GS IAS Logo

< Previous | Contents | Next >

NOTES AND REFERENCES

1. Westminster is a place in London where the British Parliament is located. It is often used as a symbol of the British Parliament.

2. See Table 22.5 at the end of this chapter.

3. An Anglo-Indian is a person whose father or any of whose other male progenitors in the male line is or was of European descent but who is domiciled within the territory of India and is or was born within such territory of parents habitually resident therein and not merely established there for temporary purposes.

4. See Table 22.5 at the end of this chapter.

5. This means that the number of Lok Sabha seats reserved in a state or union territory for such castes and tribes is to bear the same proportion to the total number of seats allotted to that state or union territory in the Lok Sabha as the population of such castes and tribes in the concerned state or union territory bears to the total population of state or union territory.

6. Under this, the president has made the Rajya Sabha (Term of Office of Members) Order, 1952.

7. The term of the fifth Lok Sabha that was to expire on 18 March, 1976, was extended by one year upto 18 March, 1977 by the House of the People (Extension of Duration) Act, 1976. It was extended for a further period of one year up to 18 March, 1978 by the House of the People (Extension of Duration) Amendment Act, 1976. However, the House was dissolved on 18 January 1977, after having been in existence for a period of five years, 10 months and six days.

8. A minister in the Union or state government is not considered as holding the office of profit. Also, the Parliament can declare that a particular office of profit will notdisqualify its holder from parliamentary membership.

9. According to the Prohibition of Simultaneous Membership Rules (1950) made by the President.

9a. Section 3 of the Salaries and Allowances of Officers of Parliament Act, 1953 (as amended).

9b. Ibid. 9c. Ibid. 9d. Ibid.

9e. Section 5 of the Salaries and Allowances of Officers of Parliament Act, 1953 (as amended).

9f. Ibid.

10. Kihota Hollohan Vs. Zachilhu (1992).

11. In this context, V.V. Giri observed: "The holder of an office provided with such extensive authority and power must discharge the duties of his office impartially. So impartiality is regarded as an indispensable condition of the office of the Speaker, who is the guardian of the powers and privileges of the House and not of the political party with whose support he might have been elected to the office. It is not possible for him to maintain order in the House unless he enjoys the confidence of the minority parties by safeguarding their rights and privileges”. ('Powers of the Presiding Officers in Indian Legislature’ in Journal of Consitutional and Parliamentary Studies, New Delhi, Vol II, No. 4, Oct- Dec. 1968, p. 22)

12. For example, in the 13th Lok Sabha, Mr. Indrajit Gupta was appointed as Speaker Pro Tem on 20 October 1999 and remained in that office till 22 October 1999 when the new Speaker, Mr. G.M.C. Balayogi was elected.

13. Under Article 107 (3) of the Constitution, a bill pending in Parliament shall not lapse by reason of the prorogation of the Houses.

Under Rule 336 of the Lok Sabha, a motion, resolution or an amendment, which has been moved and is pending in the House, shall not lapse by reason only of the prorogation of the House.

14. Subhash C. Kashyap: Our Parliament, National Book Trust, 1999 Edition, P. 135-136.

15. J.C. Johari: Indian Government and Politics, Vishal, Volume II, Thirteenth Edition, 2001, P. 360.

15a. T.K. Viswanathan (Editor), The Indian Parliament, Lok Sabha Secretariat, Fourteenth Edition, 2011, p.21.

16. Subhash C. Kashyap: Our Parliament, National Book Trust, 1999 Edition, P. 139-141.

17. Ibid, P. 139.

18. Under Rule 64 of Lok Sabha, the Speaker may, on request being made to him, order the publication of any bill in the Gazette, although no motion has been made for leave to introduce the bill. In that case, it shall not be necessary to move for leave to introduce the bill and if the bill is afterwards introduced, it shall not be necessary to publish it again.

19. For different kinds of veto, see 'Veto Power of the President’ under Chapter 17.

20. The Lok Sabha did not agree to the amendments made by the Rajya Sabha. A joint siting was held on 6 May 1961.

21. The bill was passed by the Lok Sabha but rejected by the Rajya Sabha. A joint sitting was held on 16 May 1978.

22. The bill was passed by the Lok Sabha but rejected by the Rajya Sabha. A joint sitting was held on 26 March 2002. The bill was passed when 425 members voted for it and 296 against.

23. N.N. Mallya: Indian Parliament, P. 39.

24. Kesavananda Bharati V. State of Kerala (1973);

Minerva Mills V. Union of India (1980).

25. In 1977, the sixth Lok Sabha expelled Mrs. Indira Gandhi from its membership and sentenced her to jail for a week for committing a contempt of House while she was Prime Minister. But, the seventh Lok Sabha rescinded the resolution expelling her by describing it as politically motivated. In 1990, a former Minister, K.K. Tiwari, was reprimanded by the Rajya Sabha.

26. Article 121 of the Constitution says that no discussion shall take place in Parliament with respect to the conduct of any judge of the Supreme Court or of a high court in the discharge of his duties except upon a

motion for presenting an address to the president praying for the removal of the judge. Under Rules 349 to 350 of the Lok Sabha, use of unparliamentary language or unparliamentary conduct of a member is prohibited.

27. Kaul and Shakdher: Practice and Procedure of Parliament, First Edition, P. 157.

28. Thomas Erskine May: Parliamentary Practice, 15th Edition, P. 109.

29. Subhash C. Kashyap: Our Parliament, National Book Trust, 1999 Edition, P. 241.

30. Thomas Erskine May: Parliamentary Practice, 16th Edition, P. 43.

31. The then law minister gave the following reason for dropping reference to the British House of Commons: "That the original provision-there was no escape from it-had referred to the British House of Commons. Now a proud country like India would like to avoid making any reference to a foreign institution in its own solemn constitutional document. Therefore, this verbal change is being introduced so that there may not be any reference to a foreign institution.”

32. A.V. Dicey: Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution, Macmillan, 1965 Edition, P. 39-40.