Doubt Clearance Thread: UPSC 2021
"When in doubt, observe and ask questions. When certain, observe at length and ask many more questions."
Created this thread as a one stop solution for all members so that all the doubts wherein any conceptual clarification is required can be solved here.
Can governor reserve any bill for consideration of President?
Hi!
A governor cannot reserve 'any' bill for the consideration of the President, there are specific provisions in this regard. I am attaching this image directly from M Laxmikanth's Indian Polity's chapter on Governor, you may refer to it for more details.
OctagonalArcher,upsc2020
MatildasMissHoney,37) Consider the following statements about Dadabhai Naoroji: 1. He propounded the theory of Drain of Wealth for the first time in his book Poverty and UnBritish rule in India. 2. He presided over Indian National Congress sessions three times. Which of the statements given above is/are correct? a) 1 only b) 2 only c
how ans is b.
Both seem to be true
But the catch here is the phrase- "for the first time". So poverty and unBritish rule was published in 1901. He must have propounded theory before that maybe around the 1890s (during the moderate phase of independence struggle).
The drain of wealth theory was propounded by Dadabhai Nauroji first if 1866 and later on he elaborated on it in his book Poverty and Un-British Rule in India.
Hello!
Who acts as the Vice-President of India, when a vacancy occurs in the office of the Vice-President, when the Vice-President acts as the President of India?
The Constitution is silent on this matter. However the only significant duty of V-P is to act as Chairperson of the RS, nobody technically works as VP when there is a vacancy and till the absence of VP, the functions of Rajya Sabha are performed by the Deputy Chairman of RS.
MatildasMissHoney,Can governor reserve any bill for consideration of President?
Governor has wide discretionary powers under the Constitution (read Article 163). As far as reservation of a Bill is concerned following shall be taken into consideration -
1) Constitution Amendment Bill - Can not be introduced in State Legislature hence out of our discussion here.
2) Money Bill - The governor can give assent or withhold the bill. However, since it is a money bill and introduced with prior assent of the President it can not be returned by the Governor for the reconsideration of the legislature. But governor can reserve the bill for the consideration of the president.
4) Finance Bill - Article 207 provides for the Finance Bill in the State Legislature and it also nowhere prohibits the Governor from reserving the bill for the consideration of the President.
4) Ordinary Bill - Governor can exercise an absolute veto, suspension veto, and a pocket veto over it. It can also be reserved for the consideration of the President.
Now coming to Article 200 and 201 which provides for the reservation of the Bill for the consideration fo the President, this two article too didn't mention any categories of bills on which governor is required to give his assent or which prevent Governor from reserving the bill for the consideration of the President. The only positive exception is that the Governor is mandated to reserve a bill introduced in the State Legislature for the Consideration of the President if that bill endangers the position of High Court in the States.
Hence in my opinion Governor can reserve any bill introduced in the State Legislature for the consideration of the President by virtue of Article 163 (Discretionary powers of the Governor) and also under Article 200 and 201. At least technically he can reserve any bill introduced in the State Legislature for the consideration of the President.
OctagonalArcher,
This is wrt Article 352'National Emergency'-
Here, if the Rajya Sabha disapproves the proclamation, will the emergency end with it?
Since any approval of emergency requires approval from both the houses, if one house outright rejects it, it ends. The government then has to start the procedure of proclamation again.
MatildasMissHoney,
Thinker,
Did Ambedkar oppose the inclusion of the term socialist in the preamble?
November 1948: Prof. K.T Shah, representing Bihar had proposed the following amendment.
“India shall be a Secular, Federal, Socialist Union of States.”
Ambedkar opposed the amendment. Secularism was inherent to the Constitution’s structure and he felt that mentioning it in the preamble would be redundant.
Shah also made a strong case for the inclusion of socialism.
Ambedkar turned down the proposal by explaining his understanding of the Constitution. He felt that it was a mechanism for the purpose of regulating the work of various organs of the state. Building on this understanding, Ambedkar said: “What should be the policy of the State, how the Society should be organised in its social and economic side are matters which must be decided by the people themselves according to time and circumstances. It cannot be laid down in the Constitution itself, because that is destroying democracy altogether." He added then that some of the directive principles in the Constitution are socialist in their direction.
Rambo93,tamtar
Write your comment…
