Doctrine of Colourable Legislation

Introduction
Federalism is the basic structure of the Indian Constitution. The sovereign authority derived from the
Constitution is distributed between the two levels of government: the centre and the states. This step
promotes better administration and includes growth in the nation. At times, one government body
attempts to encroach on the jurisdiction of another government body by enacting legislation that is not
within their purview of governance or by passing laws that give them authority to enact laws from
another’s domain of governance. This defeats the very purpose of federalism, and there is always a
constant risk of one government authority becoming more powerful and starting to impose its decisions
on another government authority.
The doctrine of colourable legislation discourages the misuse of the legislative authority of the
government by judicial intervention to maintain the balance of power in the country. The doctrine of
colourable legislation is not explicitly mentioned in the Indian Constitution; however, the judiciary has
interpreted this doctrine via its judgements to protect the federal nature of our country. Whenever the
centre or any state tries to expand its legislative sphere unconstitutionally, the doctrine provides the
judiciary with the authority to prevent them from doing so.
Meaning of the Doctrine
The doctrine of colourable legislation is a legal principle that aims at the prevention of excessive and
unconstitutional use of the legislative authority of the government. The doctrine is derived from the Latin
maxim “quando aliquid prohibetur ex directo, prohibetur et per obliquum” which means things that cannot be
done directly should not be done indirectly either. The Black’s Law Dictionary defines the word ‘colourable’ as:

1. Appearing to be true, valid or right.

In a literal sense, the doctrine of colourable legislation means that the government is enacting
legislation under the guise of having authority even though it does not possess any competent authority
to do so.
The judiciary has the authority to prevent the government from the abuse of its power. When the
government misuses its legislative authority by making laws outside its demarcated jurisdiction, the
judiciary has the power to review them and strike them down if they are found unconstitutional.
The doctrine of colourable legislation is also known as “Fraud on the Constitution” because the
legislature of the government authority does not enact laws according to the provisions mentioned in
the Constitution. The legislative authority creates a delusion that it is acting in compliance with the
constitutional provisions but in reality, it does not.
Significance of the doctrine of colourable legislation
 The doctrine of colourable legislation plays a crucial role in preventing the misuse of the legislative
authority of the government through timely judicial intervention.
 The doctrine of colourable legislation confers the power of the judiciary to check the competency
of legislation in accordance with its jurisdiction. The courts also have the power to strike them
down if they find them unconstitutional.
 When the legislature becomes the dominant power, it may impose its decisions on other organs of
the government. This becomes a serious threat to the concept of separation of powers. The doctrine
of colourable legislation prevents this abuse of authority by a single body.
 It encourages the legislature to act in a more vigilant manner.
 It preserves the spirit of democracy by reminding the government of its responsibilities towards the
country and promoting the desires and aspirations of the people.
Landmark Judgments
1. K.C Gajapati Narayan Deo vs. State of Orissa, 1953 AIR 375 This is the only landmark
judgment where the statute has been proclaimed clearly invalid on the ground of being
colorable legislation. In this case, the petitioner, tested and challenged the legitimacy of the
Bihar Land Reforms Act 1950[14] on the premise that the demonstration was apparently
planned to set out the guideline of pay however indeed, it didn't set out any such rule. This was
claimed as the implied endeavour to deny the petition of his right to remuneration. The court
additionally maintained the unconstitutionality of the Act.
The Supreme Court in this case well explained the meaning and scope of the doctrine as the
court stated that;

If the constitution of a State distributes the legislative powers amongst different bodies, which
have to act within their respective spheres marked out by the constitution in specific legislative
entries, or if there are limitations on the legislative authority in the shape of Fundamental rights,
the question arises as to whether the Legislature in a particular case has or has not, in respect to
subject-matter of the statute or in the method of enacting it, transgressed the limits of its
constitutional powers. Such transgressions may be patent, manifest or direct, but it may also be
disguised, covert or indirect, or and it is to this latter class of cases that the expression
colourable legislation has been applied in judicial pronouncements.
2. State of Bihar V. Kameshwar Singh, AIR 1952 SC 252. Held - In this case the Bihar Land
Reforms Act, 1950, was held void on the ground that though apparently it purported to lay
down principle for determining compensation yet in reality it did not lay down any such
principle and thus indirectly sought to deprive the petitioner of any compensation. It is the case,
Where a law has been declared invalid on the ground of colorable legislation.
Conclusion
The doctrine of colourable legislation aims to prevent the use of the legislative authority of the
government for unauthorised purposes. The primary objective of the division of powers is to prevent
the concentration of powers under one government authority. Whenever a government authority tries to
expand its powers by enacting new laws outside its territory, this situation may pose a serious threat to
democracy in the country.
The doctrine of colourable legislation acts as a shield to the federal nature of our country and prevents
despotic rule by judicial review. The doctrine of colourable legislation upholds the spirit of democracy
and encourages the leaders to work according to the aims and aspirations of the people rather than their
own advantage.