Consider the following statements: 1. Presiding officer of a House d

Consider the following statements:

  • 1. Presiding officer of a House does not vote in the first instance.
  • 2. Presiding officer can permit a member to address the House in his/her mother tongue.
  • 3. Attorney General can take part in proceedings as well as vote in both Houses due to constitutional nature of the post.

Which of the above statements are correct?

1 and 2 only
2 and 3 only
1 and 3 only
1, 2 and 3
This question was previously asked in
UPSC Combined Section Officer – 2024
Statement 1 is correct: The presiding officer (Speaker of Lok Sabha or Chairman of Rajya Sabha) does not vote in the first instance. They can exercise a casting vote only in the case of a tie to resolve a deadlock.
Statement 2 is correct: Article 120 of the Constitution allows members to speak in Hindi, English, or if they cannot adequately express themselves in either, in their mother tongue with the permission of the presiding officer. Simultaneous translation facilities are often provided.
Statement 3 is incorrect: Article 88 of the Constitution allows the Attorney General of India to take part in the proceedings of either House of Parliament, any joint sitting of the Houses, and any committee of Parliament of which he may be named a member, but he shall not by virtue of this article be entitled to vote.
– Presiding officers cast a vote only in case of a tie.
– Members can speak in their mother tongue with the presiding officer’s permission.
– The Attorney General can participate in proceedings but cannot vote.
The principle of the presiding officer not voting in the first instance is borrowed from British parliamentary practice to ensure impartiality. The provision for speaking in the mother tongue acknowledges linguistic diversity within Parliament. The Attorney General’s role is primarily advisory to the Parliament, hence the right to participate but not vote.
Exit mobile version