliament has legislative power to make any law
for execution of any treaty or agreement with other countries or at any
international conference or association.
5. President Rule – On failure of constitutional machinery, the President rule can be
imposed and under it Parliament is empowered to make laws on any matter in
State List. Such laws shall remain in force even after the President Rule but can be
repealed or amended by state legislature.

29. EXECUTIVE POWERS between The Union and
The States
The 15
Union and states have independent executive staffs fully controlled by
their respective governments and executive power of the states and the Centre
are extended on issues they are empowered to legislate. As in legislative
matters, in administrative matters also, the Central government can not
overrule the constitutional rights/powers of a state governments except when
president rule is promulgated in a state. It is the duty of the Union to ensure
that the government of every State is carried on in accordance with the
provisions of the Constitution per Article 355. Article 256 of the Constitution has
made it clear that the State governments cannot go against the Central laws in
administrative matters. When a State has failed to work according to the
Constitution, President’s rule is imposed under Article 356 and President takes
over its (the State’s) administration with post facto consent of the Parliament
per Article 357.
15
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalism_in_India

30. FINANCIAL POWERS between The Union and
The States
Article 282 accords financial autonomy in spending the financial resources
available with the states for public purpose. Article 293 gives liberty to states to
borrow without any limit to its ability for its requirements within the territory of
India without any consent from the union government. However union
government can insist for compliance of its loan terms when a state has
outstanding loan charged to the consolidated fund of India or an outstanding
loan in respect of which a guarantee has been given by the Government of India
under the liability of consolidated fund of India.
President constitutes a Finance Commission after every five years to
recommend the modality for devolving union government revenues between
central and state governments.
Under Article 360 of the constitution, President can proclaim a financial
emergency when the financial stability or credit of the nation or of any part of
its territory is threatened. However, until now no guidelines defining the
situation of financial emergency in the entire country or a state or a union
territory or a panchayat or a municipality or a corporation have been framed
either by the finance commission or by the central government.
Such an emergency must be approved by the Parliament within two months by
simple majority. It has never been declared. A state of financial emergency
remains in force indefinitely until revoked by the President. The President can
reduce the salaries of all government officials, including judges of the Supreme
Court and High Courts, in cases of a financial emergency. All money bills passed
by the State legislatures are submitted to the President for approval. He can
direct the state to observe certain principles (economy measures) relating to
financial matters.

31. CONCLUSION
At last I would like to conclude that “ Federalism is an aspect of
Constitutionalism “. As Constitutionalism means limited government or
limitations on government. In federalism is a philosophy which says power
should be divided between the governments and there shall be no monopoly of
power, and in India power is divided between The Union and The States.
But according to Article 254 i.e Doctrine of Repungancy which says that
in case of conflict between the sub matters of the lists ( union list, state list,
concurrent list ), the union prevails over the state.
But the interpretations of the lists as said by supreme court is done by keeping
in mind these principles :/
A. Doctrine of colorable legislation
B. Principle of pith and substance
C. Principles of harmonious construction