PASSAGE OF BILLS

A Bill is a draft legislative proposal which becomes law up on enactment. Enactment is the
process by which a bill is made an Act. Bills can be subjected to two broad classification as
follows:
1. Source of Origin: A bill introduced by a minister is a Government Bill and a bill introduced
by a member other than a minister is a Private Members’ Bill.
2. Procedure of Passage/ Contents
A. Ordinary Bill : A bill under Article 107 can be introduced in either of the houses and
doesn’t need the recommendation of president. It needs only a simple majority in each
house and after the passage in one house it is transmitted to the other, which has the
power to
i. Pass
ii. Amend
iii. Reject
iv. Keep it pending
In case for a period of not more than 180 parliamentary days of the house where the
bill is kept pending, a deadlock is deemed to have arisen. The same also happens on
rejection of the bill by the second house or the amendments made are not acceptable
to the originating house. President can summon a joint sitting under Article 108 to
resolve the deadlock.
After the passage in the Houses, President may
1. Assent
2. Declare that he withholds Assent
3. Exercise Suspensive Veto
4. Exercise Pocket Veto
B. Money Bill: A Bill that exclusively deals with one or more money matters enumerated
under Article 110, as follows, is a Money Bill.
Article 110 (a) – imposition,abolition or alteration of a tax
(b)- borrowing of money by parliament
(c)- custody of consolidated fund of India or contingency fund of India
and the deposit or withdrawal of money from such a fund.
(d)- appropriation of money out of consolidated fund of India
(e)- declaring any expenditure as expenditure charged on the
consolidated fund of India.
(f)- receipt of money on consolidated fund or public account of India
(g)- any matter that is incidental to the above
A money bill can be introduced only in LS and requires the recommendation of
President. It needs only a simple majority, but requires that certification of speaker that
it is a money bill after it is passed by Lok Sabha and the same is required before it is
submitted for Presidential assent. Rajya Sabha cannot amend or reject the bill but can
only suggest amendment, in which case, the final decision lies with Lok Sabha.
President is required to give assent though Constitution does not give a direction to
that effect, as it is in the case of a Constitution Amendment Bill.

1
 Justice K.S.Puttaswamy(Retd.) Vs Union ofIndia and Ors. (2018)
In what is known as Aadhar Case, a five-judge constitution bench of the Supreme
Court had held that Aadhar bill was correctly introduced as money bill as the
contested sections of the bill,namely, Section 23 and Section 54 come under
Article 110 (g) of the Constitution as they are ancillary to Section 7 of the Act
which provided for “subsidies, benefits and services” from Consolidated Fund of
India. As Section 7 happened to be a money matter, the provisions of the Act
which are linked to the same are ancillary matters.
As Aadhar Bill had held as rightly been introduced as a money bill, the majority
judgment of the Constitution Bench did not express opinion on the judicial
reviewability of the power of certification exercised by the speaker of the House
of the People.

C. Financial Bill:
A Bill that deals with non-money matters along with money matters is a financial bill.
Financial Bill mentioned under Article 117 (1) requires recommendation of President
prior to introduction and can be introduced only in the House of the People. A financial
bill under Article 117(3) can be introduced without the recommendation of President
however recommendation is required to be obtained before the bill is considered for
passage by the House. Both the Houses have equal powers regarding passage and
there may be a deadlock and a joint sitting also can be summoned. Regarding Assent,
President has also the powers as are available in case of an Ordinary Bill.

It is interesting to note that Supreme Court’s Aadhar Judgment makes reference

to Financial Bill under Article 117(1) is as Money Bill only.It views financial bills
are a broader category under which comes money bills. However, candidates
are advised to rely on the classification as reflected in parliamentary literature
and rules of procedure, as referred in the previous paragraph.

