All questions of Anti-Defection Law for BPSC (Bihar) Exam

Disqualification on the ground of defection for a Member of Parliament will not apply if he goes out of his party as a result of a merger of the party with another party. This exemption is provided under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution of India, which deals with anti-defection laws.

Explanation:
- The Tenth Schedule was added to the Constitution in 1985 to address the issue of political defections, which were seen as a threat to the stability of government.
- The Schedule lays down the procedure for disqualification of Members of Parliament and State Legislatures on the grounds of defection.
- Defection is defined as voluntarily giving up the membership of a political party or disobeying the directives of the party leadership on a vote in the house.
- However, there are certain exceptions to the rule of disqualification on the grounds of defection. One such exception is provided under clause (4) of the Schedule, which states that a member shall not be disqualified if he goes out of his party as a result of a merger of the party with another party.
- This means that if a political party merges with another party and a member of that party decides to join the new merged party, he will not be disqualified for defection under the Schedule.
- This exception is based on the rationale that if two parties merge, the resulting new party is essentially a continuation of the old parties and the members of the old parties should not be penalized for joining the new party.
- However, this exemption is subject to certain conditions, such as the merger must be approved by at least two-thirds of the members of the original party and the member must not hold any office in the new party other than that of a mere member.
- Therefore, if a member of parliament goes out of his party as a result of a merger with another party, he will not be disqualified for defection under the Tenth Schedule.

The correct answer is option 'A' - Both I and II.

Explanation:
Statement I: The anti-defection law gives for the first time a clear cut constitutional recognition to the existence of political parties.
- This statement is correct. The anti-defection law was passed in 1985 as the Tenth Schedule to the Constitution. It was introduced to address the issue of defections by Members of Parliament and State Legislatures. This law recognizes the existence of political parties and provides provisions to curb defections.

Statement II: The total number of ministers including the Prime Minister in the central council of ministers shall not exceed 15% of the total strength of the Lok Sabha.
- This statement is also correct. According to Article 75(1) of the Indian Constitution, the total number of ministers, including the Prime Minister, in the central council of ministers shall not exceed 15% of the total strength of the Lok Sabha. This provision ensures that the size of the council of ministers does not become too large and helps in maintaining efficiency and accountability.

Therefore, both statements I and II are correct, and the correct answer is option 'A' - Both I and II.

Statement I: The provision of the Tenth Schedule pertaining to exemption from disqualification in case of split by one-third members of legislature party has been deleted by the 91st Amendment.

Statement II: The Dinesh Goswami Committee, the Law Commission of India, and the Constitutional Review Commission recommended omission of the provision of the Tenth Schedule pertaining to exemption from disqualification in case of splits.

Explanation:
The Tenth Schedule of the Constitution of India, also known as the Anti-Defection Law, was inserted by the 52nd Amendment Act, 1985. It was introduced to curb the evil of political defections, which were seen as a threat to the political stability and integrity of the country.

Statement I: The provision of the Tenth Schedule pertaining to exemption from disqualification in case of a split by one-third members of the legislature party has been deleted by the 91st Amendment.

This statement is true. The 91st Amendment Act, 2003 amended the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution and removed the provision that allowed exemption from disqualification in case of a split by one-third members of the legislature party. The amendment made it clear that a member of a House belonging to any political party would be disqualified if he voluntarily gives up his membership of that party.

Statement II: The Dinesh Goswami Committee, the Law Commission of India, and the Constitutional Review Commission recommended the omission of the provision of the Tenth Schedule pertaining to exemption from disqualification in case of splits.

This statement is also true. The Dinesh Goswami Committee, the Law Commission of India, and the Constitutional Review Commission all recommended the omission of the provision of the Tenth Schedule pertaining to exemption from disqualification in case of splits. These recommendations were made to strengthen the Anti-Defection Law and prevent political defections for personal gains.

