Parliament

Introduction
Parliament, which is a platform to do a discussion on issues having social and civic importance in any
popular democracy, is a cornerstone of democratic values in any representative democracy.
Parliament may be perceived as a political institution to ensure the realization of what Mahatma
Gandhi once envisaged that, Democracy essentially is the art and science of mobilizing and utilizing
the entire physical, economic and immaterial & metaphysical resources for the common good of all
the People.
Though the origin of the concept of Parliament traces to European nations since medieval ages, it
has been an indispensable part of the Indian democratic structure since the inception of democracy
in India.
The stalwarts of Indian freedom struggle, legal experts and other members of the Constituent
Assembly, arrived at a conclusion of endorsing a parliamentary system of government after an
extensive and in-depth study of the Constitution of other nation-states.
After the first general election in the year 1952, both the houses of parliament came into existence.
It must be noted that after the Constitution was adopted and till general elections, i.e., between
1950 to 1952, the Constituent Assembly itself functioned as the provisional legislative body.
The origins of the concepts of parliament
The word 'parliament' comes from the French word parler, which means 'to talk'. A
parliament is a group of elected representatives with the power to make laws.
• Many ancient cultures featured a gathering of leaders to discuss and decide matters
of importance. There is evidence citizens' assemblies were held in ancient
Mesopotamia (modern-day Syria and Iraq) as far back as 2500 BCE. Some of the first
assemblies which had elements similar to those of modern parliaments were held in
ancient Greece and Rome.
• Around 500 BCE the ancient Greeks established an Ecclesia - Assembly - which met
on the Pnyx, a hill in central Athens, Greece. The Ecclesia met 40 times a year and
was attended by male citizens who had completed their military training. Decisions
were made by a show of hands, or voting with stones or pieces of pottery.
• The Roman Republic, which was founded around 509 BCE, was ruled by 2 elected
Consuls, who acted on the advice of the Senate—the council of elders. The Senate
comprised 300 members from wealthy and noble families. Laws were approved by
various assemblies, who represented the nobles and common people. These
assemblies did not write new laws but met to vote on laws and elect officials
Early assemblies in England
The British Parliament has its origins in 2 early Anglo-Saxon assemblies- the witan and moots.
The Witenagemot – Witan- dates back to the eighth century and advised the monarch on
matters such as royal grants of land, taxation, defence and foreign policy. Witan comes from
the Anglo-Saxon phrase Witana Gemot which means ‘meeting of the wise men’.
The moots were local assemblies held in each country and shire to discuss local issues and
hear legal cases. They were made up of local lords, bishops, the sheriff and 4 representatives
from each village. The practice of local representatives making decisions for their community
eventually led to the creation of the House of Commons.
n 1066 William the Conqueror invaded Britain. William ruled with the help of a much smaller
but permanent group of advisers known as the Curia Regis - King's Council. It consisted of
noblemen and church leaders appointed by the King. They were not elected and so did not
formally represent anyone.
In June 1215, The Magna Carta also confirmed feudal customs and the operation of the justice
system, and recognised that the barons had a right to be consulted and to advise the King in
the Great Council.
While most of the Magna Carta described the division of power between the King and the
barons, it also made reference to the rights of individuals. One of the most celebrated
sections is credited with establishing the principle of a right to a fair trial.
The emergence of a parliamentary model
From 1327 the people's representatives sat in Parliament permanently and by
1332 were referred to as the House of Commons. The British Parliament now
comprised 3 familiar elements: the monarch, the House of Commons and the House of
Lords. However, it had no formal meeting schedule and continued to meet at the
request of the monarch.
At this time, the House of Lords had far more influence on the monarch than the House
of Commons and a greater say in the decisions of Parliament. However, in 1341 the
House of Commons began meeting independently of the House of Lords and its power
started to increase.
One of the main funtions of the commons was to petition the monarch and the House
of lords to resolve the local and national issue by making new laws whereas monarch
seek the approval of the commons for new taxes because these taxes often had the
greatest impact on the people represented by the commons.
By the mid-fifteenth century, rather than simply petitioning the House of Lords, the
Commons had gained equal law-making powers. The Commons was also responsible
for granting the monarch access to money raised by taxes. Today, its law-making
powers are greater than those of the House of Lords.
Independence of Parliament
The independence of the House of Commons from the monarch was further
strengthened in January 1642 after King Charles I tried to arrest 5 members of
parliament.

Charles considered this to be treasonous. Accompanied by soldiers, the King entered the
Commons chamber to arrest Pymand his 4supporters but they had gone into hiding. The
Speaker of the House, William Lenthall, refused to reveal where the 5 members were,
claiming ‘I have neither eyes to see nor tongue to speak in its place but as the House is
pleased to direct me, whose servant I am here’. Rebuffed, Charles replied ‘I seethe birds
have flown’ and left the chamber. The autonomy of the House of Commons from the
monarch had been demonstrated. This incident started a tradition that the monarch
never enters the lower house of Parliament.

The conflict between the Commons and the King resulted in a civil war, the execution of
Charles I in 1649 and Britain being declared a republic. The monarchy was restored in
1660 but the monarch and Parliament continued to clash. In 1689 King William and
Queen Mary took the throne and agreed to the Declaration of Rights, which
acknowledged Parliament’s independence, including its right free speech and to meet
frequently.
 Difference between Presidential and Parliamentary
Form of Government
There are basically two forms of democratic government systems – Presidential and Parliamentary. India
follows a parliamentary form of government modelled on Britain’s. Our founding fathers had strong
reasons for adopting this, as opposed to the presidential system.
Apart from the parliamentary and presidential systems, there can also be a hybrid system incorporating
features of both systems. The chief difference between these systems is the extent of power separation
between the legislative, the executive and the judiciary. Another major difference between the
presidential and parliamentary systems is the accountability of the executive to the legislature.
Presidential System of Government
• In a presidential system, the head of the government leads an executive, that is distinct from the
legislature. Here, the head of the government and the head of the state are one and the same. Also, a
key feature is that the executive is not responsible to the legislature.
Features of the Presidential System
• The executive (President) can veto acts by the legislature.
• The President has a fixed tenure and cannot be removed by a vote of no-confidence in the legislature.
• Generally, the President has the power to pardon or commute judicial sentences awarded to criminals.
• The President is elected directly by the people or by an electoral college.
Merits of Presidential System
• Separation of powers: Efficiency of administration is greatly enhanced since the three arms of the
government are independent of each other.
• Expert government: Since the executive need not be legislators, the President can choose experts in various
fields to head relevant departments or ministries. This will make sure that people who are capable and
knowledgeable form part of the government.
• Stability: This type of government is stable. Since the term of the president is fixed and not subject to
majority support in the legislative, he need not worry about losing the government. There is no danger of a
sudden fall of the government. There is no political pressure on the president to make decisions.
• Less influence of the party system: Political parties do not attempt to dislodge the government since the
tenure is fixed.

Demerits of Presidential System

• Less responsible executive: Since the legislature has no hold over the executive and the president, the head
of the government can turn authoritarian.
• Deadlocks between executive and legislature: Since there is a more strict separation of powers here, there
can be frequent tussles between both arms of the government, especially if the legislature is not dominated
by the president’s political party. This can lead to an erosion in efficiency because of wastage of time.
• Rigid government: Presidential systems are often accused of being rigid. It lacks flexibility.
• Spoils system: The system gives the president sweeping powers of patronage. Here, he can choose executives
as per his will. This gives rise to the spoils system where people close to the president (relatives, business
associates, etc.) get roles in the government.
 Parliamentary system of Government
• India chose a parliamentary form of government primarily because the
constitution-makers were greatly influenced by the system in England.
• Another reason the founding fathers saw was that the parliamentary model
would only work to accommodate the varied and diverse groups within our
population.
• Also, the strict separation of powers in the presidential system would cause
conflicts between the two branches, the executive and the legislature, which
our newly-independent country could ill-afford.
• In this system, the parliament is generally supreme and the executive is
responsible to the legislature.
• It is also known as the Cabinet form of government, and also ‘Responsible
Government’.
Features of the parliamentary system
• Close relationship between the legislature and the executive: Here, the Prime Minister along with the Council
of Ministers form the executive and the Parliament is the legislature. The PM and the ministers are elected
from the members of parliament, implying that the executive emerges out of the legislature.
• Executive responsible to the legislature: The executive is responsible to the legislature. There is a collective
responsibility, that is, each minister’s responsibility is the responsibility of the whole Council.
• Dual executive: There are two executives – the real executive and the titular executive. The nominal executive
is the head of state (president or monarch) while the real executive is the Prime Minister, who is the head of
government.
• Secrecy of procedure: A prerequisite of this form of government is that cabinet proceedings are secret and not
meant to be divulged to the public.
• Leadership of the Prime Minister: The leader of this form of government is the Prime Minister. Generally, the
leader of the party that wins a majority in the lower house is appointed as the PM.
