Official: SFG / RLG All Tests Discussions in one place
Hello All,
The Group usage here is a little cumbersome, so I am creating this thread to make sure that all questions with doubts stay in one place. Can someone push all the doubts and queries here? I will make this an announcement?
-Faceless, Anonymous "root"
529.2k views
@Thinker But in Laxm. it is given as absolute majority
@troae in laxmikant too it is given as special majority (a majority of all the then members of the house) a.k.a Effective majority.
@ranahere999 term of the office of President is 5 years so technically Dr Rajendra Prasad was in office for only 2 terms ie 1952-57 & 1957-62.
@nautiyalneha2326865 Question is about being "elected" not completion of terms or being in office.
@troae Laxmikanth ha certain mistake. Plz, rectify it. Rajya Sabha website and even normal search on google will give you the correct answer. Please refer to the link https://vicepresidentofindia.nic.in/vice-president-india-and-constitution. The Vice-President can be removed from office by a resolution of the Council of States (Rajya Sabha), passed by a majority of its members at that time and agreed to by the House of the People (Lok Sabha). Passed by a majority of its members at that time means an effective majority (i.e majority of the total strength of house minus vacancy) and not the absolute majority (i.e. the majority of the total strength of house)
@ranahere999 Technically he was indeed elected thrice. However, that still doesn't negate the statement i.e. only 1 person was elected for two terms to the office of the President.
@ranahere999 Any kind of power of the president is to be exercised with aid and advice of the Council of Minister. It's not just Executive but also Judicial, Legislature and other types of power. As far as situational discretion is concerned it is exercised when constitutional crisis sets in and in those circumstances to President's primary function is to constitute Council of Minister and no policy or executive decisions are taken in those times by the President.
Karmayogi,
To clear
Do not understand the statement as how many times he was elected?
Instead
See as a statement where in was there more than 1 prez who was elected two times.
Revert back.
@Thinker but factually that statement is wrong and the way we perceive questions may be different from the way examiner wants.. so usually factual information is more so considered in answering such questions.
And this question specifically says 2 times instead of "more than once". in that case it would have been correct..
Nevertheless.. prelims questions are bound to be controversial.. that's unavoidable..
Page no 20.2 laxmikant.. specifically executive power mentioned..
To cite concurrence.. in question no 1 it must have to be lok sabha instead of parliament (being specific). So i guess same principle must be applied here..
_Rana_,
@prakhar252 Art 366(2) defines anglo indian.Key is correct i guess
@170Abhi agreed someone pls explain
@170Abhi This question is a verbatim previous year question of UPSC. Art 75 (3) clearly mentions that CoM is Collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha only. Plz, refer to the link https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1324537/. Further UPSC answer key to consider that statement wrong. I am emphasizing it again that the Laxmikanth has certain technical ambiguities that you need to rectify whenever you encounter it.
Abhi170,@ranahere999 Plz don't extrapolate the facts here. With all you due respect it is just one case that was considering the Executive Power of the Union and it might be U N Rao vs Indira Gandhi Case. Plz, refer to the Samsher Singh Case (1974) for an in-depth idea of the issue. I am attaching the link here https://indiankanoon.org/doc/872230/. Further, I am attaching the Constituent Assembly debate between Ambedkarji and Rajendra Prasadji which points towards the fact President has to act per the advice of the CoM in each and every matter.
The most powerful dramatization of the Constitutional issue is found in a debating episode in the Constituent Assembly when Dr. Rajendra Prasad had pointed exchanges with Dr. Ambedkar. We may reproduce those telling pages here :
"Mr. President : There is another amendment which has been moved by Sardar Hukum Singh in which he says that the President may promulgate ordinances after consultation with his Council of Ministers. The Honourable Dr. B.R. Ambedkar : I am very grateful to you for reminding me about this. The point is that that amendment is unnecessary because the President could not act and will not act except on the advice of the Ministers.
Mt-. President : Where is the provision in the Draft Constitution which binds the President to act in accordance with the advice of the Ministers?
Dr. Ambedkar : I am sure that there is a provision and the provision is that there shall be a Council of Ministers to aid and advise the President in the exercise of his functions.
Mr. President : Since we are having this written Constitution, we must have that clearly put somewhere.
Dr. Ambedkar : Though I cannot point it out just now, I am sure there is a provision. I think there is a provision that the President will be bound to accept the advice of the Ministers. In fact, he cannot act without the advice of his Ministers.
Some Honourable Members : Article 61(1). Mr. president : It only lays down the duty of the Ministers, but it does not lay down the duty of the President to act in accordance with the advice given by the Ministers. It does not lay down that the President is bound to accept the advice. Is there any other provision in the Constitution? We will not be able even to impeach him, because he will not be acting in violation of the Constitution, if there is no provision.
Dr. Ambedkar : May I draw your attention to Article 61, which deals with the exercise of the President's functions? lie cannot exercise any of his functions, unless he has got the advice, in the exercise of his functions'. It is not merely to aid and advise'. In the exercise of his function,' those are the most important words.
Mr. president : I have my doubts if this word could bind the President. it only lays down that there shall be a Council of Minis- ters with the Prime Minister at the Head to aid and advise the President in the exercise of his functions. It does not say that the President will be bound to accept that advice. Dr. Ambedkar : If he does not accept the advice of the existing Ministry, he shall have to find some other body of Ministers to advise him. He Will never be able to act independently of the Ministers. Mr. President : Is there any real difficulty in providing somewhere that the President will be bound by the advice of the Ministers? Dr. Ambedkar : We are doing that. If I may say so, there is a provision in the Instrument of Instructions.
Mr. President : I have considered that also. Dr. Ambedkar : Paragraph 3 reads : In all matters within the scope of the executive power of the Union, the President hall, in the exercise of the powers conferred upon him, be guided by the advice of his Ministers, We- propose to make some amendment to that. Mr. President : You want to change that? As it is, it lays down that the President will be guided by the Ministers in the exercise of the executive powers of the Union and not in its legislative power.
Dr. Ambedkar : Article 61 follows almost literally various other constitutions and the Presidents have always understood that that language means that they must accept the advice. If there is any difficulty, it will certainly be remedied by suitable amendment. The Ambedkar approach, unequivocally accepted, was "It is the Prime Minister's business, with the support of the Ministers, to rule the country and the President may be permitted now and then to aid and advise the Council of Minis- ters. Therefore, we should look at the substance and not at the mere phraseology which is the result of conventions."
If the inner voice' of the founding fathers may be any guide, it is proved beyond reasonable doubt that the President and, a fortiori, the Governor, enjoy nothing more and nothing less than the status. of a constitutional head in a Cabinet-type government few exceptions and marginal reservations apart.
Write your comment…
