The Parliament Archives

161. Which one of the following regarding the procedure and conduct of busi

Which one of the following regarding the procedure and conduct of business in the Parliament is not correct?

[amp_mcq option1=”To discuss State matters” option2=”To discuss issues of the use of police force in suppressing the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe communities” option3=”To discuss issues in dealing with violent disturbances in an Undertaking under the control of the Union Government” option4=”To discuss issues for putting down the demands of the industrial labour” correct=”option4″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CDS-2 – 2018

Download PDF Attempt Online

Discussing State matters is generally not a correct procedure and conduct of business in the Parliament.

Parliament primarily legislates and discusses matters related to the Union List and Concurrent List. Matters falling exclusively under the State List are ordinarily within the jurisdiction of State Legislatures.

While issues concerning state subjects can be discussed in Parliament if they have national importance or pertain to the implementation of Union laws on the Concurrent List, a general discussion on routine ‘State matters’ is restricted by the rules of procedure to avoid encroaching upon the autonomy of state legislatures. Issues like the use of police force concerning vulnerable groups (if it has national implications), violent disturbances in central undertakings, or national-level industrial labour issues can potentially be raised in Parliament through specific mechanisms like questions, motions, or debates, as they touch upon areas of national concern or the Union’s responsibilities.

162. Which one of the following cannot be introduced first in the Rajya

Which one of the following cannot be introduced first in the Rajya Sabha?

[amp_mcq option1=”Constitutional Amendment” option2=”CAG Report” option3=”Annual Financial Statement” option4=”Bill to alter the boundaries of any State” correct=”option3″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CDS-2 – 2017

Download PDF Attempt Online

The Annual Financial Statement (Budget) cannot be introduced first in the Rajya Sabha.

According to Article 109(1) of the Constitution of India, a Money Bill shall not be introduced in the Council of States (Rajya Sabha). The Annual Financial Statement, while laid before both Houses, is the basis for the demand for grants and the subsequent Appropriation Bill and Finance Bill, which are considered Money Bills. Money Bills must originate only in the Lok Sabha.

Constitutional Amendment Bills (Article 368) can be introduced in either House of Parliament. Reports of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG), after being submitted to the President, are laid before each House of Parliament (Article 151), but this is not an ‘introduction’ as a legislative proposal. A Bill to alter the boundaries of any State (under Article 3), though requiring the President’s recommendation, can be introduced in either House. The Budget process involves the Annual Financial Statement being laid before both Houses, but the legislative procedure involving the demand for grants and subsequent Money Bills originates in the Lok Sabha.

163. A Money Bill passed by the Lok Sabha can be held up by the Rajya Sabha

A Money Bill passed by the Lok Sabha can be held up by the Rajya Sabha for how many weeks?

[amp_mcq option1=”Two” option2=”Three” option3=”Four” option4=”Five” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CDS-2 – 2017

Download PDF Attempt Online

The question asks for the maximum period the Rajya Sabha can hold up a Money Bill passed by the Lok Sabha.

– According to Article 109 of the Constitution of India, regarding special procedure in respect of Money Bills:
– A Money Bill cannot be introduced in the Rajya Sabha.
– After a Money Bill has been passed by the Lok Sabha, it is transmitted to the Rajya Sabha for its recommendations.
– The Rajya Sabha must return the Bill with its recommendations within a period of fourteen days from the date of its receipt.
– The Lok Sabha can either accept or reject any or all of the recommendations made by the Rajya Sabha.
– If the Lok Sabha accepts any recommendations, the Bill is deemed to have been passed by both Houses with those amendments.
– If the Lok Sabha does not accept any recommendations, the Bill is deemed to have been passed by both Houses in the form it was passed by the Lok Sabha, without any amendments suggested by the Rajya Sabha.
– If the Rajya Sabha fails to return the Bill within fourteen days, it is deemed to have been passed by both Houses at the expiration of the said period in the form it was passed by the Lok Sabha.
– Therefore, the Rajya Sabha can only hold up a Money Bill for a maximum of fourteen days.

Fourteen days is equivalent to two weeks. This limited power of the Rajya Sabha over Money Bills underscores the primacy of the Lok Sabha in financial matters, as the Lok Sabha is directly elected by the people and is responsible for the financial accountability of the government.

164. A Joint Sitting of the Parliament is resorted to, for resolving the de

A Joint Sitting of the Parliament is resorted to, for resolving the deadlock between two Houses of the Parliament for passing which of the following Bills?

1. Money Bill
2. Constitutional Amendment Bill
3. Ordinary Bill

Select the correct answer using the code given below.

[amp_mcq option1=”1 only” option2=”2 and 3 only” option3=”3 only” option4=”1, 2 and 3″ correct=”option3″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CDS-2 – 2017

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct answer is 3 only.

