Which of following is NOT a device of parliamentary proceedings?

Correct — B. The half-an-hour discussion and the short duration (two-hour) discussion are both provided for in the Rules of Procedure, and Zero Hour, which the rules never mention, is used in the House every sitting.

There is no device named a full-day discussion.

How long a debate runs is settled item by item, largely on the recommendation of the Business Advisory Committee. It is not a standing category named after a full day.

Option (b) is the invented one.

Why the others are wrong

• (a)
  Half-an-hour discussion — Half-an-hour discussion is a genuine device, taken up on a matter of public importance arising from a recent question whose answer needs elucidation.
• (c)
  Two-hour (short) discussion — Two-hour (short) discussion is the short duration discussion, a debate on an urgent matter that carries no formal motion and ends without a vote.
• (d)
  Zero-hour discussion — Zero-hour discussion refers to Zero Hour, the period straight after Question Hour when members raise urgent matters without prior notice. It is an Indian innovation.

Parliament holds the executive to account through procedural devices, and this stem tests whether you can tell a real one from an invented name.

The recognised devices include the Question Hour, Zero Hour, the half-an-hour discussion, the short duration or two-hour discussion, the calling attention motion, and the motions proper such as adjournment, no-confidence, censure and cut motions.

What they share is a rule that fixes who may raise the matter, how much notice is required, and whether a vote follows. A full-day discussion has no such rule behind it.

Key facts

• Zero Hour is an Indian innovation and finds no mention in the Rules of Procedure.
• The short duration discussion is also called the two-hour discussion and ends without a formal motion or a vote.
• A half-an-hour discussion is taken up on a matter arising out of a recent question answered in the House.

Common traps

• Rejecting Zero Hour because it is not written into the rulebook, when it is still a recognised device.
• Assuming any plausible-sounding parliamentary phrase must be a real device.

No directly related past PYQ was found.