D. Constitution Amendment Bill: A Bill that seeks to amend one or more provisions of
the Constitution is a Constitution Amendment Bill. It can be introduced in either of the
houses and does not require the prior recommendation of President. It requires a
majority of the total membership of the house and a majority of two-third of the
members present and voting in each house.There can be a deadlock, in which case
there can be no joint sitting as the procedure governing a Constitution Amendment Bill
is specifically provided under Article 368 and hence not subjected to Article 108. If the
bill affects the distribution of powers between Centre and States it requires approval by

2
not less than half of the state legislatures, after which the bill is presented to President
for assent.The provisions whose amendment affects distribution of powers are
1. Article- 54,55,73,12,241
2. Chapter IV of Part V, Chapter V of Part VI, Chapter I of Part XI
3. Seventh Schedule
4. Representation of States in Parliament
5. Article 368
The Constitution (103 rd Amendment) Act, 2019 did not require the approval of state
legislatures as Part III of the Constitution does not take part in the distribution of
Powers.
As per The Constitution (24th Amendment) Act, 1971., President “shall” give assent to
the Constitution Amendment Bill duly passed by the Parliament.
Motions and Resolutions
A motion is a procedural device which enables a house to express its opinion. Motions
enable a house to facilitate its functionality. Unless the rules of procedure of a
representative house confers some decision-making power to the presiding officer, the
house is expected to take steps by way of passing motions. Motions are of three types
as follows;
1. Substantive Motions: They are independent motions that are not dependent on
some pending instrument for its introduction and passage.
Eg. No-Confidence Motion, Confidence Motion, Adjournment Motion, Censure
Motion etc.
2. Subsidiary Motions: They are dependent on pending instruments for their
introduction and passage.
Eg. Amendment Motions, ancillary Motions, Superseding Motions etc.
3. Substitute Motions: A substitute motion is sought to be introduced as a substitute to
a substantive motion and if the presiding officer permits its introduction, the house
will discuss both substantive motion and substitute motion but finally vote only on
substitute motion.
While a motion expresses the opinion of a house, a resolution expresses the resolve of
a house. All resolutions are substantive motions. But all substantive motions are not
resolutions. All motions are not necessarily voted upon, whereas all resolutions are
decided up on by the House. Resolutions are of three types;
1. Government Resolution: A Resolution introduced by a minister.
2. Private Members Resolution: A Resolution introduced by a member other than a
minister.
3. Statutory Resolution: If a law enacted by the parliament, provides for the
introduction of a resolution, it is known as statutory resolution. It is different from the
other resolutions on this ground that the outcome of the resolution is binding on
government unlike government and private member’s resolutions. For instance,
Customs Tariff Act, 1975 empowers central government to increase customs duty
rates by passing a presidential order to that effect. However, the increased duty
rates shall have to be presented before the House of the People, once it comes in

3
 Session. If the House disapproves the resolution, the government is forbidden from
collecting the new duty rates anymore.

Parliament’s Financial Control Over Government

While the executive has control over the sword of administration, the legislature has
control over the purse of the executive. Though Constitution provides for parliamentary
control over the finances of government, it is not as strong as it is in the case of the United
States, where legislature and executive are separately elected by the people. Constitution
of India conceives a harmony between the executive and the legislature in financial
matters.

Article 265 of the Constitution states that no tax shall be levied and collected except by the
authority of law enacted by legislature. The term levy implies imposition, abolition, revision
or modification of a tax. The revenue which is collected by taxation requires safe custody
and Article 266 lays down that all the revenue collected, income received and loans raised
shall be deposited in Consolidated Fund of India(CFI). No money can be withdrawn from
Consolidated Fund without the sanction of Parliament.

Interestingly, all the money kept with government need not be the money of government
as there could be money of public which is kept with government as custodian or banker.
Apparently, factoring the difficulty involved if such money gets deposited in Consolidated
Fund of India, Article 266 a parallel fund named Public Account of India(PAI) to which all
the money other than the revenue collected, income received and loans raised shall be
deposited. While CFI is kept with Parliament, PAI is kept with the executive. Though
Article 110 lists , transaction in PAI as a money matter, no such law has till date been
enacted as a result of which PAI is under the custody of Central Government and the
executive has complete control over the money under Public Account of India. Article 266
also creates Consolidated Fund for every State as well as Public Account for every state.

