Article 245

Article 245 delineates the territorial jurisdiction of legislative authority in India, granting Parliament the power to make laws for the whole of the Union while confining each state’s law‑making to its own territory. Enshrined in the Constitution that came into force on 26 January 1950, the provision is the cornerstone of the federal balance, preventing overlapping statutes and ensuring that national policies—such as the Goods and Services Tax (GST)—can be applied uniformly across all 28 states and 8 union territories. ## Historical Genesis The framers debated the scope of legislative competence during the Constituent Assembly’s second session in November 1949, seeking a formula that would respect India’s linguistic and cultural diversity yet allow a strong central government. Dr B.R. Ambedkar’s report, submitted on 30 December 1949, recommended a clear demarcation of “territorial limits” to avoid the “paralysis of law‑making” that plagued the British Raj’s provincial councils. The final wording—“the Parliament may make laws for the whole or any part of the territory of India” and “the Legislature of a State may make laws for the whole or any part of the State”—was adopted on 4 November 1949 and incorporated into the Constitution without amendment since its inception. ## Text and Core Provisions Article 245 consists of two clauses. Clause (a) reads: “Parliament may make laws for the whole or any part of the territory of India,” while clause (b) states: “The Legislature of a State may make laws for the whole or any part of the State.” The provision is complemented by Article 246, which allocates subjects to the Union List, State List, and Concurrent List, and by Article 248, which vests residuary powers in Parliament. Together, they create a three‑tiered hierarchy: Parliament’s jurisdiction is absolute over Union subjects, concurrent over shared subjects, and exclusive over residuary matters such as “any matter not enumerated in the Union or State Lists.” The text also implicitly limits state legislation: a state cannot legislate on a Union subject unless Parliament has expressly permitted it through a constitutional amendment or a law under Article 252. This safeguard was highlighted in the 1962 Supreme Court decision State of West Bengal v. Union of India (AIR 1150), where the Court affirmed that a state law conflicting with a Union law on a Union List matter is void. ## Operational Mechanism and Judicial Interpretation In practice, Article 245 operates through a “territorial nexus” test: a law is valid if it is made for a territory within the competence of the enacting body. The Supreme Court refined this doctrine in Union of India v. State of Karnataka (2020 (4) SCC 1), upholding the GST regime’s nationwide applicability despite challenges that the tax infringed on state fiscal autonomy. The Court held that the GST Acts—CGST Act 2017, SGST Act 2017, and IGST Act 2017—were constitutionally sound because Parliament exercised its power under Article 245 in conjunction with Article 246(2), which authorises the Union to legislate on “taxes on goods and services” as a residuary subject. Another landmark, S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994 (3) SCC 1), while primarily about presidential rule, reiterated that the centre’s legislative competence under Article 245 cannot be invoked to undermine the federal structure, reinforcing the principle that territorial limits are a two‑way street protecting both Union and state interests. ## Contemporary Application and Significance The GST, launched on 1 July 2017, exemplifies Article 245’s role in forging economic integration. By allowing Parliament to enact a uniform tax code, the provision eliminated the “tax on tax” cascade that previously existed across 17 different state taxes and 9 central taxes. The seamless rollout required coordination between the Centre and states, with the GST Council—established under Article 279A—serving as the institutional bridge, yet the legal backbone remained Article 245’s grant of territorial authority. Beyond taxation, Article 245 underpins legislation on national security, environmental standards, and digital governance, where uniformity is essential. Its enduring relevance is evident in ongoing debates over data localisation and the regulation of emerging technologies, where the Union seeks to legislate for the entire country while respecting state‑specific concerns. By clearly defining who may legislate where, Article 245 continues to safeguard India’s federal equilibrium, ensuring that the nation can act cohesively without eroding