A joint sitting of Parliament (Article 108) can be convened by the President to resolve a deadlock between the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha over the passage of an Ordinary Bill.
A Money Bill (Article 110) cannot be subjected to a joint sitting because the Lok Sabha has overriding powers in financial matters, and the Rajya Sabha’s role is largely advisory; it must return a Money Bill within 14 days with or without recommendations. The Lok Sabha can accept or reject these recommendations.
A Constitutional Amendment Bill (Article 368) requires to be passed separately by each House by a special majority (a majority of the total membership of the House and a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of that House present and voting). There is no provision for a joint sitting to pass a Constitutional Amendment Bill.

Joint sittings are rare and have been held only a few times in the history of the Indian Parliament. The procedure for a joint sitting is laid down in the Rules of Procedure of Parliament, and the Speaker of the Lok Sabha presides over such a sitting.

165. Which one of the following statements about the Speaker of Lok Sabha i

Which one of the following statements about the Speaker of Lok Sabha is not correct?

[amp_mcq option1=”He shall vacate his office if he ceases to be a member of the House of the People.” option2=”He may, at any time, resign by writing his resignation to the President of India.” option3=”He may be removed from his office by a resolution of the House of the People passed by majority of all the then members of the House.” option4=”While the office of the Speaker is vacant, the duties of the office shall be performed by the Deputy Speaker.” correct=”option2″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CDS-1 – 2022

Download PDF Attempt Online

According to Article 94 of the Constitution of India, the Speaker of the House of the People (Lok Sabha) may resign his office by writing under his hand addressed to the Deputy Speaker. Resignation is *not* addressed to the President of India. Statement B is therefore incorrect. Statements A, C, and D accurately reflect the provisions regarding the vacation of office, removal, and performance of duties when the Speaker’s office is vacant, as per Article 94 and 95.

The Speaker of the Lok Sabha addresses their resignation to the Deputy Speaker, not the President.

The removal of the Speaker requires a resolution passed by a majority of all the then members of the House. The Speaker continues to hold office even after the dissolution of the Lok Sabha until immediately before the first meeting of the House after the dissolution.

166. Which one of the following statements about the composition of the Par

Which one of the following statements about the composition of the Parliament is not correct ?

[amp_mcq option1=”Representatives of the states in Rajya Sabha are elected directly by the people.” option2=”Representatives from Union Territories in Lok Sabha are chosen by direct elections.” option3=”Rajya Sabha has 12 nominated members.” option4=”Lok Sabha has seats reserved for SCs and STs.” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CDS-1 – 2021

Download PDF Attempt Online

Statement A is incorrect. Representatives of the states in Rajya Sabha are elected by the elected members of the Legislative Assemblies of the states by proportional representation by means of the single transferable vote (Article 80(4)). They are not elected directly by the people.
Statement B is correct. Parliament has enacted laws providing for direct election of representatives from Union Territories to the Lok Sabha (e.g., Representation of the People Act, 1951).
Statement C is correct. Article 80(3) provides for the nomination of 12 members to the Rajya Sabha by the President from persons having special knowledge or practical experience in respect of such matters as literature, science, art, and social service.
Statement D is correct. Article 330 provides for the reservation of seats for Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) in the Lok Sabha based on their population.

Members of Rajya Sabha from states are indirectly elected by state legislative assemblies, while members of Lok Sabha from states and UTs are generally directly elected by the people. Rajya Sabha includes nominated members, and Lok Sabha has reserved seats for SCs and STs.

The Rajya Sabha is the Upper House (Council of States) and the Lok Sabha is the Lower House (House of the People) of the Parliament of India. The total strength of the Lok Sabha is currently 543 elected members. The maximum strength of Rajya Sabha is 250, of which 238 are representatives of states and union territories and 12 are nominated by the President.

167. Which one among the following motions cannot be made while introducing

Which one among the following motions cannot be made while introducing an ordinary Bill in the Parliament ?

[amp_mcq option1=”That the Bill be taken into consideration” option2=”That the Bill be circulated for the purpose of eliciting public opinion” option3=”That the Bill be referred to a Select Committee” option4=”That the Bill be referred to a Joint Committee of the House without the concurrence of the other House” correct=”option4″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CDS-1 – 2021

Download PDF Attempt Online

The motion “That the Bill be referred to a Joint Committee of the House without the concurrence of the other House” cannot be made while introducing an ordinary Bill in the Parliament.