As money can be withdrawn from CFI only with the sanction of Parliament, the Constituent
assembly had anticipated the possible emergence of an unforeseen expenditure for which
immediate parliamentary sanction may not be a practical possibility. For addressing such a
situation, Article 267(1) empowered Parliament to create by law an emergency fund
named Contingency Fund, which shall be at the disposal of President to enable advances
to be made by him out of such Fund. The Ministry of Finance operates this Fund on behalf
of the President.Article 267(2) empowers State legislature to create a Contingency Fund ,
which shall be at the disposal of the governor to enable advances to be made by him out
of such a fund. Though the fund was established in 1950, as per the amendment brought
vide Finance Act, 2005., the upper limit of Contingency Fund was increased from Rs. 50
crore to Rs 500 crore.

Apart from the abovementioned provisions, the Constitution provides for annual
parliamentary control over governmental finances by way of introduction and passage of
budget. Article 112 mandates that the President shall present Annual Financial
Statement, which is a statement of the estimated receipts and expenditure of the
Government of India for that year, in both houses of Parliament. Prior to 2017, Annual

4
Financial Statement used to be presented on the last working day of February and
budgetary process used to get completed only towards the latter half of the month of May.
Since 2017, budget is being presented on 1st of February. As a result of the presentation
of budget getting advanced by a month, the legislative approval for annual spending plans
and tax proposals could be completed before the beginning of the new financial year on 1st
April.

As per the rules of the Houses, there shall not be any discussion on day of presentation of
budget. After the presentation, each house is adjourned and each will sit on the appointed
day to have general discussion on the budget. During the general discussion, only the
general principles pertaining to the budget are discussed. After the general discussion, the
houses are adjourned for a recess of three to four weeks so that in this interlude the
departmentally related standing committees can examine the demands for grants made
my various departments.

The Budget is comprised of expenditure segment and revenue segment. Expenditure

segment is composed of Demands For Grants (DFG) and Charged Expenditure. DFGs
are the demands made by various ministries and departments to the Budget Division
which is entrusted with the task of making the budget. At the commencement of the
preparation of budget , they will intimate to the budget division the money required to fund
their activities in the coming financial year and these DFGs are presented in Parliament
after modification and final approval of the Finance Minister. While these DFGs require the
approval of the Parliament, another part of the expenditure segment namely Charged
Expenditure does not require the sanction of Parliament. Article 112(3) of the Constitution
authorises such expenditure which enumerates the following;
1. Salaries and allowances of President and other expenditure related to his office
2. Salaries and allowances of the presiding officers of both the Houses.
3. Salaries and allowances of Judges of Supreme Court and pensions payable to
Supreme Court and High Court Judges.
4. Salary, allowances and pension of Comptroller and Auditor General.
5. Debt charges for which the Government of India is liable.
6. Money needed to satisfy any judgment or award of any Court or Tribunal.
7. Any expenditure declared as charged expenditure by parliamentary law.

The Houses of Parliament can discuss such expenditure but cannot vote on it.

