UPSC Prelims 2026 Q54: Meaning of 'Law' under Article 13 — Explained
'X' was addressing a seminar on the meaning of the term 'law' as provided under Article 13, Part III of the Constitution of India. 'X' explained that the meaning of the term 'law' in the Constitution of India was very comprehensive. It included ordinances, orders and even rules and regulations. 'Y' pointed out that the term 'law' in Article 13 also included custom or usage having in the territory of India the force of law, to which 'X' was not convinced.
Based on the above, select the correct conclusion from the options given below:
- 'X' is correct in the interpretation of law, including the view on non-inclusion of custom.
- The view of 'Y' that 'law' included custom is not correct.
- The views of both 'X' and 'Y' are correct.
- The view of only 'Y' is correct.
Answer: (d) The view of only 'Y' is correct.
Statement-wise explanation
- a: incorrect — X is right that 'law' covers ordinances, orders, rules and regulations. X is wrong to reject custom. Article 13(3)(a) says 'law' includes 'any Ordinance, order, bye-law, rule, regulation, notification, custom or usage having in the territory of India the force of law'. Custom is written into the definition, so X's view as a whole cannot be called correct.
- b: incorrect — This says Y is wrong to include custom in 'law'. Article 13(3)(a) names 'custom or usage having in the territory of India the force of law' as part of 'law'. Y's view matches the text of the Constitution.
- c: incorrect — Both views cannot be correct, because they contradict each other on custom. Y says custom is included and X rejects it. Article 13(3)(a) settles the point in Y's favour, so X's position fails.
- d: correct — Only Y's view matches Article 13(3)(a), which includes 'custom or usage' with the force of law in the meaning of 'law'. X listed some items correctly but denied that custom is included. That denial is the point the passage asks you to judge, so X's view is wrong.
How to eliminate
This question tests one fact: the exact wording of Article 13(3)(a). The options split into two camps. (a) and (b) say custom is not included. (c) and (d) say Y is right. If you remember that the list in Article 13(3)(a) ends with 'custom or usage having in the territory of India the force of law', you can rule out (a) and (b) at once. To choose between (c) and (d), read what X actually said. X was 'not convinced' about custom, so X's view contradicts Y's on the one disputed point. Two contradictory views cannot both be correct, which leaves (d). Fact to remember: the eight items in Article 13(3)(a) are Ordinance, order, bye-law, rule, regulation, notification, custom and usage.
Know more
Article 13 makes the Fundamental Rights in Part III enforceable. It is the textual base for judicial review of laws.
| Clause | What it says |
|---|---|
| 13(1) | Pre-1950 laws that conflict with Part III are void to the extent of the inconsistency |
| 13(2) | The State shall not make any law that takes away or abridges Part III rights. Such a law is void to the extent of the contravention |
| 13(3)(a) | 'Law' includes any Ordinance, order, bye-law, rule, regulation, notification, custom or usage having the force of law in India |
| 13(3)(b) | 'Laws in force' includes pre-Constitution laws not repealed, even if they are not in operation |
| 13(4) | Nothing in Article 13 applies to a constitutional amendment made under Article 368 |
Why the definition is broad. Rights can be curtailed by delegated legislation (rules, notifications), by executive orders, and by customs that courts enforce. All of these are open to challenge, not only Acts of a legislature.
Doctrines built on Article 13:
- Severability: only the offending part of a law is struck down (from the words 'to the extent of').
- Eclipse: a pre-Constitution law that conflicts with a right becomes dormant, not dead. It can revive if the conflict is removed.
Amendments and Article 13. In Golaknath (1967) the Supreme Court held that a constitutional amendment is 'law' under Article 13(2). The 24th Amendment (1971) then added clause (4), and Kesavananda Bharati (1973) moved the test to the basic structure doctrine.
Custom and personal law. Article 13(3)(a) clearly covers custom. But in State of Bombay v. Narasu Appa Mali (1952), the Bombay High Court held that uncodified personal law is not 'law' under Article 13. Keep this nuance in mind for Mains.
The provision was Article 8 of the 1948 Draft Constitution. It was debated on 25, 26 and 29 November 1948.
NCERT Concepts to Revise
- Laws inconsistent with fundamental rights: The whole question rests on what counts as 'law' that Article 13 can strike down for violating Fundamental Rights.
- Doctrine of severability: Severability flows from Article 13's 'to the extent of' wording, which applies to every kind of 'law' it defines.
- Doctrine of eclipse: Eclipse applies to pre-Constitution 'laws in force', which helps show how wide Article 13's reach is beyond Acts of Parliament.