Article 254(1) of the constitution

  In the attached judgment following questions were framed:
                 Questions to be answered
           (i)  Whether making of  the  law  or  its  commencement  brings
           about repugnancy  or  inconsistency  as  envisaged  in   Article
           254(1) of the Constitution?
           (ii)  The effect in law of a repeal.

           254. Inconsistency between laws made by Parliament and laws made
           by the Legislatures of States -


           (1)   If any provision of a law made by  the  Legislature  of  a
           State is repugnant to any provision of a law made by  Parliament
           which Parliament is competent to enact, or to any  provision  of
           an existing law with respect to one of the matters enumerated in
           the Concurrent List, then, subject to the provisions  of  clause
           (2), the law made by Parliament, whether passed before or  after
           the law made by the Legislature of such State, or, as  the  case
           may be, the existing law, shall prevail and the law made by  the
           Legislature of the State shall, to the extent of the repugnancy,
           be void.
           (2)   Where a law made  by  the  Legislature  of  a  State  with
           respect to one of the matters enumerated in the concurrent  List
           contains any provision repugnant to the provisions of an earlier
           law made by Parliament or an existing law with respect  to  that
           matter, then, the law so made by the Legislature of  such  State
           shall, if it has been reserved  for  the  consideration  of  the
           President and has received his assent, prevail in that State:
                 Provided  that  nothing  in  this  clause   shall   prevent
           Parliament from enacting at any time any law with respect to the
           same matter including a law  adding  to,  amending,  varying  or
           repealing the law so made by the Legislature of the State.

  28.   To sum up, our conclusions are as follows :-
      i)    On timing, we hold that, repugnancy  arises on  the  making  and
      not commencement of the law, as correctly held in the judgment of this
      Court in Pt. Rishikesh and Another v. Salma Begum (Smt) [(1995) 4  SCC
      718].
      ii)   Applying the above test, we hold that, on the enactment  of  the
      Central Chit Funds Act, 1982, on 19.08.1982, which covered the  entire
      field of �chits� under entry 7 of List III of  the  Constitution,  the
      Kerala Chitties Act, 1975, on account of repugnancy  as  enshrined  in
      Article 254(1), became void and stood impliedly  repealed.   That,  on
      the occupation of the entire field of �chits�, the Kerala  Legislature
      could not have enacted the State Finance Act No. 7 of 2002,  inserting
      Section 4(1a) into the Kerala Chitties Act, 1975, particularly on  the
      failure of the State in obtaining Presidential  assent  under  Article
      254(2).
      iii)  That, the Central Chit Funds Act, 1982  though  not  brought  in
      force in the State of Kerala is still a law made, which is alive as an
      existing law.  By reason of  Article  367  of  the  Constitution,  the
      General Clauses Act, 1897 applies to the repeal.   Section  6  of  the
      General  Clauses  Act,  1897  is,  therefore,  relevant,  particularly
      Sections 6(b) and 6(c) and consequently, the previous operation of the
      Kerala Chitties Act, 1975 is not affected nor  any  right,  privilege,
      obligation or liability acquired or incurred under that repealed State
      Act of 1975.  Thus, after 19.08.1982, the Kerala  Chitties  Act,  1975
      stands repealed except for  the  limited  purposes  of  Section  6  of
      General Clauses Act, 1897.  If and when the Central Government  brings
      into force the Chit Funds Act, 1982 by  a  notification  in  State  of
      Kerala, under Section 1(3), Section 90(2)  will  come  into  play  and
      thereby the Kerala Chitties Act, 1975 shall continue to apply only  to
      chits in operation on the date of commencement  of  the  Central  Chit
      Funds Act, 1982 in the same manner as the Kerala  Chitties  Act,  1975
      applied to chits before such commencement.

The SC on 30.8.2012 delivered a judgment-analysis and applicability of Art 254(2) of the Constitution