• Bicameral Legislature: Most parliamentary democracies follow bicameral legislature.
• No fixed tenure: The term of the government depends on its majority support in the lower house. If the
government does not win a vote of no confidence, the council of ministers has to resign. Elections will be held
and a new government is formed.
Although India follows this system chiefly influenced by the British model, there are a few differences between
the Indian and British systems. They are:
• In India, the PM can be from either the Rajya Sabha or the Lok Sabha. In Britain, the PM will always be from the
lower house, the House of Commons.
• In Britain, the speaker once appointed, formally resigns from his/her political party. In India, the speaker
continues to be a member of his/her party though he/she is expected to be impartial in the proceedings.
• The concept of a shadow cabinet is absent in India. In Britain, the opposition forms a shadow cabinet that
scrutinises the actions and policies of the government. It also offers alternative programmes.
Merits of Parliamentary System
• Better coordination between the executive and the legislature: Since the executive
is a part of the legislature, and generally the majority of the legislature support the
government, it is easier to pass laws and implement them.
• Prevents authoritarianism: Since the executive is responsible to the legislature, and
can vote it out in a motion of no confidence, there is no authoritarianism. Also,
unlike the presidential system, power is not concentrated in one hand.
• Responsible government: The members of the legislature can ask questions and
discuss matters of public interest and put pressure on the government. The
parliament can check the activities of the executive.
• Representing diverse groups: In this system, the parliament offers representation to
diverse groups of the country. This is especially important for a country like India.
• Flexibility: There is flexibility in the system as the PM can be changed easily if
needed. During the Second World War, the British PM Neville Chamberlain was
replaced by Winston Churchill. This is unlike the presidential system where he/she
can be replaced only after the entire term or in case of impeachment/incapacity.
Demerits of Parliamentary System
• No separation of powers: Since there is no genuine separation of powers, the
legislature cannot always hold the executive responsible. This is especially true if the
government has a good majority in the house. Also, because of anti-defection rules,
legislators cannot exercise their free will and vote as per their understanding and
opinions. They have to follow the party whip.
• Unqualified legislators: The system creates legislators whose intention is to enter the
executive only. They are largely unqualified to legislate.
• Instability: Since the governments sustain only as long as they can prove a majority in
the house, there is instability if there is no single-largest party after the elections.
Coalition governments are generally quite unstable and short-lived. Because of this,
the executive has to focus on how to stay in power rather than worry about the state
of affairs/welfare of the people.
• Ministers: The executive should belong to the ruling party. This rules out the hiring of
industry experts for the job.
• Failure to take a prompt decision: Since there is no fixed tenure enjoyed by the
Council of Ministers, it often hesitates from taking bold and long-term policy decisions.
• Party politics: Party politics is more evident in the parliamentary system where
partisan interests drive politicians more than national interests.
• Control by the bureaucracy: Civil servants exercise a lot of power. They advise the
ministers on various matters and are also not responsible to the legislature.
Comparison between Parliamentary and
Presidential form of Government
Basis Parliamentary Presidential
Executive Dual Single
Accountability Executive Executive not
accountable to accountable to
legislature legislature
Ministers Only from among People outside the
MPs legislature can be
appointed
Dissolution of lower PM can dissolve President cannot
house before the expiry of dissolve
the term
Tenure Not fixed Fixed
Meaning of Parliament
Cambridge Dictionary
the group of (usually) elected politicians or other people who make
the laws for their country
Composition of Parliament:
• The Parliament in India comprises the President of India, the Upper House
i.e. Rajya Sabha and the Lower House i.e. Lok Sabha.
• Hindi names of both the houses, i.e. Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha had been
adopted by the Upper House and the Lower House respectively.
• The Constitution describes the structure of parliament in Article 79. It states that
the Parliament comprises of the President and the two houses i.e. the Lower
House or House of People and Upper house or Council of States.
• To understand the functions served by the President, we can say that the post of
president is somewhat equivalent to the role and functions of the Queen or
Crown in the United Kingdom.
• Even though the President is a part of the legislature, he doesn’t sit in
parliament.
• However, a bill passed by houses can’t be made law without the assent of the
President.
Rajya Sabha Art.80
The Rajya Sabha is the ‘upper house’ of the Parliament. It consists of representatives of the States and
Unioon territories. The maximum strength of the Rajya Sabha is 250. Of these, 238 represent the states
and union and 12 are nominated by the President from amongst persons who have distinguished
themselves in the field of literature, art, science, social service, etc, Art.80(1,2,3). Representatives of the
States are elected by members of State legislative Assemblies on the basisi of proportional representation
through a single transferable vote. It is notworthy that in the Rajya Sabha, the States have been provided
representation on the basis of their Population. Art.80(4)
Qualification Art. 84: As regards qualifications for membership of the Rajya Sabha, the candidate must,
. Be a citizen of India,
. Be 30 years of age or more; and
. Possess such other qualifications as may be prescribed by the Parliament from time to time.

Rajya Sabha shall not be subject to dissolution. The members of the Rajya Sabha are elected for a term of
six years; even though the Rajya Sabha is a permanent house, one-third of the members retire every two
years in accordance with the provisions made in that behalf by Parliament by Law. Art.83(1).

Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson of Rajya Sabha

• In Rajya Sabha, the Vice-President of India presides of its sessions and is ex-officio chairperson of the
house.
• However, to take care of its day-to-day affairs, and to preside over the sessions in the absence of the
Chairperson, i.e. the Vice-President, a member of the house itself is chosen internally by the Rajya
Sabha as Deputy Chairperson of the house
Lok Sabha
Lok Sabha is the ‘popular house’ of the Indian Parliament. It consists of
representatives elected by the people on the basis of universal adult franchise
through secret ballot. The maximum strength of Lok Sabha has been fixed at
552, out of which 530 represent the States and 20 represent the Union
Territories (Art.81). Before CAA 104, the President can nominee two members
of the Anglo-Indian community if, in his opinion, this community is not
adequately represented in the Lok Sabha (Art.331).
Duration of Lok Sabha
The Lok Sabha, unless sooner dissolved, shall continue for five years from the
date appointed for its first meeting and no longer and the expiration of the said
period of five years shall operate as a dissolution of the House: provided that
the said period may, while a proclamation of emergency (Art.352) is in
operation, be extended by Parliament by law for a period not exceeding one
year at a time and not extending in any case beyond a period of six months
after the proclamation has ceased to operate. {Art. 83(2)}.
Qualification
• Qualifications necessary for becoming a member of parliament is provided
in Article 84 of the Indian Constitution.
• Following are the qualifications:
• he/she should be a citizen of India.
• He/she should have completed 25 years of age.
• he/she need to comply with other such qualifications as prescribed in any
law by the Indian Parliament. Under the Representation of Peoples
Act,1951.
• Make and subscribe an oath or affirmation expressing his true faith and
allegiance to the Constitution and for upholding the sovereignty and
integrity of India.
Disqualification for M.P. (Art.102)
(1) A person shall be disqualified for being chosen as, and for being a
member of either House of Parliament-
(a) If he holds any office of Profit under the Government of India or the
government of any state, other than an office declared by Parliament by
law not to disqualify its holder.
(b) If he is of unsound mind and stands so declared by a competent court;
(c) If he is an undischarged insolvent;
(d) If he is not a citizen of India, or has voluntarily acquired the citizenship of
a foreign state, or is under any acknowledgement of alleigence or
adherence to a foreign State;
(e) If he is so disqualified by or under any law made by Parliament. (The
Representation of People Act, 1951).
(2) A person shall be disqualified for being a member of either House of
Parliament if he is so disqualified under the Tenth Schedule on the ground of
defection.
Grounds for Disqualification under, The Representation of People Act, 1951
(a) If he is guilty of corrupt or illegal practices at the election.
(b) If he has been convicted by court in India for any offence resulting in imprisonment for 2 or more
years.
(c) If he has failed to lodge a return of election expenses within the time and in the manner required
by the Act.
(d) If he has any share or interest in a government contract for the supply of goods, or for the
execution of any work or for the purpose of any service.
(e) If he is a Director or Managing Agent or holds any office of profit in a government corporation in
which the Government is holding 25% shares.
(f) If he has been dismissed from Government service for corruption or disloyalty to the State.
Note: None of the above disqualifications, however, operate for a period of more than five years.
Art.103 the question of disqualification (for being chosen as and for being a member of either House
of Parliament, except where the disqualification is under Tenth Schedule i.e Anti-Defection Law) is
decided by the President with the advice of the Election Commission. Members of the Lok Sabha are
elected for a term of five years but the term can be cut short if the President dissolves the House
earlier on the recommendation of the Prime Minister.
Art.101 a member of Parliament can resign by writing to the Chairman Speaker, as the case may be.
The seat of a member can also be declared vacant if he absents himself from meeting of the House for
60 days without permission.
