Doctrine of Pith and Substance | Article 246 | Schedule 7 of Indian Constitution

Doctrine of Pith and Substance
========================================
The Constitution of India has divided the extent of legislative powers between the Centre and states by way of the Seventh Schedule.

The Seventh Schedule specifies the subject matters and divides the power to make laws between the Centre and the State.
🔴 List I or the Union List contains matters where the Centre has the power to make laws, e.g. Defence, Foreign affairs and Currency.
🔴 List II or the State list contains the subjects where the State has the power to make laws, e.g. public order, health and sanitation.
🔴 List III or the Concurrent List contains subjects where both the Centre and the State have powers to legislate, e.g. Education, Forests and Administration of Justice.

Although their spheres of influence are well established in the Seventh Schedule, there often arise conflicts as to whether the Centre or the State, as the case may be, is encroaching upon the sphere of the other. To deal with this conflict, the courts in India have evolved a few doctrines and the age-old doctrine of pith (essence of something) and substance (essential part of something) is one among them.

What is the Doctrine of Pith and Substance?
=======================================
The doctrine states that within their respective spheres the state and the union legislatures are made supreme, they should not encroach upon the sphere demarcated for the other.

However, if one among the state and the Centre does encroach upon the sphere of the other, the courts will apply the Doctrine of Pith and Substance.
If the pith and substance i.e., the true object of the legislation pertains to a subject within the competence of the legislature that enacted it, it should be held to be intra vires although it may incidentally encroach on the matters not within the competence of the legislature.
The Privy Council applied this doctrine in Profulla Kumar Mukherjee v Bank of Khulna.

In this case, the Bengal Money Lenders Act of 1946 enacted by the State Legislature was challenged with the contention that parts of the legislation dealt with promissory notes; a central subject.
The Privy Council while upholding the validity of the impugned legislation stated that the Bengal Money Lenders Act was in pith and substance a law relating to money lenders and money lending – a state subject even though it incidentally trenches upon Promissory note – a central subject.
In State of Bombay v FN Balsara, the Bombay Prohibition Act was challenged on the ground that it accidentally encroaches upon import and export of liquor across custom frontier – a central subject. The court while upholding the impugned legislation declared that the Act was in pith and substance a State subject even though it incidentally encroached upon a central subject.

===============================================================
#doctrinesofapostles #doctrineofindoormanagement #padhakulog

Full Doctrine Playlist -
   • DOCTRINES | Doctrines of Constitution...  

Difference Between Law -
   • LAW Difference Between Videos | LEGAL...  

Law of Torts -
   • Law of Torts | Law of torts in Hindi ...  

Sankshipt gyaan -Law
   • SANKSHIPT GYAAN -LAW | LAW Concepts |...  

Connect with us-
Instagram- https://instagram.com/padhaku_log?igs...
Facebook-   / padhaku-log-101091301476679  
Mail id- [email protected]
Watsapp- 9630227777
Telegram- 9630227777

About us:
Padhaku Log is a platform specially created for those students who live in remote areas and don’t have access to fancy coaching classes. A channel which wants to bring parity in knowledge level of all.