Polity Red

1)  Why is it that delimitation commission's orders can't be questioned in court?  

It could be that the issue is one internal to the house and as such does not impact individual rights and If this issue gets into litigation, it may paralyze elections.

 

2) While money bill, financial bill 1 & 2 all are introduced in the house only after recommendation from President, why is it only money bill where President can't send it back to parliament for reconsideration?

Money bills generally has no policy issues that president would like the parliament to reconsider

okay sir....but wrt to money bill doesn't necessarily not have policy issues...if a tax has been altered it is a money bill...so wouldn't that be a policy issue?

If it involves tax alteration, new taxation that is decided by the government, the constitution makers have felt that president can say nothing more, that's all.

The president using his powers to ask government to reconsider is supposed to be used in rare cases and if the government holds its ground, the president can do nothing more.

The money bill is a supply bill for money. If it's stopped it will lead to standstill of economy or other serious issues. So it can't be stopped by anybody other than those who are directly elected by the people, the loksabha.

Finance bill has policy matters which need opinion of all. So all have a say in that

Comparison: finance bill is like diwali purchase planning. All participate and add and remove. Money bill is like paymeny of EMIs. Not much discretion. So nobody stops it !

If there is a policy issue like tax alteration, then it is not a money bill but a finance bill ?

Yes. You are right

Sir, but according to art 110 imposition, abolition, remission, alteration and regulation of any tax are considered money bill...

110. Definition of Money Bill

(1) For the purposes of this Chapter, a Bill shall be deemed to be a Money Bill if it contains only provisions dealing with all or any of the following matters, namely

(a) the imposition, abolition, remission, alteration or regulation of any tax;

Indeed this provision of 'no stop' by president is used to quote that the prez has inherent power to stop other bills by pocket veto!!!

All finance bills are money bills. But all money bills are not finance bills. So budget is finance bill. Bill to pawn the gold in 1991 was a money bill. Not finance bill.

President is indirectly elected. Hence he can't be given the veto to stop any wish of the people's representatives that is crucial to the functioning of the govt. So prez has no power in stopping money bills. While his discretion is given in other bills to send it back or use pocket veto.

Who declares a bill as money bill?

Speaker

actually sir president can use pocket veto! he can either withold or give assent but just can't send it back for reconsideration

Since there is no power to send back, there is no power to pocket too ‼

Sir, initially I thought it was coz prez recommends it that is why he cannot send it for reconsideration, but then I read that financial bills are also recommended by him....that's where i got stuck                                                            

sir sending for reconsideration is suspensive veto, while pocket veto is when he doesn't give his assent to the bill.

We need to appreciate the fine difference in the powers given to different constitutional authorities.

The  prez has no pocket veto in money bills.

Permission to introduce the money bills is to ensure that the houses are having enough numbers. Please note that unlike emergency, here we don't have majority of the strength, but it's members present and voting!!

Imagine a situation where many states have famine and hence MPs are busy in their states. That time the govt shouldn't hurriedly pass a money bill. That's why they kept a check of prezs permission to introduce!

But once the members are present and pass it, then such a money bill can't be stopped by anyone.

Sir, how prez's permission will ensure that there is attendance?....ensuring quorum is done by the speaker... I'm a bit confused

Prez will permit only if attendence is possible. Else he may just withhold permission. He won't and can't ask MPs attendence!

Sir but prez on almost all of the matters acts on the aid n advice of the CoM...so can he deny permission?

He will advice the cabinet to wait

Sir just one question since u mentioned emergency, had a doubt in that too....can a joint sitting be called for passing the proclamation of emergency?

Yes. Joint is possible

Ok sir! so if the ruling party decides to proclaim emergency then nobody can stop them! they can use joint sitting to get their way

No. It is only for financial emergency. Not for the regular. It was there. But amended by the Janata govt. So now regular emergency need majority in both houses individually. They amended it only to avoid this possibility of a majority govt pushing emergency thru!