Constitution of India
Article 240: Power of President to make regulations for certain Union territories
Part VIII — The Union Territories
Clause (1)
WHAT IT SAYS: The President may make regulations for the peace, progress, and good government of the following Union Territories: (a) Andaman and Nicobar Islands (b) Lakshadweep (c) Dadra and Nagar Haveli (d) Daman and Diu (e) Puducherry PROVISO 1: Once a Legislature is created under Article 239A for Puducherry, the President shall NOT make regulations from the date of its first meeting. PROVISO 2: If the Puducherry Legislature is dissolved or suspended under Article 239A(1), the President may RESUME making regulations during such dissolution/suspension. WHAT IT MEANS: 1. President acts as a substitute legislature for UTs without legislative assemblies. 2. For Puducherry — power is conditional; it ceases when Legislature is functional and revives when it is dissolved or suspended. 3. Delhi, Chandigarh, and J&K are NOT covered — they have separate governance provisions. KEY DOCTRINE: Doctrine of Plenary Legislative Power — the President's regulation-making power under Art. 240 is legislative in nature, not merely administrative, and is as wide as Parliament's own legislative authority.
Clause (2)
WHAT IT SAYS: 1. Any regulation made under Clause (1) may repeal or amend any Act of Parliament or any other law applicable to that Union Territory. 2. When promulgated by the President, such regulation has the same force and effect as an Act of Parliament applying to that territory. WHAT IT MEANS: 1. Presidential regulations can OVERRIDE even Parliamentary Acts in these UTs. 2. Regulations are equivalent in legal status to Acts of Parliament — not subordinate legislation. 3. This makes the President effectively a full legislature for these territories. KEY DOCTRINE: Doctrine of Co-equal Legislative Force — regulations under Art. 240(2) are not delegated legislation but original legislative power, carrying the same weight as parliamentary statutes.
Constitutional Inspiration
SOURCE(S): 1. Government of India Act, 1935 — Section 92(2) Original provision: The Governor could make regulations for the peace and good government of excluded/partially excluded areas, which could repeal or amend Federal/Provincial legislature Acts. What India kept: The structure of regulation-making power for specified territories, including the power to repeal/amend existing laws. 2. Indian Councils Act, 1861 — Section 42 Original provision: Empowered the Governor-General to make laws for territories not under any provincial legislature. What India kept: The concept of centralized regulation-making for territories without their own legislature. 3. Government of India Act, 1915 — Sections 71, 72, 80A Original provision: Contained regulation-making powers for certain areas outside provincial legislative jurisdiction. What India kept: The phrase 'peace, progress and good government' as the scope of regulation-making power. INDIA'S SPECIFIC ADAPTATIONS: 1. Vested power in the elected President (on aid and advice of Council of Ministers) instead of a colonial Governor/Governor-General — to ensure democratic accountability. 2. Limited the power with provisos for UTs with legislatures (e.g., Puducherry) — reflecting India's commitment to representative government wherever feasible. 3. Made regulations equal to Acts of Parliament — ensuring no legal vacuum in small/remote territories without legislatures.
Constituent Assembly Debate
DEBATED ON: Article 240 in its PRESENT form was NOT debated in the Constituent Assembly. REASON: The original Article 240 (as adopted in 1949) dealt with Part C States and was entirely SUBSTITUTED by the Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act, 1956. ORIGINAL CONTEXT: 1. The original Constitution classified territories into Part A, Part B, Part C States, and Part D territories. 2. The Seventh Amendment (1956) abolished this four-fold classification following the States Reorganisation Commission recommendations. 3. Articles 239 and 240 were substituted with new provisions creating the 'Union Territories' framework. THE 7TH AMENDMENT REPLACED THE ENTIRE TEXT of Article 240 with the current regulation-making provision for Union Territories, effective 1 November 1956. SUBSEQUENT KEY AMENDMENTS TO ART. 240: 1. 10th Amendment (1961) — Added Dadra and Nagar Haveli. 2. 12th Amendment (1962) — Added Goa, Daman and Diu. 3. 14th Amendment (1962) — Added Pondicherry; inserted provisos and created Art. 239A. 4. 27th Amendment (1971) — Added Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh; inserted second proviso. 5. 37th Amendment (1975) — Included Arunachal Pradesh under Art. 239A provisos. 6. State of Mizoram Act, 1986 — Removed Mizoram (became a State, 20 Feb 1987). 7. State of Arunachal Pradesh Act, 1986 — Removed Arunachal Pradesh (became a State, 20 Feb 1987).
Landmark Judgments
LANDMARK JUDGMENTS: 1. T.M. Kanniyan v. Income Tax Officer, Pondicherry (1968) — The Supreme Court held that the President's power under Art. 240 is NOT limited to law and order; 'peace, progress and good government' is a plenary grant of legislative power, including the power to extend taxation laws to Union Territories. 2. Govt. of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India (2018) — While primarily on Art. 239AA (Delhi), the 5-judge bench discussed UT governance broadly; held the LG is bound by aid and advice of elected Council of Ministers, clarifying the limits of central control over UTs with legislatures. 3. Puducherry Legislative Assembly v. Union of India (2018) — The Supreme Court discussed the division of powers between elected government of Puducherry and the Lieutenant Governor, reaffirming that the President's overarching authority remains constitutionally preserved under Art. 240. NOTABLE OBSERVATIONS: 1. In T.M. Kanniyan (1968), the Court traced the phrase 'peace, progress and good government' to colonial antecedents — Sec. 42 of the Indian Councils Act, 1861 and Sec. 92(2) of the Government of India Act, 1935 — affirming its broadest legislative meaning. SCHOLARS & JURISTS: 1. D.D. Basu — Art. 240 is a constitutional mechanism to fill the legislative vacuum in UTs that lack their own legislatures, representing India's asymmetric federalism. 2. M.P. Jain — The regulation-making power under Art. 240 is original legislative power of the widest amplitude, not delegated legislation, and is subject to judicial review for violation of fundamental rights.