Which of the following statements regarding the residuary powers under the Constitution of India is/are correct ? 1. Residuary powers have been given to the Union Parliament 2. In the matter of residuary power, the Constitution of India follows the Constitution of Australia 3. Schedule 7 of the Constitution of India provides a list of residuary powers 4. The Government of India Act 1935 placed residuary powers in the hands of the Governor General Select the correct answer using the code given below :

1. The Nature of Indian Federalism: Unitary Bias (basic)

To understand the nature of Indian federalism, we must first look at Article 1(1) of the Constitution, which describes India as a 'Union of States'. While the structure is federal, the word 'Federation' is nowhere to be found in the text. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar explained that the term 'Union' was preferred for two critical reasons: first, the Indian federation is not the result of a voluntary agreement or treaty among independent states (unlike the USA); and second, the component states have no right to secede from the Union D. D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India, NATURE OF THE FEDERAL SYSTEM, p.57. This foundational choice sets the stage for what we call a 'Unitary Bias'—a system that looks federal but functions with a powerful centralizing tendency. Because the Indian Constitution deviates from the 'pure' federalism seen in countries like the United States or Australia, many political scientists have given it unique labels. For instance, K.C. Wheare famously described India as 'quasi-federal', while Ivor Jennings called it a 'federation with a centralising tendency' M. Laxmikanth, Indian Polity, Salient Features of the Constitution, p.29. This bias is most visible in the distribution of powers. For example, in traditional federal systems like the U.S., any powers not specifically listed (residuary powers) belong to the states. However, India follows the Canadian model, where the Union Parliament holds exclusive authority over any matter not mentioned in the State or Concurrent Lists under Article 248 M. Laxmikanth, Indian Polity, Centre-State Relations, p.146. Historically, this centralizing tendency is a legacy of the Government of India Act 1935. Interestingly, under that Act, residuary powers were neither given to the federal legislature nor the provinces; they were vested in the hands of the Governor-General. Today, our Constitution maintains a similar tilt by vesting those same powers in the Union Parliament, ensuring that the Centre can respond effectively to new and unforeseen national challenges.

Sources: Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.), NATURE OF THE FEDERAL SYSTEM, p.57; Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth (7th ed.), Salient Features of the Constitution, p.29; Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth (7th ed.), Centre-State Relations, p.146

2. Article 246 and the Seventh Schedule (basic)

In a large and diverse nation like India, it is essential to have a clear "division of labor" between the Central and State governments to avoid constant legal friction. This division is primarily managed by Article 246 and the Seventh Schedule. Think of Article 246 as the legal authority that empowers the legislatures, while the Seventh Schedule is the detailed catalog listing exactly which government can touch which subject. Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity, Chapter 15, p.164

The Constitution adopts a three-fold distribution of legislative subjects, a scheme heavily influenced by the Government of India Act, 1935. This ensures that while some matters are handled uniformly across the country, others can be tailored to local needs. D. D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India, Chapter 24, p.377

List Name	Legislative Authority	Examples
List I (Union List)	Exclusive to Parliament	Defense, Foreign Affairs, Banking, Census
List II (State List)	Exclusive to State Legislatures	Police, Public Health, Agriculture
List III (Concurrent List)	Both Parliament and States	Education, Forests, Marriage and Divorce

A crucial point to remember is the Supremacy of the Union: If there is a conflict between a Central law and a State law on a subject in the Concurrent List, the Central law typically prevails. NCERT Class VIII, The Parliamentary System, p.155

What happens when a new topic emerges that isn't listed anywhere—like Cyber Law or Space Exploration? These are called Residuary Powers. Under Article 248, the power to legislate on these matters is vested exclusively in the Union Parliament. This follows the Canadian model. In contrast, in the United States and Australia, these powers are left to the states. Interestingly, under the Government of India Act 1935, residuary powers were neither with the federation nor the provinces, but were placed in the hands of the Governor-General. Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity, Chapter 15, p.146

Sources: Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity, Chapter 15: Centre-State Relations, p.146, 164; Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu, Chapter 24: Distribution of Legislative and Executive Powers, p.377; NCERT Class VIII, Social Science, The Parliamentary System: Legislature and Executive, p.155

3. Interpretation of Legislative Lists (intermediate)

In our federal system, the Seventh Schedule acts as the blueprint for law-making, dividing powers between the Union and the States. However, in the complex reality of governance, a law rarely fits perfectly into just one box. When a State law seems to "trespass" into the Union's territory (or vice-versa), the Judiciary uses specific rules of interpretation to maintain the constitutional balance and prevent the legislative machinery from grinding to a halt over minor overlaps.

