Consider the following statements:1. A member of a House belonging to ...
- Article 361B: A member of a House belonging to any political party who is disqualified for being a member of the House under paragraph 2 of the Tenth Schedule shall also be disqualified to hold any remunerative political post for the duration of the period commencing from the date of his disqualification till the date on which the term of his office as such member would expire or till the date on which he contests an election to a House and is declared elected, whichever is earlier. Hence, statement 1 is correct.
- Explanation: For the purposes of this article- the expression “House” has the meaning assigned to it in clause (a) of paragraph 1 of the Tenth Schedule; the expression “remunerative political post” means any office: ✓ under the Government of India or the Government of a State where the salary or remuneration for such office is paid out of the public revenue of the Government of India or the Government of the State, as the case may be; or under a body, whether incorporated or not, which is wholly or partially owned by the Government of India or the Government of State, and the salary or remuneration for such office is paid by such body;
o except where such salary or remuneration paid is compensatory in nature. Hence, Statement 2 is correct.
Office of Profit: It is a position in the government that cannot be held by an MLA or an MP. The post can yield salaries, perquisites and other benefits. The origin of this term can be found in the English Act of Settlement, 1701. Under this law, "no person who has an office or place of profit under the King, or receives a pension from the Crown, shall be capable of serving as a member of the House of Commons.” This was instituted so that there wouldn't be any undue influence from the royal household in administrative affairs.
(i) According to Articles 102(1)(a) and 191(1)(a) of the Constitution, an MP or MLA is barred from holding an office of profit as it can put them in a position to gain a financial benefit. "A person shall be disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a member of either House of Parliament, (a) if he holds any office of profit under the Government of India or the Government of any State, other than an office declared by Parliament by law not to disqualify its holder," says the law. o Under the Representation of People Act too, holding an office of profit is grounds for disqualification.
(ii) The law does not clearly define what constitutes an office of profit but the definition has evolved over the years with interpretations made in various court judgments. An office of profit has been interpreted to be a position that brings to the office-holder some financial gain, or advantage, or benefit. The amount of such profit is immaterial.
(iii) In 1964, the Supreme Court ruled that the test for determining whether a person holds an office of profit is the test of appointment. Several factors are considered in this determination including factors such as:
- whether the government is the appointing authority,
- whether the government has the power to terminate the appointment,
- whether the government determines the remuneration,
- what is the source of remuneration, and
- the power that comes with the position.
(iv) Provisions of Articles 102 and 191 also protect a legislator occupying a government position if the office in question has been made immune to disqualification by law. In the recent past, several state legislatures have enacted laws exempting certain offices from the purview of office of profit. Parliament has also enacted the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1959, which has been amended several times to expand the exempted list.
View all questions of this test
Consider the following statements:1. A member of a House belonging to ...
Statement 1: A member of a House belonging to any political party who is disqualified for being a member of the House under the Tenth Schedule shall also be disqualified to hold any remunerative political post.
Statement 2: Unlike the office of profit, a remunerative political post is defined under the Indian Constitution.
Explanation:
Statement 1: A member of a House belonging to any political party who is disqualified for being a member of the House under the Tenth Schedule shall also be disqualified to hold any remunerative political post.
The Tenth Schedule of the Indian Constitution, also known as the Anti-Defection Law, deals with the disqualification of members of Parliament (MPs) and state legislatures (MLAs) on grounds of defection.
According to the Tenth Schedule, if a member of a House belonging to any political party voluntarily gives up the membership of his/her party or disobeys the party whip, he/she can be disqualified from being a member of the House. This disqualification applies to both Parliament and state legislatures.
If a member is disqualified under the Tenth Schedule, it means that they have violated party discipline and are no longer considered a member of their original political party. As a result, they lose their seat in the House.
Additionally, the disqualification under the Tenth Schedule also extends to holding any remunerative political post. This means that if a member is disqualified under the Tenth Schedule, they cannot hold any post in a political party that involves receiving remuneration.
Statement 2: Unlike the office of profit, a remunerative political post is defined under the Indian Constitution.
An office of profit refers to a position in the government that provides financial benefits, such as a salary or perks, to the holder of the office. The Constitution of India prohibits Members of Parliament (MPs) and Members of Legislative Assemblies (MLAs) from holding any office of profit under the central or state government.
However, the Constitution does not specifically define what constitutes a remunerative political post. It is left to the interpretation of the judiciary and other relevant authorities to determine whether a particular post falls under the category of a remunerative political post.
Therefore, Statement 2 is incorrect as a remunerative political post is not specifically defined under the Indian Constitution.
Conclusion:
Both Statement 1 and Statement 2 are not correct. While Statement 1 is correct in stating that a member disqualified under the Tenth Schedule cannot hold any remunerative political post, Statement 2 is incorrect in stating that a remunerative political post is defined under the Indian Constitution.
To make sure you are not studying endlessly, EduRev has designed UPSC study material, with Structured Courses, Videos, & Test Series. Plus get personalized analysis, doubt solving and improvement plans to achieve a great score in UPSC.