The document discusses the legal doctrine of pith and substance, which is used to determine whether legislation falls under the jurisdiction of the federal or state governments in countries like Canada and India. The doctrine looks at the true nature or essence of a law by examining its overall scope, effects, and main objectives. Even if a law incidentally impacts matters in another jurisdiction, it will be upheld if its pith and substance relates to the enacting government's legitimate powers. The document outlines the history and evolution of the doctrine, key cases that applied it, and how it provides flexibility in resolving jurisdictional disputes between different levels of government.
The document discusses the legal doctrine of pith and substance, which is used to determine whether legislation falls under the jurisdiction of the federal or state governments in countries like Canada and India. The doctrine looks at the true nature or essence of a law by examining its overall scope, effects, and main objectives. Even if a law incidentally impacts matters in another jurisdiction, it will be upheld if its pith and substance relates to the enacting government's legitimate powers. The document outlines the history and evolution of the doctrine, key cases that applied it, and how it provides flexibility in resolving jurisdictional disputes between different levels of government.
The document discusses the legal doctrine of pith and substance, which is used to determine whether legislation falls under the jurisdiction of the federal or state governments in countries like Canada and India. The doctrine looks at the true nature or essence of a law by examining its overall scope, effects, and main objectives. Even if a law incidentally impacts matters in another jurisdiction, it will be upheld if its pith and substance relates to the enacting government's legitimate powers. The document outlines the history and evolution of the doctrine, key cases that applied it, and how it provides flexibility in resolving jurisdictional disputes between different levels of government.
Pith and substance is a legal doctrine used to determine under
which head of power a given piece of legislation falls. Pith means ‘true nature’ or ‘essence of something’ and Substance means ‘the most important or essential part of something’. Doctrine of Pith and Substance says that where the question arises of determining whether a particular law relates to a particular subject (mentioned in one List or another), the court looks to the substance of the matter. Thus, if the substance falls within Union List, then the incidental encroachment by the law on the State List does not make it invalid. Continued: The doctrine is primarily used when a law is challenged on the basis that one level of government has encroached upon the exclusive jurisdiction of another level of government. This is essentially a Canadian Doctrine now firmly entrenched in the Indian Constitutional Jurisprudence. This doctrine found its place first in the case of Cushing v. Evolution Dupey. of the doctrine In this case the Privy Council evolved the doctrine, that for deciding whether an impugned legislation was intra vires, regard must be have to its pith and substance. According to this doctrine, the legislation as a whole is examined to ascertain its “true nature and character” in order to determine in what list it falls. If according to its “true nature and character” the legislation substantially falls within the powers conferred on the legislature which has enacted it, then it is not deemed to be Invalid “merely because it incidentally trenches or encroaches on matters which have been assigned to another legislature. Need of Doctrine The doctrine has been applied to provide a degree of flexibility in the otherwise rigid scheme of distribution of powers. “It is not possible to make clean a cut between the powers of various legislatures; they are bound to overlap from time to time. (2 Prafulla Kumar v. Bank of Commerce, AIR 1947 PC 28 ) The reason for adoption of this doctrine is that if every legislation were to be declared invalid on the grounds that it encroaches power, the powers of the legislature would be severely limited. The doctrine saves the incidental encroachment, if only the law is in pith and substance within the legislative field of the particular legislature which has made it. This doctrine is widely used when deciding whether a state is within its rights to create a statute ESSENTIALS FOR APPLYING THE DOCTRINE For applying the principle of ‘pith and substance’ regard is to be had: 1. To the enactment as a whole; 2. To its main objects; 3. To the scope and effect of its provision Land Mark Cases The State of Bombay And Another v. F.N. Balsara, This is the first important judgment of the Supreme Court that took recourse to the Doctrine of Pith and Substance. The court upheld the Doctrine of Pith and Substance and said that it is important to ascertain the true nature and character of a legislation for the purpose of determining the List under which it falls. Union of India v. Shah Goverdhan L. Kabra Teachers' , held that in order to examine the true The Court College character of the enactment, the entire Act, its object and scope is required to be gone into. The question of invasion into the territory of another legislation is to be determined not by degree but by substance. The doctrine of pith and substance has to be applied not only in cases of conflict between the powers of two legislatures but also in any case where the question arises whether a legislation is covered by a particular legislative field over which the power is purported to be exercised. Mst. Atiqa Begam and Anr. v. Abdul Maghni Khan and Ors The court held that in order to decide whether the impugned Act falls under which entry, one has to ascertain the true nature and character of the enactment i.e. its ‘pith and substance’. The court further said that “it is the result of this investigation, not the form alone which the statute may have assumed under the hand of the draughtsman, that will determine within which of the Legislative Lists the legislation falls and for this purpose the legislation must be scrutinized in its entirety”. Premchand Jain v. R.K Chhabra, AIR 1984 SC 981 As long as the legislation is within the permissible field in pith and substance, objection would not be entertained merely on the ground that while enacting legislation, provision has been made for a matter which though germane for the purpose for which competent legislation is made, it covers an aspect beyond it. In a series of decisions this court has opined that any enactment substantially falls within the powers expressly conferred by the Constitution upon the Legislature enacting it, it cannot be held to be invalid merely because it incidentally encroaches on matters assigned to another legislature. Zameer Ahmed Latifur Rehman Sheikh v. State This doctrine is applied of Maharashtra andwhen Ors. the legislative competence of the legislature with regard to a particular enactment is challenged with reference to the entries in various lists. If there is a challenge to the legislative competence, the courts will try to ascertain the pith and substance of such enactment on a scrutiny of the Act in question. In this process, it is necessary for the courts to go into and examine the true character of the enactment, its object, its scope and effect to find out whether the enactment in question is genuinely referable to a field of the legislation allotted to the respective legislature under the constitutional scheme.
State of West Bengal v. Committee for Protection of Democ ratic Rights, West Bengal [(2010) 3 SCC 571 The principle of federal supremacy cannot be resorted to unless there is an irreconcilable direct conflict between the entries in the Union and the State lists. In re, Special Reference No. 1 of 2001 [(2004) 4 SCC 489, the SC said, “An endeavour must be made to solve it, … by having recourse to the context and scheme of the Act, and a reconciliation attempted between the two apparently conflicting jurisdictions by reading the two entries together and by interpreting, and, where necessary modifying the language of the one by that of the other. … The doctrine of pith and substance is sometimes invoked to find out the nature and content of the legislation”. According to this test, in the event where the ‘incidental The test of ‘dominant legislation’ encroachment’ by a legislation conflicts with another legislation actually enacted by the ‘dominant power’, the latter shall prevail [ITC Limited v. Agricultural Produce Market Committee, (2002) 9 SCC 232. Here, ‘incidental encroachment’ signifies a situation where a State law legislates on the subjects provided under the Union list and vice versa; and ‘dominant power’ signifies that entity which is authorised to make the law. For instance, for an item under the Union list, the Parliament is the dominant power and for an item under the State List, the State Legislature is the dominant power.