Vacation of seat
Art.101 provides us the situation under which a member must vacate his/her
seat if
• He/she is elected in both houses as this article clearly states that no person
shall be chosen as members in both the houses.
• He/she becomes a member of the Central legislature as well as a state
legislature, then he must vacate his seat in the house.
• He/she becomes subject to any of the disqualifications mentioned by
Parliament
• He/she, without permission of the speaker, is absent from the house for
consecutive 60 days
• And, after a seat is vacated in either of legislative houses, polls are conducted
to fill the vacancy.
Office of Profit
The Constitution of India, apart from enlisting certain qualifications for Members of Parliament and Legislative
Assembly, also enumerates certain disqualifications. One of these disqualifications is holding an “office of
profit”. In a democracy, it is desirable that there is proper separation of power between the Executive, the
Legislative and the Judiciary. For this, it is important that only suitable legislators are elected to and remain in
the Parliament and the State Legislatures.
Disqualifying the holders of offices of profit is also an effort in this direction for protecting the independence of
the legislators.
This concept has evolved from the British Parliamentary model. One of the earliest laws on this issue was the
English Act of Settlement enacted in 1700. By the beginning of the eighteenth century, three broad principles
were developed affecting the law on this subject:
• Certain non-ministerial offices are incompatible with membership of the Parliament.
• The influence of the Executive over the House of Commons, through the undue proportion of office-holders
who are members of the House, should be limited.
• Certain number of ministers should be members of the House for the purpose of ensuring control of the
Executive by the Parliament.
The Indian law is based on these three principles[. Articles 102(1)(a) and 191(1)(a) govern the law in this regard
for the Members of Parliament and State Legislative Assemblies respectively. There a few legislations for the
same purpose but these were not considered enough. Therefore, to address the lack of a single, comprehensive
law, the Bhargava Committee on Offices of Profit was constituted under the Chairmanship of Pt. Thakur Das
Bhargava in 1954. The Committee recommended enactment of the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification)
Act. This Act was passed in 1959 and presently governs the law on offices of profit in India. This legislation
specifies which offices would not disqualify their holders
Judicial View: Under Art.102 and 191 disqualification arises when a person holds “office
of profit”
For holds office of Profit when
(1)There is an office; (2) The office is one of profit; and (3) The office is under the
Central or State government
(1) There is an “office”.
The term “office” has nowhere been expressly defined. However, from many judicial
verdicts, an “office” refers to an employment which is permanent in nature and exists
independent of the holder. Kanta Kathuria v. Manak Chand Surana 1969 SC, Mrs.
Kathuria’s election was questioned on the ground that she was employed as a Special
Government Pleader for the State of Rajasthan which was allegedly an office of profit
under the government. The court held that the post did not constitute an office as the
appellant was simply appointed to do certain duties assigned to her instead of holding a
permanent post. The Court held that Mrs. Kathuria’s election was questioned on the
ground that she was employed as a Special Government Pleader for the State of
Rajasthan which was allegedly an office of profit under the government. The court held
that the post did not constitute an office as the appellant was simply appointed to do
certain duties assigned to her instead of holding a permanent post.
(2) The office must be of “profit”
If a legislator receives any pecuniary benefit apart from the “compensatory allowance” as
given in section 2(a) of Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1959, he becomes
disqualified.
In Divya Prakash v. Kultar Chand Rana and Another,AIR 1975 SC the respondent was appointed
as the Chairman of the State Board of School Education in an honorary capacity. His election
was challenged on the ground that he held an office of profit. It was contended that although
the respondent did not receive any salary but the post carried a scale of pay. However, this
argument was rejected by the court. It was held that the respondent never received any profit
by way of salary and furthermore, he did not become entitled to any salary due to his
appointment in an honorary capacity. Importantly, the Board, which fixed the pay scale for the
post of Chairman, was not authorised to do so.
In Ramakrishna Hegde v. State of Karnataka, AIR 1993 Kant: In this case, the petitioner, Mr
Hegde, was appointed as the Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission. According to the
respondents, there was ‘profit’ attached to the office as he enjoyed a Cabinet rank and got
various allowances including well-furnished free accommodation, chauffeur-driven car and
could travel anywhere in India having the facility of the State Guest.
However, the Karnataka High Court held to the contrary as the allowances given to Hegde
were included within the meaning of “compensatory allowance” given in s. 2a of the
Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act. The respondents could not prove that the
petitioner had profited by gaining more than the actual expenditure by way of allowances.
Also, the court opined that “Merely because the petitioner had some privileges as a State
Guest or rank of a Cabinet Minister, it cannot be said that he had pecuniary gain”.
In Jaya Bachchan v. Union of India, Jaya Bachchan was appointed by the UP Government as the Chairman of the
Film Development Council of a state and sanctioned the rank of Cabinet Minister and received a monthly
honorarium, daily allowances, free accommodation, staff car, medical treatment etc.
The Supreme Court held that the Chairperson of the Film Development Council of a state holds an office of profit
as some pecuniary gain is receivable by virtue of the post even though the said pecuniary gain may not actually
be received. The petitioner, however, neither received any payment nor did she use any facilities that she was
entitled to as the Chairperson. However, since the post was capable of yielding profit to the petitioner, she held
an office of profit. Two factors which emerged, in this case, were: a) the form of payment is not relevant as
monetary gain may be merely disguised as an honorarium; b) it is not relevant whether any remuneration was
actually received, it is only enough if such remuneration was receivable.
The Court held: An ‘office of Profit’ is an office which is capable of yielding a profit or pecuniary gain. Nature of
payment must be considered as a matter of substance rather than of form. Nomenclature is not important. In
fact, mere use of the word ‘honorarium’ cannot take the payment out of the purview of profit, if there is
pecuniary gain for the recipient payment of honorarium. If the pecuniary gain is ‘receivable’ in connection with
the office then it becomes an office irrespective of whether such pecuniary gain is actually received or not.
(3) The office must be under Government
In case Satrucharla Chandrasekhar Raju v. Vyricherla Pradeep Kumar Dev and Another 1992 SC.
• Some test were laid down,
• Whether the government has the power to appoint or revoke the appointment of the office-holder. Mere
control of the government over the authority having the power to appoint or dismiss is not decisive.
• Whether the office-holder is paid out of government revenues.
• Whether the body which employs the office-holder is independent of the government.
• The degree/extent of control the government has over the body.
Biharilal Dobray v. Roshanlal Dobray,, 1984 SCR, various tests have been
formulated for determining whether a post is “under the government” or not, by
the Supreme Court of India.
• Whether the government makes the appointment;
• Whether the government has the right to remove or dismiss the office-holder;
• Whether the government pays remuneration;
• Whether the office-holder performs functions for the government;
• Whether the government controls the duties and functions of the office-holder.
 Anti Defection Law
‘Political defection’ is the political Phenomenon in which a legislator elected as a
member of a certain political party changes his party allegiance without resigning his
seat. Some MLAs and MPs are ever ready to change party loyalty for personal
considerations viz. lure of money. Further, unstable government, coalition politics,
dissidence, infighting, etc. are also responsible for it.
‘Defection’ includes situations like change of party or group, shifting of loyalty from one
party to another or “crossing of floor” inside the legislative chamber.
Tenth Schedule and Anti- Defection Law
The Constitution (52 CAA, 1985) amended Arts.101,102,190 and 191 of the Constitution
regarding vacation of seats and disqualification from membership of Parliament/State
Legislatures and added a new Schedule (Tenth Schedule) to the Constitution setting out
certain provisions as to disqualification on grounds of defection, viz.
(1) If a member voluntarily gives up the membership of the political party on whose
ticket he is elected to the house; or
(2) If he votes or abstains from voting in the House against any direction of the political
party, without the prior permission of such party, and unless it has been condoned
by the party within 15 days from the date of voting or abstention; or
(3) If any nominated member joins any political after the expiry of 6 months from the
date on which he takes his seat in the house.
Exceptions: The disqualification will not be apply in certain cases
(1) If a member of Parliament / State Legislature goes out of his Party as a result of a
split in the original party provided such group consists of not less than 1/3 of the
total membership of that party in the House; or
(2) If a member goes out as a result of a merger of his original political party with
another political party provided 2/3 of the members of the legislative party have
agreed to such merger; or
(3) If a member, after being elected as the presiding officer gives up the membership
of the party to which he belonged, or does not rejoin that party or becomes a
member of another party.
If any question arises as to whether a member of a House has become subject to any
of the disqualifications under the Tenth Schedule, the question shall be referred to the
Chairman or the Speaker of the House, Whose decision shall be final. Where the
question is as to whether the Speaker/ Chairman has become subject to such
disqualification, the question shall be referred for the decision of such Member of the
House as the House may elect in this behalf, and his decision shall be final.
The presiding officers of the House are required to make rules for giving effect to the
provisions of the schedule. These rules must be approved by the House. Wilful
contravention of these rules may be treated as a breach of the privilege of the House
and be punished accordingly.
