Doctrine of Occupied Field: Meaning, Examples, Judgements

In India, the Doctrine of Occupied Field stops State Legislatures from enacting laws on subjects already addressed by central legislation. Moreover, this Doctrine guarantees a clear division of legislative powers and avoids conflicting regulations. Furthermore, when the Parliament establishes a legal framework for a specific area, State legislatures are usually banned from creating duplicate or contradictory laws. Read this blog to learn more about the Doctrine of Occupied Field in India, its Examples, and Major Judgments. 

What is the Doctrine of Occupied Field in India?

The Doctrine of Occupied Field in the legal sense is a principle in the law that controls the distribution of powers between governments at different levels.

• This means that if a subject matter is already under the legislation by one level of government, whether it is Central or State, then no other level of government can legislate on the same subject matter.

• Moreover, this is important as it can help in avoiding conflicts and overlaps in the working of the legislative authorities.

• Article 254 of the Indian Constitution gives the provisions and measures regarding the inconsistencies between the laws made by the Parliament and the laws made by the State Legislative Authorities.

• The Indian Constitution lets both National and State governments make laws on Concurrent issues, but national law prevails in case of conflicts.

• Under this Doctrine, it is also important to understand the concept of Federalism. It can be stated as a balance between the Central government and State governments.

Also read: What is Doctrine of Eclipse in the Indian Constitution?

Doctrine of Occupied Field Examples

The Doctrine of the Occupied Field can be found in Entry 52, List I, and Entry 24, List II. These entries claim that the Parliament has the authority to enact laws that would remove certain industries from the State Legislature’s legislative focus to exercise control over those industries in the public interest. Moreover, here are some of the Examples under the Doctrine of Occupied Field:

Fields where these principles have been applied	Comes under which legislative authority?
Education	The subject is under the state government, but the central government can also take action on certain aspects of education but cannot come between the fields that are occupied by the state.
Healthcare	Primarily a state subject, but the central government can make laws that are related to healthcare.
Public order	Listed in the state list of the Constitution of India, however, the central government can provide assistance.
Agriculture	Listed in the state list of the Constitution of India, however, the central government can assist.

Also read: What is the Difference between Doctrine of Eclipse and Severability?

The Important Parts of the Doctrine of Occupied Field

To avoid conflict between the State and Central governments, here are some important parts of the Doctrine which are: 

Essentials	Definition
Distribution of powers	Accordingly, the Constitution must distinguish the power between the State and the central government.
Legislation	The doctrine will only come into play if a particular subject matter falls within the field of one level of government and the other level of government cannot legislate on the subject.
Constitution’s Intent	The Constitution’s intent is frequently the foundation of the doctrine. The notion is applicable if it is evident that one level of government was supposed to have exclusive jurisdiction over a given area under the constitution.

Also read: What is Doctrine of Pith and Substance?

Important Judgements under the Doctrine of Occupied Field

Many Judgements by the Supreme Court of India are used under the Doctrine of Occupied Field such as:

Cases and Dates	In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court established the legal principle that the President’s Rule is subject to judicial scrutiny. This means courts can review the implementation of the President’s Rule to ensure it complies with the Constitution. The court emphasized that President’s Rule should not be used as a tool to address situations that don’t truly represent a breakdown of the constitutional machinery. This ruling safeguards the core structure and principles of the Indian Constitution.
The State of Bombay vs. United Motors (India) Ltd. in 1953	It was held by the Supreme Court that the field of taxation on the sale of goods was occupied by the central government, and thus, imposing tax on the sale of goods by the state government was declared unconstitutional.
S.R. Bommai vs. Union Of India in 1994	In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court established the legal principle that the President’s Rule is subject to judicial scrutiny. This means courts can review the implementation of the President’s Rule to ensure it complies with the Constitution. The court emphasized that the President’s Rule should not be used as a tool to address situations that don’t truly represent a breakdown of the constitutional machinery. This ruling safeguards the core structure and principles of the Indian Constitution.
T.M.A Pai Foundation vs. State of Karnataka  in 2002	The Supreme Court recognized education as a state responsibility, granting state governments the power to regulate admissions in unaided colleges. However, this regulatory authority should be exercised with due regard for the institutional autonomy of such colleges.

Related Blogs

What is Adjournment Motion?	What is Fiscal Federalism?
What is the Doctrine of Colourable Legislation?	What is a Writ of Prohibition?
What is the Difference between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles?	What is the Difference between Fundamental Duties and Directive Principles?
What is Universal Adult Franchise?	What is the Difference Between Fundamental Rights and Fundamental Duties?

FAQs

Lastly, we hope you liked our blog and gained an understanding of the Doctrine of Occupied Field in India. Moreover, you may even read more blogs and empower yourself with knowledge regarding Civics and Polity!