The Parliament after the recess

When the parliament meets after the recess, the DFGs are taken up for discussion and
voting. DFGs are not generally moved in the House by the Minister concerned. The
demands are assumed to have been moved and are proposed from the Chair to save the
time of the House. After the reports of the Standing Committees are presented to the
House, the House proceeds to the discussion and voting on Demands for Grants, Ministry-
wise. The scope of discussion at this stage is confined to a matter which is under the
administrative control of the Ministry and to each head of the demand as is put to the vote
of the House. It is open to members to disapprove a policy pursued by a particular Ministry
5
or to suggest measures for economy in the administration of that Ministry or to focus
attention of the Ministry to specific local grievances. At this stage, cut motions can be
moved to reduce any demand for grant but no amendments to a motion seeking to reduce
any demand is permissible. They can be classified into three categories:
(i) Disapproval of Policy Cut: A cut motion which says “That the amount of the demand
be reduced to Re. 1” implies that the mover disapproves of the policy underlying the
demand. The member giving notice of such a Cut Motion has to indicate in precise
terms the particulars of the policy which he proposes to discuss. Discussion is
confined to the specific point or points mentioned in the notice and it is open to the
member to advocate an alternative policy.
(ii) Economy Cut: Where the object of the motion is to effect economy in the
expenditure, the form of the motion is “That the amount of the demand be reduced
by Rs…(a specified amount)”. The amount suggested for reduction may be either a
lump-sum reduction in the demand or omission or reduction of an item in the
demand.
(iii) Token Cut: Where the object of the motion is to ventilate a specific grievance within
the sphere of responsibility of the Government of India, its form is: “That the amount
of the demand be reduced by Rs. 100”. Discussion on such a cut motion is confined
to the particular grievance specified in the motion which is within the sphere of
responsibility of the Government of India.

After the voting on demands, Appropriation Bill is introduced. While Appropriation Bill is
the legislative format of the expenditure proposed by the government, Finance Bill is the
legislative format of the revenue proposed by way of taxation. Both are money bills. After
the passage of Appropriation Bill, Finance Bill is taken up for passage. Finance Bill is
usually introduced after the presentation of the budget, whereas Appropriation Bill is
presented after the voting on DFGs.

After the passage of both the Bills in the Houses as per the procedure under Article109
,they are presented for the assent of President. Thereafter, they are notified in the gazette
and the government gets authority to spend and tax.

6
 Suggestions to improve the functioning of Parliament
1. Constitutional Amendment : Indian Parliament never sat for more than 100 days in
the last two decades; 14th LS gained bad reputation as it could sit just 66 days per year
on an average. Worst, 24 percent of that time got lost in disruptions . When Parliament is
not able adequate sittings to facilitate meaningful transaction of its business, Executive’s
accountability towards legislature becomes the casualty. While Lok Sabha had met on an
average of 130 days in a year during the 1950s, the average number of sittings reduced
to 70 days in the 2000s . It may be desirable to to amend the Constitution by adding
Clause (3) to Article 85 to make it obligatory on President to summon Houses in such a
manner that there shall be not less than 100 sittings a year.

2. The Disruption of Proceedings of Parliament(Disentitlement of Allowances) Bill,

2004 : Private member’s Bill proposed by Fali. S.Nariman when he was a nominated
member of the Council of States. The Salary of a Member of Parliament is Rs. 50000 per
month along with that Rs 2000 is given as daily allowance when parliament in session; It
is estimated that there is a loss of Rs. 52 lakh for each day of disruption. The Disruption of
Proceedings of Parliament (disentitlement of allowances) Bill 2004, sought to disentitle
members from claiming allowances for the days that Parliament is adjourned due to
disruption caused by members of Parliament, individually or collectively. There is a need
to bring such a legislation.
3. Power to convene itself: Parliament having the power to convene itself is necessary for
the institution’s independence.In UK and Australia, Annual calendar of sittings is
announced in advance. This will allow better scheduling of business and reduce the
scope for government to postpone a session if it wants to defer parliamentary scrutiny on
some emergent issue.
4. Autonomous and fully functioning Parliament:In India, Government plays the most
important role in setting the agenda of the business of Parliament. On the other hand, in
British Parliament – 20 days of each Parliamentary Session(yearlong session) are
reserved for opposition parties. In Canada, 22 days of every calendar year are allotted to
opposition parties. Taking such a path will help us constructively address one of the main
reasons why Parliament experiences disruption with consistency.
5. Strengthening Standing Committees: The receding relevance of our parliamentary
standing committees as they stand today is breathtaking. Originally designed to improve
legislative expertise, they lie mostly ignored. They ought to be symbols of power, real
checks and balances on government working. As in US and UK, we should consider
attaching experts to support to such committees, while opening up deliberation to public
record. Lawmakers should be upholders of law as well. Only about 70 percent of all bills
are referred to the committees; this step must be made mandatory for all the bills, as in the
British Parliament.
6. Parliaments Control over Budget : The reference to the committees is not mandatory,
and this process was bypassed in 2009 and 2012.There have also been instances when
the standing committee reports were submitted just before the demands for grants were
discussed. For instance, in 2010, the standing committee report on external affairs
submitted its report at 12 noon on 20th April, and the discussion on the demands started at
2 PM at the same day. House of the People in fact discusses only a few demands for