Judicial View On Judicial Review Kihoto Hollohan vs Zachilhu and Others AIR 1993 SC, the Supreme Court
struck down Para 7 of the tenth Schedule which provided that the Speaker’s decision regarding the disqualification
shall be final and no court could examine its validity. The Court held that the function of the speaker, while
applying the Anti-defection law is like that of a tribunal and therefore is open to judicial review. The process of
determining the question of disqualification could not considered part of the proceedings of the House.
In Keshavananda Bharati and Others v. the State of Kerala and Another, Judicial review was a basic feature of the
Constitution. The Constitution cannot be amended to violate its basic structure in which the basic features of the
constitutional were established. The parliament cannot alter the basic structure doctrine; thus, they must be kept
unimpaired. Out of these features, the feature of Judicial Review was being altered under the 10th schedule, and
much-needed clarity was needed. A liberal construction had to be adopted by the courts so that it would give
review jurisdiction to the Supreme Court and High Courts in cases of disputes about the review of the speaker's
decision. The power of review was imperative to lift the embargo imposed by the Tenth schedule, which removed
the review jurisdiction of the Courts. The power of review is expedient, and without it, the preciseness of the
disqualification made by the speaker's decision would have never been called into question on account of the
inability to do so by the courts.
In Rajendra Singh Rana vs. Swami Prasad Maurya and Others, AIR 2007 SC the Supreme Court held that the act of
giving a letter requesting the governor to call on the leader of the other side to form a government would amount
to an act of voluntarily giving up membership of the previous party and thus amount to defection.
On the ambit of 'voluntarily giving up membership'- In Ravi S. Naik vs Union of India, AIR 1994 SC the Apex Court
explained that the term "voluntarily giving up membership" had a wider connotation than the term 'resignation'.
The inference could be drawn from the conduct of the individual that he has voluntarily given up his membership
of the political party to which he belongs.
On-time limit - In Keisham Meghachandra Singh v. Speaker, Manipur
legislative assembly, AIR 2020 SC held that the Speaker should decide on a
disqualification petition within a period of three months from the date on
which the petition is filed.
Non-adherence to the principle of Natural Justice - In D. Sudhakar v. DN
Jeevaraju and Ors AIR 2012, the speaker violated the rules of natural justice,
and thus the SC set aside the speaker's decision.
Shri Rajesh Verma v. Shri Mohammad Shahid Akhlaque, BSP (2008), the
court held that if the party member publicly opposes his original party and
supports the other party, then this act deems to be a resignation from the
party.
Officers of the Parliament
Rajya Sabha (Art89-92)
Chairman: The Vice President of India (ex-officio) Art.89(1).
Deputy Chaiman : Elected {Art.89(2)}
Lok Sabha (Art 93-96)
Speaker: Elected (Art.93)
Deputy Speaker: Elected (Art.93)
Secretariat of Parliament
Speaker of the Lok Sabha
• The Speaker is the constitutional and ceremonial head of the House.
• Each House of Parliament has its own presiding officer. There is a Speaker and a Deputy Speaker for the
LokSabha and a Chairman and a Deputy Chairman for the RajyaSabha.
Election of Office of the Speaker:

Qualification: The Constitution of India requires the Speaker should be a member of the House.
• Although there are no specific qualifications prescribed for being elected the Speaker, an understanding of the Constitution and the
laws of the country is considered a major asset for the holder of the Office of the Speaker.
• Usually, a member belonging to the ruling party is elected Speaker. The process has evolved over the years where the ruling party
nominates its candidate after informal consultations with leaders of other parties and groups in the House.
• This convention ensures that once elected, the Speaker enjoys the respect of all sections of the House.

Voting: The Speaker (along with the Deputy Speaker) is elected from among the LokSabha members by a simple
majority of members present and voting in the House.
Term of Office of the Speaker:
• The Speaker holds Office from the date of his/her election till immediately before the first meeting of the next Lok Sabha
(for 5 years).
• The speaker once elected is eligible for re-election.
• Whenever the Lok Sabha is dissolved, the Speaker does not vacate his office and continues till the newly-elected Lok Sabha
meets.
Responsibilities of Speaker:
• Joint Sitting of Both Houses: He/ She presides over a joint sitting of the two Houses of Parliament.

• Such a sitting is summoned by the President to settle a deadlock between the two Houses on a bill.
• Adjournment of Sitting: He/ She can adjourn the House or suspend the meeting in absence one-tenth of the total strength
of the House (called the quorum).
• Casting Vote: The speaker does not vote in the first instance but in the case of a tie; when the House is divided equally on
any question, the Speaker is entitled to vote.

• Such a vote is called a Casting Vote, and its purpose is to resolve a deadlock.
• Money Bill: He / She decides whether a bill is a money bill or not and his/her decision on this question is final.
• Disqualifying Members: It is the speaker who decides the questions of disqualification of a member of the LokSabha,
arising on the ground of defection under the provisions of the Tenth Schedule.

• The 52nd amendment to the Indian Constitution vests this power in the Speaker.
• In 1992, the Supreme Court ruled that the decision of the Speaker in this regard is subject to judicial review.
 Vacation, Resignation, and Removal
Deputy Chairman
Vacation: If he ceases to be a member
of RajyaSabha (Art. 90(a)
Resignation: Art.90(b) to the Chairman
Removal: (1) Art.90(c) May be removed
by resolution of the council passed by
majority, Provided 14 days notice is
required.
(2) Art.92 Whenever there is motion of
resolution for the removal of the
deputy chairman, he/she cannot act as
deputy chairman but as a member of
the house.
Salary and allowances: Art.97 Salaries
and allowances prescribed by
Parliament by law, until it is made
specified in second schedule
Speaker
Vacation: If he ceases to be a member
of Lok Sahba (Art.94(a)
Resignation: Art.94(b) to the Deputy
Speaker
Removal: Art.94(c) May be removed by
resolution of the house of people
passed by majority of then member,
provided that 14 days notice is required
, provided that whenever house of
people dissolved the speaker and
deputy speaker shall not vacate office.
(2) Art.96 Whenever there is motion of
resolution for the removal of the
speaker or deputy speaker, he/she
cannot act as speaker but as a member.
Salary and allowances: Art.97 Salaries
and allowances prescribed by
Parliament by law, until it is made
specified in second schedule
Deputy Speaker
Vacation: If he ceases to be a member
of Lok Sabha (Art.94(a)
Resignation: Art.94(b) To the Speaker
Removal: (1) Art.94(c) May be removed
by resolution of the house of people
passed by majority of then member,
provided that 14 days notice is required
, provided that whenever house of
people dissolved the speaker and
deputy speaker shall not vacate office.
(2) Art.96 Whenever there is motion of
resolution for the removal of the
speaker or deputy speaker, he/she
cannot act as speaker but as a member
Salary and allowances: Art.97 Salaries
and allowances prescribed by
Parliament by law, until it is made
specified in second schedule
Duration of Parliament (Art.83) and Sessions (Art.85)
Duration of house:
For Rajya Sabha – shall not be subject to dissolution but 1/3 member shall retire every 2nd year.
For Lok Sabha – unless sooner dissolved shall continue for five years from the date appointed for its first meeting
Provided that in proclamation of emergency the Parliament may be extended for one year at a time and in no
case beyond a period of six months after the proclamation has ceased to operate.
Sessions of Parliament
• The session of parliament in India is convened by the Government. India does not have a fixed parliamentary
calendar. By convention (i.e. not provided by the Constitution), Parliament meets for three sessions in a year.
The President summons each House of the Parliament from time to time. The gap between two sessions of the
Parliament cannot exceed 6 months, which means the Parliament meets at least two times in one year.
(Art.85).
• A session of the Indian Parliament is the period during which a House meets almost every day uninterruptedly
to manage the business. There are typically three sessions in a year. A session contains many meetings.
• The process of calling all members of the Parliament to meet is called Summoning of Parliament. It is the
President who summons Parliament.
• In general, the sessions are as follows:
• Budget session (February to May)
• Monsoon session (July to September)
• Winter session (November to December)
Joint Session of Parliament (Art.108)
• The Constitution of India provides for the joint sitting of the Parliament’s two Houses, the Lok Sabha
and the Rajya Sabha, in order to break any deadlock between the two.
• The joint sitting of the Parliament is called by the country’s President.
• Such a session is presided over by the Speaker, and in his/her absence, by the Deputy Speaker of the
Lok Sabha. In the absence of both, it is presided over by the Deputy Chairman of the Rajya Sabha.
• If any of the above are not present, any other member of the Parliament can preside by consensus
of both the Houses.
• Article 108 of the Constitution talks about a joint Parliament session.
Condition required for Joint Session
• If a bill is passed by one House and passed on to the other and –
• The other House rejects the bill.
• The Houses disagree on the amendments made to the bill.
