Consider the following statements:
- 1. The President of India can summon a session of the Parliament at such place as he/she thinks fit.
- 2. The Constitution of India provides for three sessions of the Parliament in a year, but it is not mandatory to conduct all three sessions.
- 3. There is no minimum number of days that the Parliament is required to meet in a year.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct ?
[amp_mcq option1=”1 only” option2=”2 only” option3=”1 and 3 only” option4=”2 and 3 only” correct=”option3″]
This question was previously asked in
UPSC IAS – 2020
Statement 2: The Constitution does not mandate three sessions per year. Article 85(1) only requires that “six months shall not intervene between its last sitting in one session and the date appointed for its first sitting in the next session.” This means Parliament must meet at least twice a year. While the practice is to hold three sessions (Budget, Monsoon, Winter), it is not constitutionally mandatory. Thus, statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 3: The Constitution does not specify a minimum number of sitting days for Parliament in a year. The frequency of meetings is primarily determined by the executive’s need for legislative business and the constitutional requirement of not having more than a six-month gap between sessions. Thus, statement 3 is correct.
– The Constitution mandates Parliament must meet at least twice a year (max 6 months between sessions).
– There is no minimum number of sitting days specified in the Constitution.