7
 grants. In the last 10 years, just 6 % of demands have been discussed on average. The
need of the hour is to enable legislature of have meaningful control over budget.
There has to be greater emphasis on the examination of the budget by the committees as
well as on more detailed discussion on the floor of the House.
In the first three Lok Sabhas, the budget was discussed for 134 hours on an average
each year.This has fallen to 35 years, in the last three Lok sabhas. This trend has to be
reversed.
7. Absenteeism of Members: Absenteeism of Members threatens to become a serious
malady. Members for whom the quorum bells ring too often have many pressures on their
time and energy outside the House. In practice, the quorum requirement is often ignored
by not questioning the quorum. Suggestions have sometimes been made for reducing the
present minimum (1/10th) to constitute the quorum. What is required is ensuring better
and longer attendance by the Members in the Houses of Parliament. The citizens have
certain claims on their representatives and perhaps expectation of some minimum hours
of presence in the house and some minimum hours of parliamentary work each day would
be quite legitimate.
8. Criminal Background of Candidates: A major issue that has raised apprehension in
recent years is criminals getting elected to the parliament not merely by employing “Robin
Hood” image but by terrorizing voters. It is felt that the RPA. 1951 is not adequately
equipped to eliminate criminals from seeking elections and even getting elected.
A suggestion in this regard is that from the moment charges are framed by a court against
any person –whether he is a sitting member or not – he should cease to be a member and
be disqualified from contesting an election till he has been cleared of charges. As charge
is framed after, the accused gets opportunity to be discharged by filing discharge
application which would be heard on the basis of the documents produced by the
prosecution.4

Public Interest Foundation & Ors. V. Union of India & Anr. (2018)

A Constitution bench of the Supreme Court of India has recently turned down a petition
seeking judicial order in the direction of disqualifying the candidates. The five-judge
Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court held that candidates cannot be disqualified
merely because charges have been framed against them in a criminal case. The bench
has observed that it is for the legislature to consider framing law to ensure
decriminalisation of politics, as the is endowed with the power to do so under Article 102
(1) (e).
9. Orientation Programmes and Refresher Courses : Better and more institutionalized
arrangements are necessary to provide the much needed professional orientation to newly
elected members. The curriculum should include, among other things, adequate
knowledge of the political system, the Constitution, the rules of procedure and conduct of
business, practices and precedents, mechanisms and modalities of working of the Houses
and the Parliamentary Committees, the rules of parliamentary etiquette, and, what is even
more important, the unwritten rules of parliamentary conduct and speech. The emphasis
should be on imparting practical knowledge on how to be an effective member.
10. Reinstating the Sanctity of Question Hour : This potent weapon in the hands of MPs to
question all government acts of omission and commission is in pressing need of revamp.
Out of the questions listed to be answered orally, less than 25 % is usually answered due