The most vital tool in this regard is the Doctrine of Pith and Substance. "Pith" refers to the "true nature" or essence of the law. This doctrine states that if the essential character of a law falls within the power of the legislature that made it, the law is valid even if it incidentally touches upon a subject in another list. The goal is to see if the law is substantially within the right list. For instance, the Privy Council used this in the Prafulla Kumar Mukherjee case (1947) to decide if a state law on money-lending was valid even though it affected "promissory notes" (a Union subject) Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.), Important Doctrines of Constitutional Interpretation, p.654.

Conversely, the Doctrine of Colourable Legislation is used to check if a legislature has overstepped its bounds covertly. It is based on the maxim: "What cannot be done directly, cannot be done indirectly." If a legislature lacks the power to make a law on a topic, it cannot bypass that restriction by disguising the law to look like it belongs to its own list. In such cases, the court looks past the "form" or title of the Act to its actual effect on the distribution of powers Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.), Important Doctrines of Constitutional Interpretation, p.658.

Doctrine	Core Philosophy	Key Goal
Pith and Substance	Focuses on the "True Nature" and "Substance" of the law.	To allow flexibility and ignore incidental encroachments.
Colourable Legislation	Prevents "fraud on the Constitution" or indirect trespassing.	To ensure a legislature doesn't exceed its competence by disguise.

Sources: Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.), Important Doctrines of Constitutional Interpretation, p.653-655; Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.), Important Doctrines of Constitutional Interpretation, p.658

4. Historical Evolution: The Government of India Act 1935 (intermediate)

The Government of India Act of 1935 was a monumental milestone in India's constitutional journey, acting as a detailed 'blueprint' for the modern Constitution of India. Its most significant contribution was the attempt to transform the Indian administration from a Unitary system (where all power sits at the top) to a Federal system. It envisioned a 'Federation of India' comprising British Indian provinces and the Princely States as units D. D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India, THE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND, p.8. Although the Princely States ultimately chose not to join, causing the federation to never fully materialize, the division of powers introduced by this Act remains the backbone of our legislative structure today. To manage this federal structure, the Act divided legislative subjects into three distinct lists, which you will recognize as the precursors to our current Seventh Schedule D. D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India, THE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND, p.9:

• Federal List: For the Centre (e.g., External Affairs, Currency).
• Provincial List: For the Provinces (e.g., Police, Education).
• Concurrent List: For both (e.g., Criminal Law, Marriage).

However, there was a unique constitutional arrangement regarding Residuary Powers—the authority to make laws on matters not found in any of these three lists. In modern India, these powers belong to the Parliament (the Centre), following the Canadian model. But under the 1935 Act, these powers were vested neither in the Federal nor the Provincial legislatures; instead, they were given to the Governor-General to exercise at his discretion M. Laxmikanth, Indian Polity, Centre-State Relations, p.146.

Feature	GoI Act 1935 System	Modern Indian Constitution
Nature of State	Proposed Federation (never realized)	Union of States
Lists	Federal, Provincial, Concurrent	Union, State, Concurrent
Residuary Powers	Vested in the Governor-General	Vested in the Union Parliament

Sources: Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.), THE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND, p.8; Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.), THE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND, p.9; Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth (7th ed.), Centre-State Relations, p.146

5. Comparative Federalism: India, Canada, and Australia (exam-level)

To understand federalism, we must look at how power is divided. In any federal system, the Constitution divides subjects into lists (like Union and State). However, no matter how detailed a list is, new issues—like cyber law or space exploration—will inevitably arise. These 'leftover' subjects are known as residuary powers. The way a country handles these powers tells us a lot about its federal character: whether it leans toward a strong center or strong sub-units. In the American and Australian models, the federal government is given specific, enumerated powers, and everything else is left to the states. This reflects a 'centrifugal' approach where states are seen as the primary repositories of power. Conversely, Canada adopted a 'centripetal' model where residuary powers vest in the Centre to ensure national stability. India chose to follow the Canadian precedent M. Laxmikanth, Indian Polity, Chapter 15, p. 146. Under Article 248 of the Indian Constitution, the Union Parliament has exclusive power to legislate on any matter not mentioned in the State or Concurrent Lists. This is why scholars often describe India as a 'federation with a strong centralising tendency' D. D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India, Chapter 4, p. 66. Interestingly, India’s current arrangement is a departure from its colonial predecessor. Under the Government of India Act, 1935, residuary powers were not given to the federal or provincial legislatures; instead, they were uniquely vested in the Governor-General to exercise at his discretion D. D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India, Chapter 24, p. 378. Today, while India follows the Canadian path of centralisation, it also embraces asymmetric federalism. This means that unlike the 'constitutional symmetry' of the US (where all states have equal status), India grants special prerogatives to certain states (like those under Article 371) to meet specific historical or cultural needs NCERT Class XI, Indian Constitution at Work, Chapter 10, p. 232.