Conclusion:
Both statements I and II are individually true. Statement II provides the correct explanation for Statement I. The 91st Amendment Act deleted the provision of exemption from disqualification in case of a split by one-third members of the legislature party, and this deletion was recommended by the Dinesh Goswami Committee, the Law Commission of India, and the Constitutional Review Commission.

Presiding Officer of the House

The question of disqualification of a member of Parliament arising on the ground of defection is decided by the Presiding Officer of the House. Let's understand why this is the correct answer.

Defection and Anti-Defection Law

Defection refers to the act of leaving one political party to join another or to form a new party. To curb this practice and maintain the stability of political parties and governments, the Anti-Defection Law was enacted in 1985 as the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution of India. This law sets out the provisions for disqualification of elected members on the grounds of defection.

Role of the Presiding Officer

The Presiding Officer of the House plays a crucial role in the implementation of the Anti-Defection Law. The Presiding Officer refers to the Speaker in the case of Lok Sabha and the Chairman in the case of Rajya Sabha. The role of the Presiding Officer includes the following:

1. Decision-making: The Presiding Officer has the authority to make the final decision on disqualification petitions filed against members of Parliament. The decision is based on the recommendations of the leader of the political party concerned or any other member.

2. Inquiry and Disqualification: The Presiding Officer conducts an inquiry to determine whether a member has incurred disqualification under the Anti-Defection Law. The inquiry involves providing an opportunity to the member to present his/her case and examining relevant evidence.

3. Timeframe for Decision: The Presiding Officer is required to decide on disqualification petitions in a timely manner. The law specifies a period of three months for the completion of an inquiry and giving a decision.

4. Judicial Review: The decision of the Presiding Officer can be challenged in the High Court and subsequently in the Supreme Court of India through a writ petition. The courts have the power of judicial review to examine whether the decision of the Presiding Officer is in accordance with the law.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the question of disqualification of a member of Parliament on the grounds of defection is decided by the Presiding Officer of the House. The Presiding Officer, either the Speaker or the Chairman, plays a crucial role in conducting an inquiry, making a decision, and ensuring the application of the Anti-Defection Law. The decision of the Presiding Officer can be subject to judicial review by the High Court and the Supreme Court.

Subject of the 91st Constitutional Amendment Act, 2003: Limiting the size of Council of Ministers

The 91st Constitutional Amendment Act, 2003 is an important legislation that aims to restrict the size of the Council of Ministers in both the Union government and the state governments. This amendment was introduced to address the issue of bloated and unwieldy ministries that had become a concern in the Indian political system.

Background:
Prior to the 91st amendment, there was no specific limit on the number of ministers that could be appointed by the President or the Governor. As a result, political parties would often expand their ministries by appointing a large number of ministers, which not only increased the administrative burden but also led to unnecessary expenses.

Key provisions of the 91st Constitutional Amendment Act:
The 91st amendment introduced the following provisions to limit the size of the Council of Ministers:

1. Article 75(1A): This provision states that the total number of ministers, including the Prime Minister, in the Union Council of Ministers shall not exceed 15% of the total number of members in the Lok Sabha.

2. Article 164(1A): Similarly, this provision states that the total number of ministers, including the Chief Minister, in the state Council of Ministers shall not exceed 15% of the total number of members in the Legislative Assembly of that state.

3. Disqualifications: The amendment also introduced disqualifications for any member of Parliament or the state legislature who accepts a ministerial position in excess of the prescribed limit. Such a member would be disqualified from holding their membership.

Significance:
The 91st Constitutional Amendment Act, 2003 has several significant implications:

1. Reduced administrative burden: By limiting the size of the Council of Ministers, the amendment aims to streamline the decision-making process and reduce administrative complexities.

2. Effective governance: A smaller Council of Ministers can ensure better coordination and efficiency in governance, leading to better implementation of policies and programs.

3. Financial savings: Restricting the number of ministers helps in curbing unnecessary expenses incurred in maintaining large ministries, thereby saving public funds.