• Exception to the Joint session
Money Bills: Money bills do not require the approval of the RajyaSabha. Only LokSabha needs to pass
it. Even if the Upper House does not pass a money bill within 14 days, it is deemed to have been
passed by both Houses of Parliament after the expiry of the above period. So, there is no case for a
joint sitting in the case of a money bill.
Constitution Amendment Bills: According to Article 368, the constitution of India can be amended by
both the Houses by a 2/3rd majority. In case of a disagreement between both the houses, there is no
provision for a joint session of Parliament.
Conduct of Business during Joint Sittings
• According to Article 118, the President can make rules for the procedure of the joint
sitting after due consultation with the Lok Sabha Speaker and Rajya Sabha
Chairman.
• In a joint sitting, any new amendment cannot be proposed in the bill, excepting
those which have been passed by one House and refused by the other.
• Amendments which are relevant to the matter at discussion can only be proposed.
• About the admissibility of amendments, the decision of the presiding officer is final.
• The bill in a joint sitting is passed by a simple majority.
According to Article 87 of the Constitution, there are two instances when the
country’s President specifically addresses a joint sitting of both Houses. They are:
• At the start of the first session after a general election. This is when the
reconstituted ok Sabha meets for the first time after being elected.
• At the start of the first session every year.
Quorum of House (Art.100)
• The minimum number of the members required to be present for conducting a
meeting of the house is called Quorum.
• one-tenth strength is fixed as quorum by the Constitution for both Lok Sabha and
Rajya Sabha. Therefore,
• there should be at least 55 members present to conduct a sitting of Lok Sabha, while
at least 25 members are to be present to conduct a sitting of Rajya Sabha.
Adjournment of House
• When the sitting of the House is terminated to meets again at the time appointed for
the next sitting, it is called Adjournment.
• The sittings of the house can be postponed through adjournment for a specified
time such as hours, days or weeks.
• If the meeting is terminated without any definite time/date fixed for the next
meeting, it is called Adjournment sine die.
• The presiding officer (Speaker or Chairman) of the House is the authority to adjourn
as well as adjournment sine die the house sittings.
Prorogation of Session
• Prorogation is done by the President of India. It is the end of session of Parliament and not the
dissolution of the house.
• Prorogation is done only in case of Lok Sabha, as Rajya Sabha does not dissolve.
Functions of Parliament
• he functions of the Parliament are mentioned in the Indian Constitution in Chapter II of Part V.
The functions of the Parliament can be classified under several heads. They are discussed
below:
Legislative Functions
• The Parliament legislates on all matters mentioned in the Union List and the Concurrent List.
• In the case of the Concurrent List, where the state legislatures and the Parliament have joint
jurisdiction, the union law will prevail over the states unless the state law had received the
earlier presidential assent. However, the Parliament can any time, enact a law adding to,
amending, varying or repealing a law made by a state legislature.
• The Parliament can also pass laws on items in the State List under the following circumstances:
• If Emergency is in operation, or any state is placed under President’s Rule (Article 356), the Parliament
can enact laws on items in the State List as well.
• As per Article 249, the Parliament can make laws on items in the State List if the Rajya Sabha passes a
resolution by ⅔ majority of its members present and voting, that it is necessary for the Parliament to
make laws on any item enumerated in the State List, in the national interest.
• As per Article 253, it can pass laws on the State List items if it is required for the implementation of
international agreements or treaties with foreign powers.
 According to Article 252, if the legislatures of two or more states pass a resolution to the effect that it is
desirable to have a parliamentary law on any item listed in the State List, the Parliament can make laws for
those states.
Executive Functions (Control over the Executive)
• In the parliamentary form of government, the executive is responsible to the legislature.
Hence, the Parliament exercises control over the executive by several measures.
• By a vote of no-confidence, the Parliament can remove the Cabinet (executive) out of power.
It can reject a budget proposal or any other bill brought by the Cabinet. A motion of no-
confidence is passed to remove a government from office.
• The MPs (Members of Parliament) can ask questions to the ministers on their omissions and
commissions. Any lapses on the part of the government can be exposed in the Parliament.
Financial Functions
• Parliament is the ultimate authority when it comes to finances. The Executive cannot spend a
single pie without parliamentary approval.
• The Union Budget prepared by the Cabinet is submitted for approval by the Parliament. All
proposals to impose taxes should also be approved by the Parliament.
• There are two standing committees (Public Accounts Committee and Estimates Committee)
of the Parliament to keep a check on how the executive spends the money granted to it by
the legislature
Amending Powers (Art.368)
• The Parliament has the power to amend the Constitution of India. Both Houses of the Parliament have
equal powers as far as amending the Constitution is concerned. Amendments will have to be passed in
both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha for them to be effective.
Electoral Functions
• The Parliament takes part in the election of the President and the Vice President. The electoral college
that elects the President comprises of, among others, the elected members of both Houses. The
President can be removed by a resolution passed by the Rajya Sabha agreed to by the Lok Sabha.
Judicial Functions
• In case of breach of privilege by members of the House, the Parliament has punitive powers to punish
them. A breach of privilege is when there is an infringement of any of the privileges enjoyed by the MPs.
• A privilege motion is moved by a member when he feels that a minister or any member has committed a
breach of privilege of the House or one or more of its members by withholding facts of a case or by
giving wrong or distorted facts.
• In the parliamentary system, legislative privileges are immune to judicial control.
• The power of the Parliament to punish its members is also generally not subject to judicial review.
• Other judicial functions of the Parliament include the power to impeach the President, the Vice
President, the judges of the Supreme Court, High Courts, Auditor-General, etc.
Some other Functions
• Issues of national and international importance are discussed in the Parliament. The opposition plays an
important role in this regard and ensures that the country is aware of alternate viewpoints.
• The Parliament has the power to alter, decrease or increase the boundaries of states/UTs.
Legislative Procedure:
Legislative Procedure is followed for making of laws, is initiated by the
introduction of the proposals for legislation in the form of a “Bill”.
Bill is the draft of a legislative proposal which can be introduced in either House of
Parliament (except money/finance bill, which can be introduced only in Lok Sabha)
{107(1)}. It can only become law only when it has received the approval of the
Parliament’s both Houses [107(2)] and gets assent of the President Art.111.
Introduction of Bill: A bill may be introduced by a minister or a private member.
Kinds of Bill:
(1) General Bill Art.107 & 108.
(2) Money Bill Art.110 and 109 (procedure).
(3) Finance Bill Art.117.
(4) Constitution Amendment Bill 368.
(1) Ordinary Bills 107
An Ordinary Bill may defined as “that Bill which is neither a Money Bill nor a Financial
Bill involving expenditure from the Consolidated fund”
An ‘Ordinary Bill’ may be introduced in either House of Parliament (Art.196 similarly
provides for in case of state Legislature). When it is passed by that House, the bill is
transmitted to the other House. If the Bill has been agreed to by both Houses( with or
without amendments), the bill is deemed to be passed by both the houses. Thereafter,
the Bill is sent for the President’s assent. Thus, in case of ordinary bills, Rajya Sabha is
a co-equal of Lok Sabha.
Process of Passing the Bill: It may be noted that a Bill passes through various stages (in
each House of Parliament) like first reading, second reading, committee stages, report
stage, and third reading.
After Introduction (‘First Reading’- no discussions take place at this stage), the motion
is moved that the Bill be taken into consideration, or it be referred to a select
Committee (which later submits its ‘report’) or to a joint committee, or it be circulated
for the purpose of eliciting public opinion on it.
In ‘Second Reading’ the general discussion of the principles of the Bill and its clause-by-
clause consideration occurs.
The ‘third reading’ is confined to limited discussion for passing or rejection of the bill
as a whole.
Joint Sitting in case of deadlock on a Bill (Art.108)
If there is any disagreement between the two houses over the Bill, it cannot be deemed
to have been passed by both Houses. The President can call ‘joint session’ of the two
Houses if a bill (other than a Money Bill) passed by one house is rejected by the other
house, or if the amendments proposed to a bill by one house are not acceptable to the
other, or if the other house does not take any action on a Bill remitted to it for six months
(unless the Bill has lapsed by reason of a dissolution of the Lok Sabha).
The joint session of Parliament is presided over by the Speaker of the Lok Sabha. A
decision is taken by a majority of the total number of members of both Houses present
and voting. Thus, the will of the Lok Sabha prevails as the number of members of Lok
Sabha is greater. Till, date joint session has been called only fro three times.
The bill shall be deemed to have been passed with such amendments, if any, as are
agreed to at the joint sitting.
A joint sitting of the two houses shall be held even if the Lok Sabha has been dissolved
provided the President had notified his intention to hold the join sitting before the
dissolution of the house takes place.
It is the only case in which the members of a dissolved House take part in the passing of
a bill.
Money Bill(Art.110)
Under Art.110(1), a Bill is deemed to be a money Bill if it contains only provisions dealing with all or any of the
following matters:
(a) The imposition, abolition, remission, alteration or regulation of any tax;
(b) The regulation of the borrowing of money or the giving of any guarantee by the Government of India or the
amendment of the law with respect to any financial obligation undertaken by the Government of India.
