Show Summary Details

Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE ( © Oxford University Press, 2022. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 07 July 2022

Abstract and Keywords

This chapter examines the law of legislative competence in India. After providing an overview of legislative competence in the Indian Constitution, it explains the distinction between legislative power (‘competence’) and the exercise of legislative power (‘repugnance’). In particular, it considers early clashes in the money-lending litigation, the argument of Sir Walter Monckton KC and the Advice of Lord Porter in the Prafulla Kumar Mukherjee case, and the birth of ‘aspect theory’ in Indian law. It then explores how competence and repugnance have impacted the legislative relationship between the States and the Union. It argues that the failure to separate competence and repugnance has given rise to new ‘doctrines’ in India, including aspect theory, and concludes by revisiting a long-standing controversy in Indian law about the applicability of Article 254(1) to legislation outside the Concurrent List.

Keywords: aspect theory, India, Indian Constitution, Indian law, legislative competence, legislative power, money-lending litigation, Prafulla Kumar Mukherjee, repugnance, Walter Monckton

Access to the complete content on Oxford Handbooks Online requires a subscription or purchase. Public users are able to search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter without a subscription.

Please subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you have purchased a print title that contains an access token, please see the token for information about how to register your code.

For questions on access or troubleshooting, please check our FAQs, and if you can''t find the answer there, please contact us.