8
 to the time lost in disruption. In order to reign in this repeated disruption , no time should
be lost in defining strictly defining the procedures and penalties for disrupting the
Question Hour. Any interruption to question hour should be admissible by the chair of the
house only if it is introduced either by the leader of the opposition or the leader of the
ruling party, premised further on the fact that the issue for disruption should comprise of an
agenda of extraordinary concern.
11. Codifying Parliamentary Privileges: In a democratic society, privileges for a section or of
the people are anachronistic, any undefined privileges like the privileges of Parliament are
even more so. It is, therefore of the utmost importance that the weapon of parliamentary
privileges is used with great circumspection. As a great institution, Parliament should be
able to take in its stride, a great deal of the criticism and adverse comments against it.
Privileges of Parliament are intended to be privileges enjoyed by Parliament on behalf of
the people, to enable members to function freely and fearlessly, in the interest of the
people. These privileges should not be allowed to be used in such a manner as to nullify
themselves and become rights against the people. The specific parliamentary privileges
which may be deemed to be in conformity with contemporary thinking and absolutely
necessary for the free and independent functioning of the institution of Parliament should
be clearly defined, delimited and simplified. A joint Committee of the two Houses may be
set up to lay down the privileges in precise terms and to recommend appropriate
piecemeal or comprehensive legislation.
12. Invoke Rule 374 A without hesitation, when circumstances warrant : Rule 373 A was
added by 13th Lok Sabha in 2001 .It empowered the Speaker of the House to enforce
automatic suspension of the members who are wilfully obstructing the proceedings of the
House by naming them on the floor of the House. Such members will be subjected to
“Automatic Suspension” for 5 consecutive sittings or for the remaining sittings of the
Session whichever is lesser.

13. Bringing Rule 256 A, if need be : While Rule 256 of Rules of Procedure of the Council of
States provides for suspension of the members as similar to Rule 374 of Rules of
Procedure of the House of the People, there is no provision under the Rules of Procedure
of the Council of States which is analogous to Rule 373 A of the Rules of the House of the
People. It may be pertinent to bring such a Rule (preferably 256 A) to enable the presiding
officer to enforce discipline in the House when there is wilful obstruction of the
proceedings of the House. It may be noted that the Chairman pf the Upper House , M.
Venkaiah Naidu has ordered a comprehensive review of the rules of procedure and
conduct of business in the upper House in May 2018 with the focus on replicating the Lok
Sabha provision for automatic suspension of members who disrupt proceedings
"persistently".

14. Facilitating Members’ access to Information: Information is power. For any effective
surveillance over administration, Parliament needs information. Members need
information. They have to be fed with latest information and kept up to date in regard to
developments in all areas of parliamentary concern and more particularly in matters
coming up before their House or Committees. Instead of depending almost entirely on
published documents – which are almost always outdated and - other official sources,
Parliament must build its own independent national information reservoir with a network of
feeding and retrieval points. In this connection, computerization of storage and retrieval of

9
 information in Parliament was well conceived. But much depends on the data files that are
built and what is actually fed into the computer or the internet. Unfortunately, it seems
there has been no qualitative change in information gathering processes. Members need
first hand information and fresh inputs on various subjects of interest to Parliament and
particularly in regard to the activities of the Ministries and Departments of the Government
so as to facilitate monitoring and evaluating progress, performance and efficiency and lead
to better surveillance of administration as a whole. Even if no other parliamentary reform
was brought about, the single step of developing an infrastructure of information support
system in Parliament would have been profound effect on revitalizing and transforming the
institution of Parliament.
15. Make Women’s Reservation in Parliament a reality : The Women’s Reservation Bill
[The Constitution (108th Amendment) Bill] is one of the longest pending legislations in the
Indian Parliament. The Bill sought to reserve 33.33 per cent seats in the Lok Sabha or the
Lower House of Indian Parliament and in the State Legislative Assemblies for women, in
accordance with the 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments which reserved the same
percentage of seats for women in rural and urban local bodies respectively. The Bill has
been introduced in the Indian Parliament several times since its initial launch in 1996, but
however the proposed amendment could not be passed primarily due to lack of political
consensus. The very functional culture of Parliament may undergo a qualitative
transformation if one third of its members are women.

10