MPSC 2021 Prelims Paper-I · Question 77 of 100

Correct — option (3), statements (a) and (c). Everything in this question comes from Article 111 of the Constitution, which governs what the President may do when a Bill passed by both Houses of Parliament is presented to him. The article gives him two courses in the main clause — he may declare that he assents to the Bill, or that he withholds assent from it — and then adds a proviso creating a third. Under that proviso the President may, as soon as possible after a Bill is presented to him, return it to the Houses with a message asking them to reconsider the Bill or any specified provisions of it, and in particular to consider any amendments he recommends. Statement (a) states exactly this power, and it is correct. But the proviso carries an express exception: the Bill may be returned only 'if it is not a Money Bill'. A Money Bill, once passed, may be assented to or refused assent, but it cannot be sent back for reconsideration, which makes statement (b) wrong. The exception is not arbitrary. A Money Bill can be introduced in the Lok Sabha only on the recommendation of the President in the first place, so the government has already obtained his approval of the proposal before the House ever considered it, and returning it afterwards for reconsideration would ask the House to think again about something he had himself set in motion. Statement (c) takes up the sequel to a return. The same proviso goes on to say that when a Bill is so returned the Houses shall reconsider it, and if it is passed again by the Houses, with or without amendment, and presented to the President for assent, the President shall not withhold assent from it. So the President's power to return an ordinary Bill is a suspensive power only: he may delay the Bill and invite Parliament to think again, but if Parliament reaffirms its decision he is bound. Statement (c) is therefore correct, and the answer is the option pairing (a) with (c). The three ways in which a Bill may be dealt with are conventionally described as three kinds of veto. The absolute veto is the withholding of assent altogether; the suspensive veto is the return for reconsideration described in statements (a) and (c); and the pocket veto is the course of simply not acting, which is open to the President of India because Article 111 fixes no time limit within which he must decide, saying only 'as soon as possible'. India has no qualified veto, the kind that can be overridden only by a special majority; where Parliament passes a returned Bill again, an ordinary majority suffices. Note that this question prints only three statements, (a) to (c), and that its fourth option reads 'None of above' without the definite article, as printed.

• (1)(a) and (b) — This pairs the true statement (a) with the false statement (b), and the falsity of (b) is the whole point of the question. The proviso to Article 111 permits the President to return a Bill for reconsideration only if it is not a Money Bill, so the one category of legislation he may never send back is precisely the category this statement names. The reason lies in the special treatment Money Bills receive throughout: under Article 117 a Money Bill can be introduced only in the Lok Sabha and only on the recommendation of the President, under Article 110 the Speaker's certificate that a Bill is a Money Bill is final, and under Article 109 the Rajya Sabha may keep it no more than fourteen days and may only make recommendations which the Lok Sabha is free to reject. A Bill that could not be introduced without the President's own recommendation is not one he can ask the House to reconsider afterwards.
• (2)(b) and (c) — This pairs the false statement (b) with the true statement (c), so it fails on the Money Bill point alone; but the reason it attracts candidates is worth examining. Statement (c) is correct and reassuringly familiar, and having accepted it a candidate may be inclined to accept its neighbour without separate scrutiny. The habit that defeats this is to decide each statement on its own before looking at the options at all, writing a verdict against each in the margin, and only then matching the pattern of verdicts to a choice. It is also worth noticing that this option and the keyed one share statement (c), so the entire question turns on the comparison between statements (a) and (b) — that is, on whether the candidate remembers that the power to return excludes Money Bills. In a three-statement question where two options share a common member, the difference between them is always where the examiner has hidden the test.
• (4)None of above — This asserts that none of the three statements is correct, which cannot stand: statements (a) and (c) both reproduce the proviso to Article 111 almost word for word. The President may return an ordinary Bill with a message requesting reconsideration, and if the Houses pass it again, with or without amendment, he shall not withhold assent from it. An option of this shape is included in many statement-list questions as a refuge for the candidate who cannot decide, and it is a real answer often enough that it cannot be dismissed on sight — but it can only be right when every statement in the list has failed, and here two of the three are straight from the constitutional text. Note the printed wording of this option, 'None of above' rather than 'None of the above'; this paper spells its escape options in many different ways, so a candidate should read what is printed rather than rely on a remembered form.

Article 111 governs the President's assent to Bills passed by Parliament. He may assent, withhold assent, or — if the Bill is not a Money Bill — return it to the Houses with a message requesting reconsideration of the whole Bill or of specified provisions, and recommending amendments; if the Houses pass it again, with or without amendment, he shall not withhold assent. The article prescribes no period within which he must act, requiring only that a return be made 'as soon as possible'. These possibilities are usually described as three vetoes: absolute, where assent is withheld outright; suspensive, where the Bill is returned and Parliament may override the objection by passing it again by an ordinary majority; and pocket, where the President simply takes no action, a course available because no time limit is prescribed. The qualified veto, which can be overridden only by a special majority, exists in the United States but not in India. A Constitutional Amendment Bill stands apart: since the Twenty-fourth Amendment Act of 1971 the President is bound to give his assent to it, so neither the absolute nor the suspensive veto applies. The position at the State level under Articles 200 and 201 is different in an important respect. The Governor may assent, withhold assent, return a Bill that is not a Money Bill for reconsideration, or reserve the Bill for the consideration of the President; and where a Bill has been reserved and the President directs its return and the House passes it again, the President is not bound to assent — so the State legislature's power to override is weaker than Parliament's.

