Which one of the following statements is correct?
A Bill can be taken up in a joint sitting of the Houses notwithstanding the dissolution of the Lok Sabha.
A Bill cannot be taken up in a joint sitting of the Houses after Lok Sabha is dissolved.
Joint session cannot be convened by the President after dissolution of Lok Sabha even though the President notified his intention to summon the Joint Sitting of the Houses.
There is express provision in the Constitution regarding the effect of dissolution on a Bill which has been passed by the two Houses and sent to the President for assent.
Answer is Wrong!
Answer is Right!
This question was previously asked in
UPSC SO-Steno – 2017
Statement B is generally true for most common scenarios where a joint sitting might be required, as the Bill causing the deadlock would have lapsed.
Statement C is incorrect. Article 108(5) explicitly states that if the President has notified his intention to summon a joint sitting *before* the dissolution of the Lok Sabha, the joint sitting *can* be held and the Bill passed, *notwithstanding* the dissolution, provided the Bill has not lapsed under Article 107.
Statement D is correct. Article 107(5) is the express provision in the Constitution regarding the effect of dissolution on a Bill which has been passed by the two Houses and sent to the President for assent. It states that such a Bill *shall not lapse*.