4. Prevention of political patronage: The amendment prevents the formation of large ministries primarily for political patronage or appeasement, ensuring that ministerial positions are based on merit and competence.

5. Strengthening democratic principles: By curbing the size of the Council of Ministers, the amendment promotes the principles of accountability, transparency, and good governance in the political system.

In conclusion, the subject of the 91st Constitutional Amendment Act, 2003 is the limitation of the size of the Council of Ministers. This amendment plays a crucial role in ensuring effective governance, reducing administrative burden, and promoting financial prudence in the Indian political system.

Explanation:

The correct answer is option 'B', which is the 52nd Amendment to the Constitution of India. This amendment sought to curb political defection in India.

Background:
Political defection refers to the act of elected representatives changing their political party affiliation or leaving their party to join another party. It often leads to instability in the government and undermines the democratic process. In India, political defection has been a significant issue since the early years of independence.

Key Points:

1. 52nd Amendment:
- The 52nd Amendment to the Constitution of India was enacted in 1985.
- It introduced the Tenth Schedule, popularly known as the Anti-Defection Law, in the Indian Constitution.
- The amendment sought to address the problem of political defection by disqualifying elected representatives who defected from their party.
- It aimed to provide stability to the government and promote party discipline.

2. The Anti-Defection Law:
- The Tenth Schedule, introduced by the 52nd Amendment, contains provisions regarding the disqualification of elected members on the grounds of defection.
- According to the law, if an elected member voluntarily gives up the membership of their party or votes against the party's directions, they can be disqualified from holding their office.
- The law applies to both Parliament and state legislatures.
- It prohibits defection by elected members and imposes penalties for defection, including the loss of membership and disqualification from holding any office.
- However, there are certain exceptions to the law, such as when a party merges with another party.

3. Importance and Impact:
- The 52nd Amendment and the Anti-Defection Law have played a crucial role in curbing political defection in India.
- They have helped in maintaining stability in the government and ensuring party discipline.
- By disqualifying defectors, the law acts as a deterrent and discourages elected representatives from switching parties for personal gain or political opportunism.
- The law has also led to legal battles and controversies, with various cases challenging its constitutional validity and interpretation.

In conclusion, the 52nd Amendment to the Constitution of India introduced the Anti-Defection Law, which sought to curb political defection in the country. This amendment and the subsequent law have been instrumental in maintaining stability and promoting party discipline in the Indian political system.

Introduction:
The anti-defection law is an important legislation in India aimed at preventing political defections and maintaining the stability of the parliamentary system. It was enacted during the Prime Ministership of P.V. Narasimha Rao in 1985. In this response, we will analyze the given statements and determine their correctness.

Statement 1: The anti-defection law is intended to strengthen the fabric of Indian Parliamentary democracy.
Explanation:
The anti-defection law was introduced to address the issue of political defections, which were considered detrimental to the democratic process. Prior to the enactment of this law, frequent defections by MPs and MLAs were causing instability in the government and undermining the principles of democracy.

Under the anti-defection law, if a legislator voluntarily gives up the membership of his/her political party or votes against the party's directions during voting, he/she can be disqualified from the membership of the legislature. This law aims to curb unethical practices like horse-trading and ensures that elected representatives remain loyal to the party and the electorate.

Therefore, statement 1 is correct.

Statement 2: The anti-defection law was enacted during the Prime Ministership of P.V. Narasimha Rao.
Explanation:
The anti-defection law was indeed enacted during the Prime Ministership of P.V. Narasimha Rao. It was added to the Constitution as the Tenth Schedule through the 52nd Amendment Act of 1985. The amendment was introduced by the Rajiv Gandhi-led government, but it was enacted when P.V. Narasimha Rao was the Prime Minister.

Therefore, statement 2 is correct.

Conclusion:
Both statements 1 and 2 are correct. The anti-defection law was enacted during the Prime Ministership of P.V. Narasimha Rao with the intention of strengthening the fabric of Indian Parliamentary democracy by curbing political defections and ensuring stability in the government.