Consider the following statements: 1. A bill amending the Constitution requires a prior recommendation of the President of India. 2. When a Constitution Amendment Bill is presented to the President of India, it is obligatory for the President of India to give his/her assent. 3. A Constitution Amendment Bill must be passed by both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha by a special majority and there is no provision for joint sitting. Which of the statements given above are correct?
Contents13
- A1 and 2 only
- B2 and 3 only
- C1 and 3 only
- D1, 2 and 3
Show answer
Answer: (B) 2 and 3 only
The answer is (B) Statements 2 and 3 only.
Statement 1 is WRONG:
A Constitution Amendment Bill does NOT need the President's prior permission.
Any MP can introduce it directly in either House.
This is different from Money Bills.
Statement 2 is CORRECT:
After both Houses pass it, the President MUST give assent.
He cannot refuse or send it back.
The 24th Amendment (1971) made this clear.
No veto power here.
Statement 3 is CORRECT:
Each House must pass it separately with a special majority (50%+ of total membership AND 2/3rd of those present and voting).
If one House passes and the other doesn't, the bill fails.
NO joint sitting provision exists for Constitutional Amendments.
Constitutional amendment procedure under Article 368 requires both Houses to pass separately with special majority, and the President cannot refuse assent once both Houses approve.
The 24th Constitutional Amendment (1971) specifically removed the President's power to withhold assent from constitutional amendments, making presidential approval mandatory.
UPSC tests whether students confuse constitutional amendment rules with ordinary bill procedures, especially regarding presidential recommendation and joint sittings.
Constitutional Amendment Procedure
Indian Polity Constitution Amendment Bill Article 368 special majority
Constitutional Amendment Procedure: Article 368 & Key Rules
Amendment bills need no prior presidential permission to introduce
President must give assent to passed amendment bills - no veto power
Both Houses must pass separately with special majority - no joint sitting
Special majority = 50%+ total strength AND 2/3rd present & voting
Article 368 governs constitutional amendments in India. Unlike ordinary bills, amendment bills follow special rules that balance flexibility with constitutional stability.
Amendment vs Ordinary Bills
Aspect | Constitutional Amendment | Ordinary Bill |
|---|---|---|
Introduction | No presidential permission needed | No presidential permission needed |
Passage Required | Both Houses separately | Both Houses (joint sitting possible) |
Majority Required | Special majority | Simple majority |
Presidential Assent | Mandatory - no veto | Can refuse or return once |
Joint Sitting | Not allowed | Allowed for deadlocks |
Amendment Process Steps
%%{init: {"flowchart": {"wrappingWidth": 460}}}%%
flowchart TD
s1["`**Introduction**
Any MP introduces in either House - **no presidential permission**`"]
s2["`**First House Passage**
Must get **special majority** (50%+ total + 2/3rd present)`"]
s3["`**Second House Passage**
Must get **special majority** - if fails, bill dies`"]
s4["`**Presidential Assent**
President **must give assent** - cannot refuse or return`"]
s1 --> s2
s2 --> s3
s3 --> s4Special Majority Formula
50%+ of total strength of each House (not just those present)
2/3rd majority of members present and voting in that House
Both conditions must be satisfied simultaneously
Lok Sabha total strength = 545, Rajya Sabha = 245 (varies slightly)
24th Amendment (1971) made presidential assent mandatory
Question Connection
This 2022 UPSC question tested the three key misconceptions: presidential permission (not needed), presidential veto (not allowed), and joint sitting (not possible). Statement 1 was the trap - students often confuse amendment bills with Money Bills.
