Parliament› Houses, Sessions, Dissolution & Lapsing of Bills
With reference to the Parliament of India, consider the following statements :
- 1. Prorogation of a House by the President of India does not require the advice of the Council of Ministers.
- 2. Prorogation of a House is generally done after the House is adjourned sine die but there is no bar to the President of India prorogating the House which is in session.
- 3. Dissolution of the Lok Sabha is done by the President of India who, save in exceptional circumstances, does so on the advice of the Council of Ministers
Which of the statements given above is/are correct ?
Answer c.
Option (c) — statements 2 and 3 only. Prorogation and dissolution are both presidential acts performed on ministerial advice, so statement 1's claim that prorogation needs no advice is wrong. Article 85(2)(a) lets the President prorogue the Houses, but Article 74(1) binds the President to act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers in all such functions — prorogation is not a discretionary power. Prorogation ends a session and usually follows adjournment sine die, yet nothing stops the President from proroguing a House that is still in session, which has happened in practice. Dissolution under Article 85(2)(b) is likewise done on ministerial advice, with a narrow situational discretion recognised only when the government has lost or cannot prove its majority.
Prepared with PrepKar AI and checked; it may contain errors.