Which one of the following statements with regard to Censure Motion is NOT correct?
- (a)A leave of the House is required to move it
- (b)The Government is free to fix time and date for its discussion
- (c)It can also be moved against the entirety of the Council of Ministers
- (d)The Speaker decides whether the motion is in order
Correct — A, A leave of the House is required to move it. Leave of the House is the requirement attached to a motion of no confidence, where the Speaker asks whether leave is granted and at least fifty members must rise in support before the motion can be admitted. A censure motion carries no such threshold. It is moved like any other substantive motion, the Speaker rules on whether it is in order, and if admitted the government decides when time will be found for it. The other three statements describe the censure motion accurately.
- (b)The Government is free to fix time and date for its discussion — Correct as stated. Once the motion is admitted it is for the government to allot time, which is a real limitation on the instrument's usefulness to the opposition.
- (c)It can also be moved against the entirety of the Council of Ministers — Correct as stated. A censure motion may be directed at an individual minister, at a group of ministers or at the whole Council, which is wider than the no-confidence motion in that respect.
- (d)The Speaker decides whether the motion is in order — Correct as stated. Admissibility rests with the Speaker, and that is precisely why no separate leave of the House is needed.
Both motions are devices by which the House expresses displeasure with the executive, and both are creatures of the rules of procedure rather than of the Constitution. They differ on four points — who they may be aimed at, whether they must state reasons, what threshold is needed to bring them, and what follows if they are carried.
A censure motion must state the grounds on which it is based; a no-confidence motion need not, since the whole of it is the single proposition that the House no longer trusts the ministry. A censure motion may target one minister, several, or the entire Council; a no-confidence motion may be moved only against the Council as a whole, and only in the Lok Sabha, because it is that House alone to which the ministry is collectively responsible under Article 75. If a censure motion is carried the Council is not obliged to resign, though it will normally explain itself to the House; if a no-confidence motion is carried the Council must go. Setting those four differences side by side answers almost any question either House's procedure can generate on the topic.
- A no-confidence motion requires the support of at least fifty members before the Speaker grants leave; a censure motion has no such threshold.
- A censure motion must state the reasons for it; a no-confidence motion need not.
- A censure motion may be moved against an individual minister, a group of ministers or the whole Council of Ministers.
- A no-confidence motion may be moved only in the Lok Sabha and only against the entire Council of Ministers.
- If a censure motion is carried the ministry need not resign; if a no-confidence motion is carried it must.
The wrong option imports the fifty-member leave requirement from the second motion into the first.
- Carrying the fifty-member requirement across from the no-confidence motion.
- Assuming a carried censure motion forces the government out.
- Forgetting that censure may be aimed at a single minister, which no-confidence may not.
Parliamentary-procedure items are built by swapping one feature between two similar devices. Learn the pair as a table of differences rather than as two separate lists.
Which one of the following statements is NOT correct?
- (a) In Lok Sabha, a no-confidence motion has to set out the grounds on which it is based
- (b) In the case of a no-confidence motion in Lok Sabha, no conditions of admissibility have been laid down in the Rules
- (c) A motion of no-confidence once admitted, has to be taken up within ten days of the leave being granted
- (d) Rajya Sabha is not empowered to entertain a motion of no-confidence
Answer(a) In Lok Sabha, a no-confidence motion has to set out the grounds on which it is based
The same pair of motions tested from the other side. It settles the requirement to state grounds — which belongs to the censure motion and not to the no-confidence motion — and it also confirms the ten-day rule that follows the grant of leave.
Which one of the following statements is not correct?
- (a) A censure motion can be moved against a single Minister of the Council of Ministers.
- (b) A motion of no-confidence cannot be moved against the Prime Minister alone.
- (c) A censure motion cannot be moved against the entire Council of Ministers.
- (d) A censure motion can be moved against a group of Ministers.
Answer(c) A censure motion cannot be moved against the entire Council of Ministers.
The same examiner returning to the censure motion two years later, and confirming option (c) of this question directly — the motion may indeed be aimed at the whole Council, as well as at one minister or a group of them.
- practice — not a real PYQ
A motion of no confidence in the Lok Sabha requires the support of at least how many members before it can be admitted?
- (a)25
- (b)50
- (c)75
- (d)100
Answer(b) 50 — that number of members must rise in their places when the Speaker asks whether leave is granted.
- practice — not a real PYQ
Which one of the following motions must state the grounds on which it is based?
- (a)A no-confidence motion
- (b)A censure motion
- (c)An adjournment motion in every case
- (d)A privilege motion in every case
Answer(b) A censure motion — the no-confidence motion need not set out any grounds.