Feature	India	Canada	Australia / USA
Residuary Powers	Vested in the Union (Centre)	Vested in the Federal Govt (Centre)	Vested in the States
Enumeration	Three-fold (Union, State, Concurrent)	Double (Federal, Provincial)	Single (specific Federal powers)

Sources: Indian Polity, Chapter 15: Centre State Relations, p.146; Introduction to the Constitution of India, Chapter 4: Nature of the Federal System, p.66; Introduction to the Constitution of India, Chapter 24: Distribution of Legislative and Executive Powers, p.378; Indian Constitution at Work (NCERT Class XI), Chapter 10: The Philosophy of the Constitution, p.232

6. Article 248 and Entry 97: Residuary Powers Deep Dive (exam-level)

In a federal system, power is divided between the Centre and the States. However, society is dynamic, and new subjects like cyber law or space exploration inevitably emerge that the framers could not have anticipated. These unlisted subjects are known as Residuary Powers. Under Article 248 of the Indian Constitution, the exclusive power to legislate on any matter not mentioned in the State List (List II) or the Concurrent List (List III) is vested in the Union Parliament Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity, Chapter 15, p. 146. This includes the power to levy residuary taxes, ensuring the Centre remains financially and administratively robust in the face of evolving challenges. To ensure there is no technical gap in the Seventh Schedule, the Union List (List I) includes Entry 97, which acts as a 'catch-all' provision for any matter not enumerated in the other two lists D. D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India, Chapter 25, p. 384. It is important to note that while Parliament exercises this power, the final authority to determine whether a subject truly falls under the residuary category rests with the Judiciary. If a law is challenged, the courts examine whether the subject is indeed absent from the State and Concurrent lists before validating the Union's authority to legislate on it. India's approach to residuary powers is a departure from many other federations. While we follow the Canadian model by vesting these powers in the Centre, countries like the USA and Australia vest residuary powers in the States to ensure greater provincial autonomy D. D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India, Chapter 24, p. 378. Interestingly, our system also differs from its immediate predecessor, the Government of India Act, 1935, where residuary powers were given neither to the federal nor the provincial legislatures, but were placed at the discretion of the Governor-General.

System/Act	Vesting of Residuary Powers
USA & Australia	The States (Provinces)
Canada & India	The Centre (Union Parliament)
GoI Act, 1935	The Governor-General (Individual Discretion)

Sources: Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Chapter 15: Centre-State Relations, p.146; Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu, Chapter 24: Distribution of Legislative and Executive Powers, p.378; Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu, Chapter 25: Distribution of Financial Powers, p.384

7. Solving the Original PYQ (exam-level)

This question beautifully synthesizes three fundamental pillars you have just mastered: the distribution of legislative powers, comparative federalism, and the constitutional history of India. To solve this, you must look at 'residuary powers' not just as a definition, but as a dynamic 'leftover' category. As we discussed in Indian Polity by M. Laxmikanth, the Indian Constitution-makers chose a strong centralizing tendency. This is why Statement 1 is correct; under Article 248, the Union Parliament has the exclusive authority to legislate on any matter not found in the State or Concurrent Lists. This mirrors Statement 4, which reflects the unique historical precedent of the Government of India Act 1935, where residuary powers were vested in the Governor-General's discretion rather than the legislatures.

Now, let's look at how to navigate the traps in Statements 2 and 3. UPSC frequently tests your knowledge of borrowed features. While India is a federation, Statement 2 is incorrect because we follow the Canadian model of vesting residuary powers in the Center; in contrast, Australia and the USA leave these powers to the States to protect provincial autonomy. Statement 3 is a classic 'technical trap.' While Schedule 7 is the source of the three legislative lists, it does not provide a 'list' of residuary powers. By definition, residuary powers are those subjects that are not enumerated. Although Entry 97 of the Union List allows for residuary taxation, the power itself exists because a subject is missing from the specific lists, as explained in Introduction to the Constitution of India by D.D. Basu.

By process of elimination and conceptual clarity, you can see that only 1 and 4 stand up to scrutiny. Therefore, the correct answer is (C) 1 and 4. Always remember: in the Indian context, the Center is the default legatee for any new or unforeseen legislative subject, a stark departure from the Australian model you might be tempted to choose.