(c) The custody of the Consolidated/Contingency Fund of India, the payment of moneys into or the withdrawal
of moneys from any such fund;
(d) The appropriation of moneys out of the Consolidated Fund of India;
(e) The declaring of any such expenditure to be charged on the Consolidated Fund of India or the increasing of
the amount of any such expenditure;
(f) The receipt of money on account of Consolidated Fund of India or the Public Account of India or the custody
or issue of such money or the audit of the accounts of the Union/State; or,
(g) Any matter incidental to any of the matters specified in sub-clauses.
Art.110(2)- A bill shall not be deemed to a money bill by reason only that it provides for the (1) imposition of
fines, (2) or other pecuniary penalties, (3) or for the demands rendered, (4) or payments of fees for licenses, (5)
or fees for services rendered, (6) or by reason that it provides for the imposition, abolition, remission, alteration
or regulation of any tax by any local authority or body for local purposes.
Art.110(3) If any question arises as to bill is money bill or not, the decision of speaker of house of people shall be
final.
Art110(4) Every money bill shall endorsed by speaker of House of people when transmitted to the upper house
(Art.109) or to the President for his assent to bill (Art.111).
Procedure in respect of Money Bills (Art.109)
Certification of Money Bills- Money Bill can be introduced on the
recommendation of the President of India in the Lok Sabha only. If any question
arises whether a Bill is a money Bill or not, the decision of the Speaker thereon is
final. The certificate of the Speaker to the effect that a Bill is a money Bill, is to
be endorsed and signed by him when it is transmitted Rajya Sabha (after it has
been passed by the Lok Sabha) and also when it is presented to the President for
his assent.
Role of Rajya Sabha with Regard to Money Bills:- In money Bills, Lok Sabha
enjoys a pre-eminent position. A money Bill cannot be introduced in the Rajya
Sabha and it has no power to reject or amend it. Rajya Sabha is required to
return a money Bill passed and transmitted by Lok Sabha within a period of
14vDays from the date of its receipt. Rajya Sabha may return a Money Bill
transmitted to it with or without its recommendation:
(1) If a money Bill is returned by Rajya Sabha without any recommendation, it is
presented to the President for his assent.
(2) If Lok Sabha accepts all or any of the amendments recommended by
Rajya Sabha, the Bill is deemed to have been passed by both the Houses of
Parliament.
(3) If Lok Sabha does not accept any of the amendments recommended by
Rajya Sabha, the Money Bill is deemed to have been passed by both the
Houses of Parliament in the form in which it was passed by Lok Sabha
without any of the amendments recommended by Rajya Sabha and it is
presented to the President for his assent.
(4) If Rajya Sabha does not return a Money Bill within the prescribed period
of 14 days, the Bill is deemed to have been passed by both the Houses of
Parliament at the expiry of the said period in the form in which it was
passed by Lok Sabha and is presented to the President for his assent.
The President may either give or withhold his assent to a money Bill. Under
the Constitution, a Money Bill cannot be returned to the House by the
President for reconsideration.
Finance Bills (Art.117)
It is secret Bill introduced in Lok Sabha every year immediately after the
presentation of the General Budget to give effect to the financial proposals of the
Government of India for the following financial year. Finance Bills are treated as
Money Bills as they substantially deal with amendments to various tax laws.
Further, like Money Bills, Finance Bills cannot be introduced in the Lok Sabha
without prior recommendation of the President. They cannot be introduced in
the Rajya Sabha.
However in respect to other matters, A finance Bill is like an Ordinary Bill. When
the Finance Bill is passed by the Lok Sabha, it is transmitted to the Rajya Sabha
for its passing. A Finance Bill cannot be presented to the President for its assent
unless both the Houses have passed it. Thus, a Finance Bill is a mixture of an
Ordinary Bill and a Money Bill.
Procedure in Financial Matters (Art.112-117)
The Budget (Art.112)
The ‘Annual Financial Statement’ (the main budget document) or the Statement of the Estimated Receipts and Expenditure of
the Government of India in respect of each financial year (1st April to 31st March) is popularly known as the Budget.
Under Art.112(1) of the Constitution, such a statement has to be laid before Parliament in respect of every financial year.
The Budget contains:
• Estimates of revenue and capital receipts,
• Ways and means to raise the revenue,
• Estimates of expenditure,
• Details of the actual receipts and expenditure of the closing financial year and the reasons for any deficit or surplus in that
year, and
• The economic and financial policy of the coming year, i.e., taxation proposals, prospects of revenue, spending programme
and introduction of new schemes/projects.
• In Parliament, the Budget goes through six stages:
• Presentation of Budget.
• General discussion.
• Scrutiny by Departmental Committees.
• Voting on Demands for Grants.
• Passing of Appropriation Bill.
• Passing of Finance Bill.
Changes Introduced in 2017
• Advancement of Budget presentation to February 1 (earlier presented on the last working day of February),
• Merger of Railway Budget with the General Budget, and
• The estimates of expenditure in the Annual Financial Statement shall show separately- (a)
the sums required to meet expenditure described by the Constitution as expenditure
charged upon the Consolidated Fund of India; and (b) the sums required to meet other
expenditure proposed to be made from the Consolidated Fund of India, and shall
distinguish expenditure on revenue account from other expenditure. (Art.112(2).
• Under the Constitution, certain items of expenditure like emoluments of the President,
salaries, and allowances of the Chairman/ Deputy Chairmen (Rajya Sabha) and the Speaker/
Deputy Speaker (Lok Sabha), Salaries and allowances and pensions of the judges of the
Supreme Court and, the Comptroller and Auditor General of India, intersest on and
repayment of loans raised by Government, and, payments made to satisfy decrees of court,
etc, are charged on the “Consolidated Fund”. (Art.112(3).
• So much of the estimates as relates to ‘expenditure charged upon the “Consolidated Fund
of India” shall not be submitted to the vote of Parliament, but nothing in this clause shall be
construed as preventing the discussion in either House of Parliament of any of those
estimates. Art.113(1).
• So much of the said estimates as relates to ‘other expenditure’ shall be submitted in the
form of ‘demands for grants’ to the Lok Sabha, and the Lok Sabha shall have power to
assent , or to refuse to assent, to any demand, or to assent to any demand subject to a
reduction of the amount specified therein. {Art.113(2)}
• No demand for a grant shall be made except on the recommendation of the
President.{Art.113(3)}
Appropriation Bills (Art.114)
It is introduced in Lok Sabha immediately after the voting of the relevant demands for
grants. Such Bills are categorized as ‘Money Bills’ as they seek to authorize
appropriation from the Consolidated Fund of India of all money required to meet the
grants made by the House and the expenditure charged on the Consolidated Fund of
India.
Art.114(1) lays down that as soon as may be after the grants under Art.113 have been
made by the Lok Sabha, there shall be introduced a Bill to provide for the appropriation
out of the Consolidated Fund of India of all moneys required to meet-
(a) The grants so made by the LokSabha; and
(b) The expenditure charged on the Consolidated fund of India but not exceeding in any
case the amount shown in the statement previously laid before Parliament.
Art.114(2) No amendment shall be proposed to nay such Bill in either House of
Parliament which will have the effect of varying the amount or altering the designation
of any grant so made or of varying the amount of any expenditure charged on the
Consolidated Fund of India.
No money shall be withdrawn from the Consolidated Fund of India except under
appropriation made by law passed in accordance with the provisions of this article.
Vote on Accounts/ Votes of Credit/ Exceptional Grants
As the whole process of Budget, beginning with the presentation and ending with
discussion and voting of demands for grants and passing of Appropriation Bill and
Finance Bill, generally goes beyond the current financial year, a provision has been
made in the Constitution empowering the LokSabha to make any grant in advance
through a ‘Vote on Account’ to enable the Government to carry on its business.
Normally the vote on account is taken for two months. During an election year, it may
be taken for a period longer than two months.
Votes on Account: Art.116(1) (a) provides that the Loksabha shall have power to make
any grant in advance in respect of the estimated expenditure for a part of any financial
year pending the completion of the procedure prescribed in Art.113 fro the voting of
such grant and the passing of the law in accordance with the provisions of Art.114 in
relation to that expenditure.
Votes of Credit: Art.116(1)(b) provides that the loksabha shall have power to make a
grant for meeting an unexpected demand upon the sources of India when on account
of the magnitude or the indefinite character of the service the demand cannot be stand
with the details ordinarily given in an annual financial statement.
Exceptional Grants: Art116(1)(c) provides that the Loksabha shall have power to make
an exceptional grant which forms no part of the current service of any financial year;
and Parliament shall have power to authorize by law the withdrawal of moneys from
the consolidated Fund of India for the purposes for which the said grants are made.
