Article 254(2) is a crucial provision of the Indian Constitution that addresses the Doctrine of Repugnancy between laws made by a State Legislature and Parliament on a subject enumerated in the Concurrent List (List III of the Seventh Schedule). The provision was adopted as part of Article 254 on June 13, 1949, and its concept is inherited from Section 107 of the Government of India Act, 1935. It was later amended by the Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act, 1956.
The provision acts as an exception to the general rule established in Article 254(1), which states that a Central law will prevail over a repugnant State law on a Concurrent List matter. Article 254(2) allows a State law, which is inconsistent with an earlier Central law, to prevail in that State if the State Legislature has reserved the bill for the President's consideration and it has received his assent. This mechanism is designed to accommodate regional variations within the quasi-federal structure.
However, the proviso to Article 254(2) connects to the concept of ultimate Parliamentary supremacy. It specifies that Parliament is not prevented from enacting a new law at any time to add to, amend, vary, or repeal the State law that received Presidential assent. The Supreme Court, in cases like the one involving Kaiser I Hind Pvt. Ltd. (2002), has clarified that Presidential assent is not a mere formality and must be based on a meticulous evaluation of the specific conflict between the State and Central laws. For instance, in 2017, the Tamil Nadu government secured Presidential assent under this Article for its law to legalise jallikattu.