– After a Bill is introduced, the member in charge can move one of several motions: to take it into consideration, to refer it to a Select Committee of that House, to refer it to a Joint Committee of both Houses, or to circulate it for public opinion.
– Referring a Bill to a Select Committee (C) is a motion confined to the House where the Bill is being considered.
– Referring a Bill to a Joint Committee (D) involves members from *both* Houses. This requires the approval (concurrence) of the other House. Therefore, a motion to refer a Bill to a Joint Committee cannot be made unilaterally “without the concurrence of the other House”.
– Taking the Bill into consideration (A) and circulating it for public opinion (B) are standard motions possible after introduction.

If the motion is to refer the Bill to a Joint Committee, the House where the motion is moved passes a resolution recommending to the other House that the Bill be referred to a Joint Committee and naming the members from its own House to serve on the committee. The other House then has to concur with this recommendation and appoint its own members to the Joint Committee.

168. Which of the following statements is not correct regarding the Members

Which of the following statements is not correct regarding the Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS)?

[amp_mcq option1=”Members of the Parliament (MPs) sanction, execute and complete works under the scheme.” option2=”Nominated Members of the Parliament can recommend works for implementation anywhere in the country.” option3=”The scheme is fully funded by the Government of India.” option4=”The annual entitlement per MP is ₹ 5 crore.” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CDS-1 – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

Under the Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS), Members of Parliament (MPs) *recommend* works for implementation. The *District Authority* is responsible for sanctioning, executing, and completing the recommended works. Option A is incorrect as it states that MPs sanction, execute, and complete the works themselves.

– MPLADS is a Central Sector Scheme.
– The funds are released directly to the District Authority.
– Nominated Members of Parliament can recommend works for implementation anywhere in the country. (Option B is correct)
– The scheme is fully funded by the Government of India. (Option C is correct)
– The annual entitlement per MP was ₹ 5 crore (Note: This was the case before the scheme was suspended temporarily from April 2020 onwards and then restored with reduced entitlement). (Option D is correct based on the typical understanding of the scheme prior to the suspension).

The MPLADS guidelines detail the nature of works permissible (creation of durable community assets), fund flow, monitoring mechanisms, etc. The scheme aims to enable MPs to recommend works of developmental nature with emphasis on the creation of durable community assets based on locally felt needs.

169. A person is disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a Member

A person is disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a Member of either House of the Parliament if the person

1. holds any office of profit under the Government of India or the Government of any State other than an office declared by the Parliament by law not to disqualify its holder
2. is an undischarged insolvent
3. is so disqualified under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution of India
4. is of unsound mind and stands so declared by a competent Court

Select the correct answer using the code given below.

[amp_mcq option1=”1, 2 and 4 only” option2=”1, 2, 3 and 4″ option3=”3 and 4 only” option4=”1, 2 and 3 only” correct=”option2″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CDS-1 – 2018

Download PDF Attempt Online

Article 102 of the Constitution of India specifies the grounds for disqualification for being chosen as, and for being, a member of either House of Parliament.

Article 102(1) states that a person shall be disqualified if he:
1. 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 (Covers statement 1).
2. is of unsound mind and stands so declared by a competent court (Covers statement 4).
3. is an undischarged insolvent (Covers statement 2).
4. is not a citizen of India, or has voluntarily acquired the citizenship of a foreign State, or is under any acknowledgment of allegiance or adherence to a foreign State.
5. is so disqualified by or under any law made by Parliament.

Additionally, Article 102(2) states that a person shall be disqualified for being a member of either House of Parliament if he is so disqualified under the Tenth Schedule (Anti-Defection Law) (Covers statement 3).

All four listed conditions are explicit grounds for disqualification of a Member of Parliament as per the Constitution of India.

170. A Member of Lok Sabha does not become disqualified to continue as a Me

A Member of Lok Sabha does not become disqualified to continue as a Member of the House if the Member :

[amp_mcq option1=”voluntarily gives up his / her membership of the political party from which he / she was elected” option2=”is expelled by the political party from which he / she had been elected to the House” option3=”joins a political party after being elected as an independent candidate” option4=”abstains from voting contrary to the direction by his / her political party” correct=”option2″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CDS-1 – 2016

Download PDF Attempt Online

Under the Tenth Schedule (Anti-Defection Law), a member of a House belonging to a political party becomes disqualified if they voluntarily give up membership (A), vote or abstain against the party whip (D), or if an independent member joins a party after election (C). However, being *expelled* from the political party (B) does not automatically lead to disqualification under the Tenth Schedule. The expelled member continues to be a member of the House but may be treated as an unattached member. They would only be disqualified if they then join another political party or vote/abstain against the whip of the party they were originally elected from (though the applicability of whip after expulsion is a debated point).

Expulsion from a political party is not a direct ground for disqualification under the Tenth Schedule (Anti-Defection Law).

The Tenth Schedule was added by the 52nd Amendment Act of 1985. It was designed to prevent political defections. The power to decide on disqualification is vested in the Speaker of the Lok Sabha or the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha.