Here’s All About The Joint Session Of Parliament (article 108)

The Constitution provides a special procedure known as joint sitting to end a standoff between the two Houses over the passage of a bill. The President of India must convene a joint session of Parliament (Article 108) in order to break the impasse between Loksabha and Rajyasabha. 

 

•    The Government of India Act of 1935 serves as a model for the provision allowing for joint sessions of both Houses of Parliament.

 

•    The constitutions of the US, Canada, Britain, Ireland, etc. all contain comparable clauses.

 

•    India has two houses of the legislature. Both Houses (the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha) must consent to any law.

 

•    Before the President can sign a law, both Houses must pass it.

 

•    The forefathers foresaw a potential deadlock between the two Houses of Parliament. They therefore established joint sittings as a constitutional instrument to resolve the impasse.

 

•    The constitution offers the extraordinary mechanism of a joint sitting to break a tie between the Loksabha and Rajyasabha over the passage of a bill.

 

•    The President may call a joint session of both chambers "for the purpose of deliberating and voting on the Bill" in accordance with Article 108 of the Constitution.

 

•    According to Article 118, the President of India may make rules governing the proceedings of a joint session of parliament after consulting with the Speaker of the Lok Sabha and the chairman of the Rajya Sabha.

 

•    No new modifications to the measure may be introduced in a joint session, with the exception of those that have already been considered by one House and rejected by the other.

 

•    There are three limitations, though: Every time one house of parliament adopts a law and the other rejects it, there is a standoff. Every time one house of parliament passes a measure and the other rejects it, there is a stalemate.

 

•    Before being passed, the bill lingered in the other House for more than six months after being sent there. The six-month timeframe does not include any days that the house is prorogued or adjourned for more than four days straight.

 

•    The Speaker of the Loksabha, the Deputy Speaker of the Lok Sabha, or in their absence, the Deputy-Chairman of the Rajya Sabha, preside over Joint Sitting.

 

•    The Rajyasabha chairman never serves as the chair of the joint session.

 

•    A joint sitting requires a quorum of one-tenth of the combined members of the two chambers.

 

•    Rajya Sabha does not set the norms for Joint Sitting; rather, Loksabha does. 

 

The Indian Constitution has exclusions that prevent the calling of a joint sitting. The bills they are for are as follows:

•    According to the Indian Constitution, only the Lok Sabha has the authority to approve money bills. The Lok Sabha has the option to adopt or reject any proposals made by the Rajya Sabha. A money bill is regarded as having been approved by both Houses of Parliament when the allotted time period has passed, even if the Rajya Sabha fails to do so within the allotted 14 days. As a result, calling a joint session is not necessary in the case of money bills.

 

•    Article 368 of the Indian Constitution states that both houses of parliament may change it with a two-thirds majority. If the two houses of parliament disagree, there is no procedure for calling a joint session of parliament.

 

•    An end to the Lok Sabha: If the bill (in dispute) has already expired as a result of the dissolution of the Lok Sabha, no joint sitting may be held.

 

•    The joint sitting may go on, though, if the Lok Sabha is dissolved after the President has declared his intention to convene one (because the bill does not expire in this scenario).

 

•    Neither House may act on the legislation after the President indicates that he intends to call a joint session of the two Houses.

 

•    Regardless of the Rajya Sabha's voice, the Lok Sabha wins the conflict in a joint session because it has more members.

 

•    If a majority ruling party chooses a joint sitting to pass a law because there is a logjam in Rajyasabha, it should be able to do so because it has a majority in Loksabha.

 

•    Deadlocks between the upper house, the Rajya Sabha, and the lower house, the Lok Sabha, were anticipated by the writers of the Indian Constitution.

 

•    In order to resolve the impasse, the Indian Constitution mandates a joint session of both Houses of Parliament.

 

•    The joint session also stresses the need of Rajya Sabha as a check on the government's hastily drafted laws.

 

•    Since 1950, the option for joint sessions of the two Houses has only been invoked three times.

 

•    The Dowry Prohibition Bill of 1960 is one of the laws that have been approved during joint sessions.

 

•    Bill to repeal the Banking Service Commission, 1977.

 

•    The 2002 Prevention of Terrorism Bill. 

 

A unique constitutional tool for resolving a deadlock between the two Houses over a measure's passage is joint sitting. The Constitution provides an unparalleled structure for joint sitting in order to sustain the crucial synergy between the two chambers of Parliament. In accordance with Article 118, the President of India may make rules for the proceedings of a joint session of parliament after consulting with the Speaker of the Loksabha and the chair of the Rajyasabha.