Principle of constitutional interpretation: Doctrine of Pith and Substance

Principle of constitutional interpretation: Doctrine of Pith and Substance

Introduction:

The supreme law of the country in India is the constitution. The Indian Constitution guarantees a number of rights to citizens as well as some to non-citizens. Additionally, it aims to give the legislative branch of a government the authority to enact laws. The seventh schedule of the Indian Constitution's twelve schedules is in charge of dividing the legislative authority between the Union government and state governments. These are often provided towards the conclusion of an Act or enactment that lays out the procedure for enforcing the provisions of the enactment and provides some extra information regarding those provisions. Their job is to limit the amount of extraneous information in the provisions.

Three lists (list I, list II, and list III) that can be referred to as the central list, state list, and concurrent list make up the seventh schedule of the constitution. According to the topics listed in these lists, the centre and the states each have a certain amount of legislative authority. While only the union has the authority to pass legislation over the 97 issues on the union list, only state legislators have that authority over the 66 subjects on the state list. Additionally, there are 47 topics on the concurrent list where both the federal government and the states have the authority to enact legislation, with federal legislation taking precedence over state legislation. This is the predetermined rule for interpreting the Constitution. 

Residuary power:

Article 248 of the Indian Constitution grants the Union government residual legislative authority, allowing it to enact laws on subjects not covered by state or concurrent lists, and to pass laws for union territory governance.

Doctrine of Pith and Substance:

One of the fundamental tenets of constitutional law is this idea. This theory is applied when there is a conflict between the legislative authority of the federal and state governments as a result of state-level legislation. When a state passes a law that in some way affects or encroaches upon a topic that the union has the authority to pass laws on. It is possible for a legislature to make laws on one topic while also influencing another list's topic. However, that does not make the entire statute void. As a result, these unintended consequences or intrusions are permitted by Indian constitutional law without rendering the entire body of legislation unconstitutional. One of the first hypotheses to address India's constitutional issues is this one. It is made up of two words. First, Pith, which refers to the true nature or essence of anything, and substance, which refers to a necessary or fundamental component that cannot be separated. In essence, the courts must take into account the true intent of the legislation when applying this theory to its interpretation.

After the law's applicability, they must not take its incidental effects into account. To determine whether the contested statute is intra or extra vires is the task of the court. If the act is supra vires, it will be void, and if it is intra vires, it is avoided. If every contested Act of this nature were to be ruled invalid due to insignificant, incidental encroachments, the powers of legislators would be useless. The true purpose and meaning of the law are established by this notion.

The doctrine of pith and substance, originating from Canada's Cushing v. Depoy 1880 UKPC 22 case, was first applied in India's State of Bombay & Anr. v. F. N. Balsara case, where the Supreme Court upheld the law's true spirit and character in order to identify the List under which it was included.

Relevant Case Law:

In the Indian legal cases cited:

1. State of Rajasthan v. Vatan Medical and General Store (2001) established a fundamental principle. It declared that once a state enactment falls within the State List (List II) of the Indian Constitution's seventh schedule, no central law from List I or List III can challenge its constitutionality. This decision emphasized that Article 246 cannot grant state legislatures authority over such enactments.

2. R. D. Joshi v. Ajit Mills (1977) reinforced the doctrine of "Pith and Substance." It stressed that when safeguarding social policies, legislative entries should be broadly interpreted. The case also acknowledged the concept of "subsidiary or accidental intrusion."

3. Assn. of Natural Gas v. Union of India and Ors. (2004) emphasised understanding what legislative subjects encompass in practical terms. It also considered the practices of the state that granted legislative power.

These cases collectively highlight the intricate principles of constitutional interpretation in India. They aim to strike a balance between central and state legislative powers while ensuring the essence of legislation is preserved.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, the Indian Constitution's seventh schedule delineates the division of legislative powers between the central and state governments through three lists. The doctrines of "Pith and Substance" and "Residuary Power" play crucial roles in resolving conflicts between these authorities. These legal principles ensure that the true essence of legislation is upheld, allowing for the effective governance of India.

References

1.https://lawwire.in/doctrine-of-pith-and-substance-and-the-concept-of-colourable-legislation-explained/?noamp=available

2.https://lawcorner.in/explain-the-rule-of-pith-and-substance-with-case-laws/

3.https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.lawyersclubindia.com/amp/articles/he-doctrine-of-pith-and-substance-in-constitutional-law-15986.asp

4.https://www.legalserviceindia.com

5.https://blog.ipleaders.in/doctrine-of-pith-and-substance/

**Author :- Vaibhav Prajapati,pursuing B.A L.L.B, BM law college, Jodhpur (Affiliated to Jai Narain Vyas University, Jodhpur)**