Doctrine of Harmonious

Construction
Prof.(Dr.) S. P. Srivastava
Department of Law and Governance
Central University of South Bihar
Meaning and Concept
 The essance of harmonious construction isto
give effect to both the conflicting provisions
under the statute or within the framework of
same areas legal system.
 It gets its legal sanction through the rule of Ex

Vescribus Actus i.e. A Statute should be read as

a whole.
 This rule obligates one provision of the Act

should be construed in with reference to other

provisions in the same Act so as to make a
consistent enactment.
Basic Principles
 In CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers, (2003) 3SCC
57), The Hon’ble SC laid down the five criterion
thereof:
1. The Courts must avoid a head on clash of
seemingly conflicting provisions and must be
construed to harmonize them.
2. The provision of one section cannot be used
to defeat the provisions contained in another,
unless the court, despite all itseffort, is unable
to find a way to reconcoil their differences.
Continued:
3. When it is impossible to completely reconcile
the differences in contradictory provisions the
courts must interpret them in such way so that
the effect is given to all the conflicting
provisions as much as possible.
4.Courts must also remember that the
interpretation which reduces one provision to
useless number or nullity is not harmonious
construction.
5. To harmonize is not to destroy any statutory
provisions or to render it frutless.
Tools for Harmonious Construction
 Generalia Specialibus Non derogant and
Generalia specialibus derogant.
 Explore two independent operating situations

for the enactments to change seemingly

conflict as separately operational situations.
Scope of Harmonious construction
Rule application
 This is used by the courts to avoid conflict in
between the different clauses or proviso in
one section or explanation or lllustrations
appended with the enactments.
 In general mandate of the legislative drafting

the courts should interpret each provision in

relation to their respective relations within
the statute.
Conflict
 The Courts can also use the HC for resolving a
conflict in between a provision in the Act and
the rule made thereto. (Collector of Central
Excise Jaipur v. Raghwar (India) Ltd., JT 2000
(7) SC 99- SS. 11-A of the Central Excise Act
was read in reference to Rule 57 of the rules.
 This principle was also resorted by the courts
to resolve the conflict between two different
Acts. (Indian Telecom Ltd. v. Motorola Ltd.,
(2005) 2 SCC163.
Continued:
 The principle of Harmonious Construction is
also applicable in cases of construction of
subordinate and parent legislation. E.g.
Central University Act and Ordinances thereto
or regulations thereto.
Steps for Harmonious Construction
 That both the provisions, which are in conflict
or are repugnant to each other must be read as
a whole with reference to entire enactment in
question.
 Give full possible effect to both of them and

then reduce the conflict.

 Out of Two Conflicting provisions find out wider

and narrower scope of the two separately.

 From the wider provision subtract the narrow

and see the consequences thereto.

Continued:
- If consequence is reasonable as to harmonize
both and gives their full effect separately, no
further enquiry is needed.
-Begin with the intent that legislature intend
to give full effect to all sections and statute in
its entirety.
-When one section of an Act takes away what
another confers, a non obstante clause must
be used. (A.G. Varadajaulu v. State of T.N.,
AIR 1998 SC 1388.
Leading Indian Cases
1. Venkatramana Devaru v. State of Mysore, AIR
1958 SC 255
- Conflict between Articles 25(2)(b) and 26(b)
Held: The right of every denomination or any
section thereof to manage its own affairs in
matter of religion is subject to a law made by
a state providing for social welfare and
reform throwing of Hindu religious
institutions of a public character to all classes
and sections of Hindus.
Continued:
2. M. S.M. Sharma v. Krishna Sinha, AIR 1959
SC 395.
-Conflict between Articles 19(1)(a) and 194(3)
Held: The right of freedom of speech
guranteed u/A 19(1)(a) is subject to powers,
privilege and immunities of a House of the
legislation.
3. Special Reference No. 1964
Article 194(3) shall be subject to Article21, 32,
211 and 226.
Continued:
4. Srisilk Ltd. V. Govt. of AP, AIR 1964 SC160
5. In Re Kerala Education Bill
6.Raj Krishna v. Binod
7. Prof. Yashpal Sharma v. State of Chatisgarh,