Understanding Article 254(2) of the Indian Constitution

Article 254 of the Indian Constitution deals with the situations where laws made by Parliament and laws made by the Legislatures of States are inconsistent or repugnant to each other.

Repugnancy between Union and State Laws

Generally, according to Article 254(1), if a State law conflicts with a Union law (made by Parliament) on a subject that is in the Concurrent List, the Union law will prevail. This means the State law will be considered void to the extent of the repugnancy.

The Exception: Article 254(2)

However, Article 254(2) provides a crucial exception to this rule. It states that a State law can override a conflicting Central law under specific circumstances:

• The State law must be concerning a matter enumerated in the Concurrent List.
• The State law must be repugnant to an earlier law made by Parliament (or an existing Union law).
• The State law must be one in which the State Legislature has the power to make a law, even though* it contains any provision repugnant to the provisions of the earlier Dominion law or any law made by Parliament.
• Crucially, such a State law must be **reserved for the consideration of the President of India**.
• The State law must receive the **assent of the President**.

If these conditions are met, the State law, even if repugnant to a Central law, can prevail in that particular State. The President's assent signifies that the Union has, in this specific instance, approved the State's overriding legislation, possibly because it suits the local conditions or needs.

Analysis of Options:

Let's analyze why the correct option is the right one:

• Option 1: While sometimes special majorities are required for certain legislative actions, Article 254(2) does not mandate a special majority as the condition for a State law to prevail over a Central law. The key is presidential assent.
• Option 2: Publication in the Gazette is a standard procedure for laws to come into effect, but it is not the specific condition that allows a repugnant State law to prevail over a Central law under Article 254(2).
• Option 3: This option correctly identifies the core requirement of Article 254(2). The State law must be reserved for the President's review and must obtain his explicit assent. This allows the State law to have precedence in that state despite the conflict with the Central law.
• Option 4: The Governor plays a role in forwarding the bill to the President, but the ultimate decision rests with the President's assent. A mere certification by the Governor that the law is necessary for public welfare is insufficient to override the Central law under Article 254(2).

Therefore, the essential condition for a State law, which is repugnant to a Central law, to prevail in the State is that it must be reserved for the President's consideration and receive his assent.