Legislative Procedure In Parliament

A joint session of parliament can be called under Article 108 of the constitution if the Rajya Sabha fails to adopt a bill passed by the Lok Sabha. A joint sitting of Parliament is a mechanism to resolve a deadlock between the two houses. Not all bills can be referred to a joint sitting of Parliament. There are two exceptions. Money bills, which deal with taxation and spending, can only be originated in the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha has limited powers to suggest amendments. Disagreements are usually resolved through conferences between the houses, not a joint sitting. Constitutional amendment bills require a special majority in both houses, A joint sitting cannot be called. Therefore, a joint sitting is only used for ordinary bills, which are any bills that don't fall under the category of money bills or constitutional amendment bills.

**Statement 1 Incorrect:** An amendment to the Constitution of India can be initiated by the introduction of a bill in either house of Parliament, the Lok Sabha or the Rajya Sabha. **Statement 2 Incorrect:** If an amendment seeks to make changes in the federal character of the Constitution, the amendment requires ratification by the legislatures of at least half of the States of India. This is a special provision to ensure a wider consensus for changes affecting the balance of power between the center and the states.

The Lok Sabha (Lower House) has the final say in the matter of Money Bill. Here's the process: - The Money Bill originates in the Lok Sabha. - The Lok Sabha passes the Money Bill. - The Bill is sent to the Rajya Sabha for recommendations. The Rajya Sabha can discuss the Bill and recommend amendments within 14 days. Two scenarios can occur 1. Rajya Sabha returns the Bill without recommendations or with recommendations accepted by the Lok Sabha. The Bill is deemed to have been passed by both Houses of Parliament in its original or amended form. 2. Rajya Sabha recommends amendments that the Lok Sabha disagrees with (substantial amendments). The Lok Sabha can either accept the recommendations of the Rajya Sabha or reject them. If the Lok Sabha rejects the amendments, the Bill is deemed to have been passed by both Houses in the form in which it was passed by the Lok Sabha (original form). Essentially, the Rajya Sabha's power to amend a Money Bill is limited. While they can propose recommendations, the Lok Sabha has the final authority to decide whether to accept or reject those changes.

When a bill is referred to a joint sitting of both houses of the Indian Parliament due to a deadlock, it requires a simpler majority for passage compared to a regular bill passed by each house individually. This provision helps break the impasse and allows for the bill's passage.

**Statement 1 is correct:** The Rajya Sabha has no power either to reject or to amend a Money Bill. This is a provision under Article 110 of the Indian Constitution. **Statement 2 is correct.** The Rajya Sabha cannot vote on the Demands for Grants. This is the exclusive privilege of the Lok Sabha. **Statement 3 is incorrect.** The Rajya Sabha can discuss the Annual Financial Statement (Budget), but it does not have the power to vote on the demands for grants. This is also the exclusive privilege of the Lok Sabha.

**Statement 1 is incorrect:** Private member’s bills are introduced by Members of Parliament (MPs) who are not ministers i.e., they do not hold any position in the government. These bills allow non-ministerial MPs to propose legislative changes, reflecting their views or those of their political parties on important issues. **Statement 2 is incorrect:** While the passage rate of private member’s bills is very low, it is not true that no such bill has ever been passed in recent times. Since 1952, a total of 14 private member’s bills have been passed by Parliament. One of the most notable examples is the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Bill, 1970, which was successfully enacted. However, the majority of private member’s bills fail to become law due to a lack of government backing, time constraints, or procedural hurdles. Hence, the correct answer is option (D) neither 1 nor 2.

**Option A is correct.** A Bill shall be deemed a Money Bill if it contains only provisions related to the imposition, abolition, remission, alteration, or regulation of any tax. This statement is correct as per Article 110(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution, which defines the scope of a Money Bill. **Option B is correct.** A Money Bill includes provisions regarding the custody of the Consolidated Fund of India or the Contingency Fund of India. This statement is correct. As per Article 110(1)(c) of the Constitution, a Money Bill may contain provisions related to the custody, withdrawal, and audit of funds from these financial accounts. **Option C is incorrect.** A Money Bill is concerned with the appropriation of money out of the Contingency Fund of India. This statement is not correct. The Contingency Fund of India is under the disposal of the President of India to meet unforeseen expenditures, and its withdrawal is not governed by a Money Bill. Instead, Article 267(1) of the Constitution provides for its use, and the withdrawal of money from this fund is later regularized through an Appropriation Bill. **Option D is correct.** A Money Bill deals with the regulation of borrowing of money or giving of any guarantee by the Government of India. This statement is correct. As per Article 110(1)(d), provisions regarding government borrowing, the issuance of guarantees, and financial obligations of the Government of India fall within the scope of a Money Bill. Thus, statements (a), (b), and (d) are correct, while statement (c) is incorrect.

Statement 1 is correct: While a Finance Bill (Category I under Art 117) is introduced only in the Lok Sabha (similar to a Money Bill), it is passed according to the ordinary legislative procedure. Therefore, the Rajya Sabha has the power to reject or amend it. Statement 2 is correct: A Money Bill (Article 110) cannot be rejected or amended by the Rajya Sabha. It can only make recommendations which the Lok Sabha may accept or reject. Statement 3 is incorrect: While a Joint Sitting is not provided for Money Bills, it is available for Finance Bills. However, it is not "necessary" (mandatory) to hold one. Under Article 108, the President "may" summon a Joint Sitting to resolve the deadlock, but is not obliged to do so; the bill could simply be allowed to lapse.

* **Article 109 of the Indian Constitution** specifically deals with the special procedure for Money Bills. **(Correct)** * **Article 109(1)** states that a Money Bill shall not be introduced in the Council of States (Rajya Sabha). It can only be introduced in the Lok Sabha (House of the People). **(Correct)** * **Article 109(5)** states that the Rajya Sabha can't reject a Money Bill. It can only make recommendations within 14 days, which the Lok Sabha may or may not accept. **(Correct)** * The Lok Sabha has the ultimate power regarding Money Bills. It is not bound to accept any amendments suggested by the Rajya Sabha. **(Incorrect)** Therefore, statements 1, 2, and 3 are correct.