Supplementary and Excess Demands for grants: Art. 115
If the amount authorized to be expended for a particular service for the current financial year
is found to be insufficient for the purpose of that year or when a need has arisen during the
current financial year for supplementary or additional expenditure upon some ‘new service’
not contemplated in the Budget for that year, the President causes to be laid before the houses
another statement showing the estimated amount of that expenditure.
General Bill: A bill which is not money bill, financial Bill or Constitutional Bill is called general
Bill.
Provision for Introduction and Passing of Bills.
Art.107(1) If a Bill is not money bill under Art.109 and Financial Bill under Art.117, may
originate in either house.
Art. 107(2) A bill shall be passed by the both houses of Parliament with amendment as are
agreed to by both house, that is in same format and content by both houses.
Effect of Dissolution of Loksabha on pending Bill.
1. If a Bill is introduced in Council of states and pending in it, during pendency of Bill
Loksabha is dissolved, then there is no effect of dissolution of Loksabha on the Bill.
Art.107(4).
2. There is no effect of prorogation of house on the pending bill. Art. 107(3)
3. A Bill is pending in Loksabha or passed by Loksabha and pending in Council of States shall
be lapsed on the dissolution of the Loksabah, subject to the Provisions of Art.108.
 Parliamentary Privileges
Meaning:
Parliamentary Privileges are special rights, immunities and exemptions enjoyed by the
two houses of Parliament, their committees and their members.
They are necessary in order to secure the independence and effectiveness of their
actions.
Without these privileges, the Houses can neither maintain their authority, dignity and
honour nor can protect their meetings from obstruction in the discharge of their
parliamentary Responsibility.
Parliamentary/Legislative privileges connotes “certain rights accruing to each house of
Parliament collectively and also to members individually without which it would not be
possible to maintain either independence of action or the dignity and efficiency of a
sovereign Legislature.” Thus, without such privileges the members could not discharge
their functions properly.
The Constitution has also extended the parliamentary privileges to those persons who
are entitled to speak and take part in the proceedings of a house of Parliament or any
of its committees. These include the attorney general of India and Union Ministers.
It must be clarified here that the parliamentary privileges do not extend to the
president who is also an integral part of the Parliament.
Parliamentary Privileges can be classified into two broad categories:
1. Those that are enjoyed by each house of Parliament collectively.
2. Those that are enjoyed by the members individually.

Collective Privileges
The privileges belonging to each House of Parliament collectively are:
1. In has the right to publish its reports, debates and proceedings and also the right to prohibit others from
publishing the same. The 44th Amendment Act of 1978 restored the freedom of the press to publish true
reports of parliamentary proceedings without prior permission of the House. But this is not applicable in
the case of a secret sitting of the House.
2. It can exclude strangers from its proceedings and hold secret sittings to discuss some important matters.
3. It can make rules to regulate its own procedure and the conduct of its business and to adjudicate upon such
matters.
4. It can punish It can punish members as well as outsiders for breach of its privileges or its contempt by
reprimand, admonition or imprisonment (also suspension or expulsion, in case of members).
5. It has the right to receive immediate information of the arrest, detention, conviction, imprisonment and
release of a member.
6. It can institute inquiries and order the attendance of and send for relevant papers and records.
7. The courts are prohibited to inquire into the proceedings of or its committees.
8. No person(either a member or outsider) can be arrested, and no legal process (civil or criminal) can be
served within the precincts of the House without the permission of the presiding officer.
Individual Privileges
The privileges belonging to the members individually are:
1. They cannot be arrested during the session of Parliament and 40 days before
the beginning and 40 days after the end of a session. This privilege is
available only in civil cases and not in criminal cases or preventive detention
cases.
2. They have freedom of speech in Parliament. No member is liable to any
proceedings in any court fro anything said or any vote given by him in
Parliament or its committees. This freedom is subject to the provisions of the
Constitution and to the rules and standing orders regulating the procedure of
Parliament.
3. They are exempted from jury service. They can refuse to give evidence and
appear as a witness in a case pending in a court when Parliament is in
session.
Parliamentary Privileges Available to Members:
Freedom of Speech: Art 105 (1)
• Subject to Art.121 and tenth Schedule and rule -238of R.S and 352 of L.S - The members of the parliament have been vested with the
freedom of speech and expression. As the very essence of our parliamentary democracy is a free and fearless discussion, anything said by
them expressing their views and thoughts are exempted from any liability and cannot be tried in the court of law.
• Sir John Eliot’s Case- The House of Lords recognised that the court should never have assumed jurisdiction over the charge of seditious
speeches, which was “fully answered by the plea of privilege” and reversed the decision of Court of King’s bench in which they have
convicted Sir John for delivering a seditious speech in House of Common.
• The freedom of speech guaranteed under clause (1) is different from that which a citizen enjoys as a fundamental right under Article 19 (1)
(a). the freedom of speech as a fundamental right does not protect an individual absolutely for what he says. The right is subject to
reasonable restrictions under clause (2) of Article 19. The term ‘freedom of speech’ as used in this article means that no member of
Parliament shall be liable to any proceedings, civil and criminal, in any court for the statements made in debates in the Parliament or any
committee thereof. The freedom of speech conferred under this article cannot therefore be restricted under Article 19 (2) . Clauses (1) and
(2) of Article 105 protect what is said within the house and not what a member of Parliament may say outside. Accordingly, if a member
publishes his speech outside Parliament, he will be held liable if the speech is defamatory . Besides, the freedom of speech. To which
Article 105 (1) and (2) refer, would be available to a member of Parliament when he attends the session of Parliament, no occasion arises
for the exercise of the right of freedom of speech, and no complaint can be made that the said right has been invalidly invaded.
• K.A.Nambiyar vs Security Secretary, Madras 1966 SC
The Supreme Court held that such kind of freedom could be claim by member only he speaks in house not in outside.
P.V.Narshimha Rao vs UOI, 1998 S.C, The Constitution Bench by a majority of three to two answered the question (Does Article 105 of the
Constitution confer any immunity on a Member of Parliament from being prosecuted in a criminal court for an offence involving offer or
acceptance of a bribe?) in the affirmative, except in the case (who, unlike the other co-accused did not cast his vote on the no-confidence
motion), holding that the bribe-taking Members of Parliament who voted on the no-confidence motion are entitled to immunity from
criminal prosecution for the offences of bribery and criminal conspiracy conferred on them by Article 105(2) of the Constitution. It also
concluded that since there is no authority to grant sanction for prosecution of the offending persons for certain offences, they cannot be
tried under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for such offences.
2. Immunity from civil arrest
• The members enjoy freedom from arrest in any civil case 40 days before and
after the adjournment of the house and also when the house is in session. No
member can be arrested from the limits of the parliament without the
permission of the house to which he/she belongs so that there is no hindrance
in performing their duties.
• If the detention of any members of the parliament is made, the chairman or
the speaker should be informed by the concerned authority, the reason for the
arrest. But, a member can be arrested outside the limits of the house on
criminal charges against him under The Preventive Detention act, The Essential
Services Maintenance Act (ESMA), The National Security Act (NSA) or any such
act.
3.Immunity from appearing as a witness
• The members of the parliament enjoy special privileges and are exempted
from attending court as a witness. They are given complete liberty to attend
the house and perform their duties without any interference from the court.
Immunity avialbale to House
(1) Freedom of Publication of Proceedings
Art.105(2) provides that “no member of parliament shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or
any vote given by him in parliament or any committee thereof, and no person shall be so liable in respect of the publication by
or under the authority of either House of Parliament of any report, paper, votes or proceedings.”
The Constitution44th Amendment Act,1978 has put the immunity for publication on a very sound footing. It has added
Art.361-A to the Constitution which provides that “no person shall be liable to any proceedings, civil or criminal, in any court in
respect of either House of Parliament or the Legislative Assembly (or either House of the Legislature of a state) unless the
publication is proved to have been made with malice.”
The protection under Art.105 (2) does not extend to publication made by a private person without the authority of a House.
Further, the publication by a newspaper of those parts of the speech of a member in the House which were ordered to be
expunged by the Speaker constituted breach of privilege of the House.(Search Light Case 1959 SC).
M. S. M. Sharma v/s Shri Sri Krishna Sinha, 1959 SC.
In this case, 30th May, 1957: Maheshwar Prasad Narayan Sinha who is a member of Bihar Legislative Assembly alleged the Chief
Minister of being partial in the selection process of his Ministers, transfers of public servants and involvement and in corrupt
administrative practices.
The Speaker of the Legislative Assembly replied to the contentions of Mr. Maheshwar by stating that: I have already ruled with
reference to whatever has been said about Mahesh Babu that such words be expunged from the proceedings.
31st May, 1957: Though the statement was expunged by the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, the English daily, ‘Searchlight',
published an article reporting the entire speech of Mr. Maheshwar Prasad Narayan Sinha, including the expunged parts as well.
18th August, 1958: The editor of Searchlight, herein the petitioner, was summoned by the Secretary of the Legislative Assembly
to appear before the Privilege Committee and reply as to why an action against him shall not be taken for the Breach of
Privilege.