Trap: Confusing amendment bills with Money Bills (which need presidential recommendation)
Trap: Thinking President can refuse assent like with ordinary bills
Trap: Assuming joint sitting can resolve deadlocks (not allowed for amendments)
Trap: Forgetting both conditions of special majority must be met together
Trap: Mixing up Article 368 (amendments) with Article 109 (Money Bills)
Presidential Powers Over Bills
Indian Polity President of India assent veto power
Presidential Powers: Assent, Veto & Special Cases
President has absolute veto (refuse) and suspensive veto (return once) for ordinary bills
No veto power over Constitutional Amendment Bills - assent is mandatory
Money Bills cannot be returned - only absolute veto possible
Pocket veto - indefinite delay by taking no action
Presidential Veto Powers by Bill Type
Bill Type | Absolute Veto | Suspensive Veto | Pocket Veto | Special Rule |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Ordinary Bills | ✓ Can refuse | ✓ Return once | ✓ Delay indefinitely | If returned & re-passed, must sign |
Money Bills | ✓ Can refuse | ✗ Cannot return | ✓ Delay indefinitely | Rajya Sabha has no role |
Constitutional Amendment | ✗ Must sign | ✗ Cannot return | ✗ Cannot delay | 24th Amendment made assent mandatory |
State Bills | ✓ Can refuse | ✓ Return once | ✓ Delay indefinitely | Governor sends to President |
Why No Veto on Amendments?
Constituent power belongs to Parliament, not President
President is part of Parliament but not supreme over it
24th Amendment (1971) specifically removed presidential discretion
Prevents deadlock between elected legislature and appointed President
Kesavananda Bharati case upheld this parliamentary supremacy in amendments
Types of Presidential Veto
# Presidential Veto Powers
## Absolute Veto
- Refuses to sign
- Bill dies permanently
- Used rarely
- No constitutional obligation
## Suspensive Veto
- Returns bill once
- Parliament can re-pass
- Must sign if re-passed
- Cannot return again
## Pocket Veto
- Takes no action
- Bill remains pending
- Indefinite delay
- Used to pressure ParliamentTrap: Assuming President has same powers over all bill types
Trap: Confusing Money Bills (can't return) with ordinary bills (can return once)
Trap: Forgetting 24th Amendment removed presidential veto on constitutional amendments
Trap: Thinking pocket veto means permanent rejection (it's just delay)
Joint Sitting of Parliament
Indian Polity joint sitting Lok Sabha Rajya Sabha
Joint Sitting of Parliament: When & Why
Joint sitting resolves deadlocks between Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha
Not allowed for Constitutional Amendment Bills
President convenes joint sitting on advice of government
Only 4 joint sittings held since 1950
Article 108 provides for joint sitting when the two Houses cannot agree on a bill. This mechanism ensures Lok Sabha's primacy in legislation while respecting bicameralism.
When Joint Sitting Can/Cannot Be Called
Bill Type | Joint Sitting Allowed? | Reason | Alternative Resolution |
|---|---|---|---|
Ordinary Bills | ✓ Yes | Resolve House deadlock | Simple majority in joint sitting |
Money Bills | ✗ No | Rajya Sabha has no veto power | Lok Sabha decision final after 14 days |
Constitutional Amendment | ✗ No | Both Houses must agree separately | Bill fails if either House rejects |
Financial Bills (other) | ✓ Yes | Same as ordinary bills | Joint sitting decides |
Joint Sitting Process
%%{init: {"flowchart": {"wrappingWidth": 460}}}%%
flowchart TD
s1["`**House Deadlock**
One House passes, other rejects/amends/delays 6+ months`"]
s2["`**Presidential Summons**
President calls joint sitting on PM's advice`"]
s3["`**Joint Debate**
Both Houses sit together, **Lok Sabha Speaker presides**`"]
s4["`**Simple Majority**
Decision by majority of **total members present** (Lok Sabha advantage)`"]
s1 --> s2
s2 --> s3
s3 --> s4Historical Joint Sittings
Dowry Prohibition Act (1961) - first joint sitting
Banking Service Commission Act (1978)
Prevention of Terrorism Act (2002) - most recent
Anti-Terrorism Act - only time ruling party used joint sitting to override Rajya Sabha opposition
Trap: Assuming joint sitting can resolve constitutional amendment deadlocks
Trap: Confusing Money Bills (no joint sitting needed) with Financial Bills (joint sitting possible)
Trap: Thinking Rajya Sabha Chairman presides (it's always Lok Sabha Speaker)
Trap: Forgetting joint sitting uses simple majority, not special majority