Which one of the following statements is not correct with regard to le

Which one of the following statements is not correct with regard to leave of absence by MPs ?

If for a period of 60 days, an MP remains absent, without permission of the House, from all meetings thereof, his seat may be declared vacant by the House.
in computing the period of sixty days, account is taken of any period during which the House is prorogued or is adjourned.
The period of sixty days means a single unbroken period of sixty days.
The constitutional provisions are only directory and not mandatory and seat may be declared vacant unless there is a contumacious disregard of duty as an MP.
This question was previously asked in
UPSC SO-Steno – 2017
Statement B is incorrect.
According to Article 101(4) of the Constitution, if a member of either House of Parliament is absent from all meetings thereof for a period of sixty days without the permission of the House, the House may declare his seat vacant. However, in computing the period of sixty days, no account shall be taken of any period during which the House is prorogued or is adjourned for more than four consecutive days. Statement B incorrectly states that account is taken of *any* period during which the House is prorogued or adjourned, which is contrary to the rule that periods of adjournment exceeding four consecutive days are excluded.
Statement A accurately reflects the condition under Article 101(4). Statement C refers to the accumulated absence over time that needs to reach 60 days. Statement D is incorrect; the constitutional provision is mandatory, and the seat *shall* be declared vacant if the conditions are met, subject to procedural rules.