Issues
Whether the Constitution of India, under Article 194(3), empowers a State Legislative Assembly to restrict any publication of a
proceeding that has been witnessed by its members or to prohibit the publication of the parts that has been directed to be
expunged?
The Petitioner contended that the ‘Right to freedom of speech and expression' is a
Fundamental Right under Article 19(1)(a) and hence the publication of a bona fide
report shall not be treated as illegal. Moreover, in case of a conflict between Article
19(1)(a) & Article 194(3), the former shall prevail over the latter as it is a Fundamental
Right.
The court concluded that at the time of the onset of the Constitution of India i.e. 26th
January, 1950, the House of Commons reserved a right to impose the said restriction.
Still, in cases of conflict, both Article 19(1)(a) & Article 194(3), both stand out to have
equivalent importance and one of them cannot be provided any privilege over the
other. In cases of such a conflict, the principle of ‘Harmonious Construction' shall
adopted, relying upon which, Article 19(1)(a) stands general and Article 194(3) stands
special.
Hence, the court deduced a conclusion that the notice by the Assembly stands valid
and the petition stands dismissed.
Now Article 361-A inserted by the 44th Amendment with effect from June 20, 1979
provides that no person shall be liable to any proceedings civil or criminal for reporting
the proceedings of either House of Parliament or a State Legislature unless the
reporting is proved to have been made with malice. This provision does not apply to
the reporting of proceedings of secret sittings of the Houses.
Keshav Singh vs State of UP, 1965 SC
Keshav Singh, he printed and published a pamphlet about a congress MLA, Narsingh
Narin Pandey. The pamphlet clearly disowned Narsingh Pandey and cleared that he is
a corrupt politician. Narsingh Narin Pandey claimed that the pamphlet clearly violated
the privilege and dignity of Narsingh Narin Pandey and this clearly shows the
contempt of the Assembly. Keshav Singh and his colleagues, who supported him were
ordered to summon before the Lucknow assembly to give answers for their actions.
But they refuse to present before the assembly. Keshav Singh was arrested and
brought to the assembly.
A warrant was issued by the speaker of the legislative assembly, Mr. Verma directing
the District Jail, Lucknow to take Keshav Singh under custody for the period of seven
days.
An advocate on the behalf of Keshav Singh presented a writ petition of Habeus corpus
under SECTION 491 of Code of Criminal procedure, 1898 as well as under ARTICLE
226 of the constitution.
According to the appeal, Keshav Singh was ordered to be imprisoned after receiving
the reprimand which rendered the order of imprisonment unconstitutional without
any authority.
The house proceed to take action against the two learned judges who passed the order, as well
as against Keshav Singh and his advocate. The house again passed an order to keshav Singh to
summon in assembly and both the judges should be brought in custody before the house.
When the warrant was issued by the legislative assembly seeking both the learned judges to
represent in the assembly the President decided to use his powers under ARTICLE 143 (1) of
the constitution.
JUDGEMENT
The Supreme court referred to so many cases and precedents across the world in detail and
finally came to certain conclusions.
• It was declared that filing the petition was not an illegal act, so neither the judges nor Keshav
Singh was in contempt for filing the petition.
• The full bench had the authority to issue the interim orders.
• A judge who hears a person petition against a house order does not commit contempt of the
house, nor does the house have the authority to take action.
Judgment of High Court
The HC disposed Keshav Singh’s case and refused to infer mala fides in the Assembly. The High
Court held, dismissing Keshav Singh’s petition, that whether there had been contempt of the
House, or not, in a particular situation, is a matter exclusively for the House to decide and the
court would not go into the question of legality.
Right to exclude strangers
The members of the house have the power and right to exclude strangers who are not
members of the house from the proceedings. This right is very essential for securing
free and fair discussion in the house. If any breach is reported then the punishment in
the form of admonition, reprimand, or imprisonment can be given.
The right to punish members and outsiders for breach of its privileges
The Indian Parliament has the power to punish any person whether strangers or any
member of the house for any breach or contempt of the house. When any breach is
committed by the member of the house, he/she is expelled from the house.
The right to regulate the internal affairs of the house
Each house has a right to regulate its proceedings in the way it deems fit and proper.
Each house has its own jurisdiction over the house and no authority from the other
house can interfere in regulation of its internal proceedings. Under Article 118 of the
Constitution, the house have been empowered to conduct its regulation for
proceedings and cannot be challenged in the court of law on the ground that the
house is not in accordance with the rules made under Article 118. The Supreme Court
has also held that this is general provision and the rule is not binding upon the house.
They can deviate or change the rule anytime accordingly.
Punishments prescribed for breach of privileges or contempt of the house
• Imprisonment – If the breach committed is of a grave nature the, punishment can be given in the form
of the imprisonment of any member or person.
• Imposing fine – If in the view of the parliament, the breach or contempt committed is of economic
offence and any pecuniary gain has been made from the breach then, the parliament can impose fine
on the person.
• Prosecuting the offenders – The parliament can also prosecute the one committing the breach.
• Punishment given to its own members – If any contempt is committed by the members of the
parliament then, he is to be punished by the house itself which could also result in the suspension of
the member from the house.
Other Rights available to Parliament and state legislature
Right to restrain to publish the proceedings
Right to exclude strangers from house.
Right to regulate its proceedings
Right to punish for breech of Privilege
Right to immediate information of the arrest etc., of any member of the house
Prohibition of arrest etc., within precnicts of the houses without permission of the speaker of the house.
Right to issue general warrant.
Prohibition to court to inquire into proceedings of the house. Art.122 (Parliament) and Art.212 (state
legislature)
Freedom of Press and Parliamentary Privileges
The parliamentary privileges restrict the freedom of the press, which is a fundamental right.
Caution to a great extent has to be taken by the press while publishing any report of the
proceedings of the parliament or the conduct of any member. There are instances where the
press can be held liable for the contempt of the house
• Publishing any matter concerning the character of any member of the parliament
• Any pre-mature publication of the proceedings
• Misreporting or misrepresenting the proceeding of the house
• Publishing the expunged portion of the proceedings
In spite of the fact that the freedom of the press is subject to the parliamentary privileges,
certain enactments have been made for the protection of the freedom of the press. If the
fundamental right is being violated, there is no meaning of democracy. The freedom of the
press has to be protected because we need to be informed about the acts of our
representatives. Parliamentary Proceedings (protection of the publication) Act, 1977 protects
the rights of the press under certain given circumstances
• The reports of the proceedings are substantially true.
• The report is made without malice.
• The report is made for public good.
• The report should not constitute any secret meeting of the house.
Judicial review of the parliamentary privileges
• The Indian judiciary has been vested with the responsibility of the protection
of the fundamental rights. Parliament members claim absolute sovereignty
over their powers and in any case does not want the judiciary to interfere. But,
the judiciary is regarded as the guardian of our Constitution and it cannot sit
quietly if any fundamental right of a citizen is violated due to privileges or
when there is an escape from any criminal liability.
• The judiciary has to take a stand on the wrongs committed by the members
who are taking the shelter of the privileges. The Supreme Court in Keshav
Singh’s case observed that the privileges conferred on the members are subject
to the fundamental rights.
• The Supreme Court has also held that any conflict arising between the
privileges and the fundamental rights would be resolved by adopting
harmonious construction. The judiciary is very well aware of the fact that it
does not have jurisdiction over parliamentary matters but it is necessary for
the society that any violation should be resolved by the court as it deems fit.
In case of a conflict between the provisions under Art.194 and and the provisions
pertaining to fundamental rights, an attempt will have to be made to resolve the said
conflict by the adoption of the rule of harmonious construction. Further Art.194 (or
Art.105) is subject to the fundamental rights guaranteed Art.21and Art.22 the Constitution
of India.
The Court could examine the validity of detention of a person sentenced by the Assembly
under a general warrant. Art.21 is not subject to the legislative privileges and therefore, a
person can move the court for enforcing his right to life or personal liberty guaranteed by
Art.21 by appropriate proceedings. (Keshav Singh Case).
The Court made a distinction between British Parliament and Indian Parliament. The
former is sovereign and the latter is subject to the provisions of the Constitution. Ours
being a federal Constitution, the interpretation of the Constitution is judicial function,
including the interpretation of the privileges of the Legislature.
Raja Rampal vs UOI 2007 SC,
The Supreme Court held that when the court examine the proceedings of the houses, it
does not act as Appellate Court rather acting as Court of the land. And its intention is only
to examine whether the house is acting as per the Constitution or not or on the ground of
natural justice.
Similar view has been observed by C.J.I. Gajendragadkar (Keshav Singh) Art.105, 194
provides privileges to the legislature similar to the House of commons in England but the
privileges available to the Parliament is not similar to House of commons because House of
commons is court of record where the Parliament in India is not court of records. So power
available to house of commons as a court of records is not available to parliament in India.