The legislative process is one of the densest areas of the polity syllabus and MPSC returns to it constantly, because a single article can generate questions on who may do what, on the exceptions, and on the difference between the Union and the State positions. This question is built on the single most examinable exception in Article 111 — that the power to return a Bill for reconsideration does not extend to a Money Bill — and it is set as a three-statement list, which is this paper's most common format after the plain four-choice item. Two habits protect a candidate here. The first is to judge every statement separately before looking at the options, since a list in which one statement is plainly true and another plainly false invites the assumption that the third must follow the pattern. The second is to keep the President's powers over Union Bills separate from the Governor's over State Bills, because the Commission asks both and the differences are exactly where the marks are: the Governor has a fourth option that the President does not have, and the State legislature's power to compel assent is weaker than Parliament's. It is also worth being able to state which Bills require the President's prior recommendation before introduction, since that requirement explains several of the rules that follow.

• Article 111: when a Bill passed by both Houses is presented to the President, he may assent to it, withhold assent, or — if it is not a Money Bill — return it to the Houses with a message requesting reconsideration and recommending amendments.
• A Money Bill cannot be returned for reconsideration, because it could be introduced in the Lok Sabha in the first place only on the recommendation of the President; the Speaker's certificate that a Bill is a Money Bill is final under Article 110.
• If a returned Bill is passed again by the Houses, with or without amendment, and presented once more, the President shall not withhold assent — so the power to return is a suspensive veto that an ordinary majority can override.
• Article 111 prescribes no time limit for the President's decision, saying only that a return should be made 'as soon as possible', which is what makes the so-called pocket veto possible; India has no qualified veto of the American kind.
• Under Articles 200 and 201 a Governor has a fourth course not open to the President — reserving a Bill for the consideration of the President — and where a reserved Bill is returned and passed again by the State legislature, the President is still not bound to assent.

• Believing that the President may return a Money Bill for reconsideration, when the proviso to Article 111 excludes Money Bills from that power expressly
• Accepting a statement because the statement beside it is true, instead of judging each statement in the list separately against the constitutional text
• Confusing the President's powers over a Union Bill with the Governor's over a State Bill, since the Governor may in addition reserve a Bill for the President's consideration
• Assuming the President has an unlimited discretion after a Bill is passed a second time, when Article 111 says in terms that he shall not withhold assent

MPSC asks the legislative process as statement lists of the kind set here, as direct questions on which veto is available in which situation, and as comparisons between the President and the Governor or between an ordinary Bill and a Money Bill. The Commission is particularly fond of the exceptions — the Money Bill that cannot be returned, the Constitutional Amendment Bill to which assent must be given, the absence of a joint sitting for a Money Bill or for a Constitutional Amendment Bill — because they cannot be guessed from general principle and must be learnt. Expect related questions on the definition of a Money Bill, on the Rajya Sabha's fourteen days, on the finality of the Speaker's certificate, and on the pocket veto, which is usually asked as the reason the Constitution's silence about a time limit matters. Reading Articles 107 to 111 once in the original text, and again alongside Articles 196 to 201 for the States, covers nearly the whole of this ground.

No directly related past PYQ was found.

• practice — not a real PYQ

  Which one of the following statements about the President's power to withhold or return a Bill is correct ?

  • (a)The President may return a Money Bill to the Houses for reconsideration
  • (b)The President must give his assent to a Constitution Amendment Bill presented to him
  • (c)The President must decide within thirty days of a Bill being presented to him
  • (d)A Bill returned by the President and passed again requires a special majority in both Houses

  Answer(b) The President must give his assent to a Constitution Amendment Bill presented to him — this obligation was imposed by the Constitution (Twenty-fourth Amendment) Act, 1971, so neither the absolute nor the suspensive veto is available for such a Bill. A Money Bill can never be returned for reconsideration, since Article 111 excludes it expressly; Article 111 prescribes no time limit at all for the President's decision, which is what makes the pocket veto possible; and a Bill returned and passed again needs only an ordinary majority, after which the President is bound to assent.

• practice — not a real PYQ

  Under Article 201 of the Constitution, when a State Bill is reserved by the Governor for the consideration of the President, and the President directs the Governor to return it, and the State legislature passes it again,

  • (a)the President is bound to give his assent to the Bill
  • (b)the President is not bound to give his assent to the Bill
  • (c)the Bill becomes law automatically after fourteen days
  • (d)the Bill must be referred to the Supreme Court for its opinion

  Answer(b) The President is not bound to give his assent to the Bill — this is the principal difference between the position under Article 201 for reserved State Bills and the position under Article 111 for Union Bills, where the President must assent once Parliament has passed a returned Bill a second time. The State legislature must reconsider such a Bill within six months of its return, but even a Bill passed again may still be refused assent. There is no provision for a Bill to become law by lapse of time, and no requirement of a reference to the Supreme Court.