State List is the second list in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India, enumerating subjects on which State Legislatures have exclusive power to make laws. Under Indian law, Article 246(3) provides that the Legislature of any State has exclusive power to make laws with respect to any matter enumerated in List II, subject to the overriding provisions of Articles 246(1) and 246(2) which give Parliament supremacy on Union List and Concurrent List subjects.
Legal definition
Article 246(3) of the Constitution provides:
Article 246(3): Subject to clauses (1) and (2), the Legislature of any State has exclusive power to make laws for such State or any part thereof with respect to any of the matters enumerated in List II in the Seventh Schedule (in this Constitution referred to as the "State List").
The State List currently contains 59 entries (reduced from the original 66 by constitutional amendments, notably the 42nd Amendment which transferred five entries to the Concurrent List). Key entries include:
- Entry 1: Public order (but not the use of any naval, military or air force in aid of the civil power)
- Entry 2: Police (including railway and village police)
- Entry 4: Prisons, reformatories, borstal institutions
- Entry 5: Local government (municipalities, district boards, mining settlement authorities)
- Entry 6: Public health and sanitation; hospitals and dispensaries
- Entry 14: Agriculture, including agricultural education and research
- Entry 18: Land — land rights, land tenures, landlord and tenant, rent regulation, land revenue
- Entry 23: Regulation of mines and mineral development (subject to Central laws under List I Entry 54)
- Entry 45: Land revenue, including assessment and collection of revenue, maintenance of land records, survey
- Entry 49: Taxes on lands and buildings
- Entry 54: Taxes on sale or purchase of goods (other than newspapers, subject to GST provisions)
The non-obstante clause "subject to clauses (1) and (2)" in Article 246(3) means that if there is an overlap between a State List and Union/Concurrent List entry, the Union/Concurrent List entry prevails.
How courts have interpreted this term
State of Rajasthan v. G. Chawla [AIR 1959 SC 544]
The Supreme Court applied the doctrine of pith and substance to determine whether the Ajmer (Sound Amplifiers Control) Act fell within the State List. The Court held that the true nature and character of the legislation was regulation of public health and public order (State List entries), not regulation of scientific apparatus (potentially a Union subject). This case established that incidental encroachment on a Union List entry does not invalidate a State law if its pith and substance falls within the State List.
State of Karnataka v. Union of India [(1978) 2 SCC 1]
A seven-judge bench considered the scope of State legislative power and held that entries in the State List must be interpreted broadly and liberally. The Court affirmed that the State List preserves the federal character of the Constitution by ensuring areas of exclusive State competence. However, the Court noted that the Constitution gives the Union preponderance in legislative matters, as evidenced by the non-obstante clauses and the residuary power vesting in Parliament.
ITC Ltd. v. Agricultural Produce Market Committee [(2002) 9 SCC 232]
The Supreme Court held that where a Union law and a State law appear to deal with the same subject, the Court must determine whether the subject falls within the State List or Union List by examining the pith and substance of the respective legislations. A Union law cannot invade the State List unless Parliament is acting under specific constitutional provisions (Articles 249, 250, 252, or 253).
Why this matters
The State List is the constitutional guarantee of State autonomy in the Indian federal system. It delineates the subjects on which States can legislate independently without Central interference, preserving the diversity and local responsiveness that federalism is designed to ensure. Key areas of State governance — police, public order, public health, agriculture, land, local government, and state taxation — fall within the State List.
For practitioners, State List entries are critical when challenging Central legislation as being beyond Parliament's competence. If a Central law in pith and substance deals with a State List subject and Parliament is not acting under any special provision (Articles 249, 250, 252, or 253), the law may be struck down for want of legislative competence.
A significant practical concern is the erosion of the State List through constitutional amendments and judicial interpretation. The 42nd Amendment (1976) transferred five important subjects — education, forests, weights and measures, protection of wild animals, and administration of justice — from the State List to the Concurrent List, thereby enabling Central legislation on these matters. The introduction of GST through the 101st Amendment (2016) further impacted State fiscal autonomy by subsuming State-level indirect taxes.
Related terms
Seventh Schedule:
Related concepts:
Frequently asked questions
Can Parliament make laws on State List subjects?
Ordinarily, no. The State List is within the exclusive legislative competence of State Legislatures. However, there are five exceptions: (1) under Article 249, if the Rajya Sabha passes a resolution by two-thirds majority that it is necessary in the national interest; (2) under Article 250, during a Proclamation of Emergency; (3) under Article 252, if two or more States consent; (4) under Article 253, to implement international treaties or agreements; and (5) under Article 356, during President's Rule in a State.
How many entries are in the State List?
The State List currently contains 59 entries. It originally had 66 entries when the Constitution was enacted in 1950, but constitutional amendments — particularly the 42nd Amendment (1976) — transferred several entries to the Concurrent List. Five subjects were moved: education, forests, protection of wild animals and birds, weights and measures, and administration of justice.
What happens if a State law conflicts with a Union law on a State List subject?
If a matter genuinely falls within the State List, Parliament ordinarily cannot legislate on it, and there would be no conflict. However, if a State List entry and a Union/Concurrent List entry overlap, courts apply the doctrine of pith and substance to determine which list the legislation truly belongs to. If the legislation is found to be on a Union/Concurrent List subject in its true nature, the Central law prevails regardless of any incidental overlap with a State List entry.
This entry is part of the Veritect Indian Legal Glossary, a comprehensive reference of Indian legal terminology grounded in statutory text and judicial interpretation.
Last updated: 2026-03-27. Veritect provides this content for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice.