Article 108

Article 108 of the Constitution of India provides for a joint sitting of both Houses of Parliament—the Lok Sabha (House of the People) and the Rajya Sabha (Council of States)—to resolve disagreements or deadlocks over the passage of ordinary Bills. It acts as a constitutional mechanism to ensure that crucial legislation is not indefinitely delayed due to differences between the two Houses. This provision promotes legislative efficiency, cooperation, and democratic continuity within India’s bicameral parliamentary system.

Constitutional Framework

Article 108 is located in Part V, Chapter II (The Parliament), and establishes the process and conditions under which a joint sitting may be summoned by the President of India. It serves as a balancing provision, ensuring that bicameralism—while preserving checks and deliberation—does not become an obstacle to governance.
The provision explicitly excludes Money Bills and Constitutional Amendment Bills, which follow separate constitutional procedures.

Conditions for a Joint Sitting

A joint sitting may be convened only under specific conditions of legislative deadlock between the two Houses of Parliament. According to Article 108(1), the President may summon a joint sitting if:

1. Rejection by the Other House:A Bill passed by one House is rejected by the other House.
2. Disagreement on Amendments:The two Houses finally disagree on the amendments to be made to the Bill.
3. Delay Beyond Six Months:More than six months have elapsed from the date the Bill was received by the other House without it being passed by that House.

However, these provisions do not apply to Money Bills (Article 110) or Constitutional Amendment Bills (Article 368), which have their own special procedures.
This framework ensures that while both Houses participate equally in the law-making process, the will of the majority ultimately prevails through constitutional means.

Procedure After Presidential Notification

Once the conditions for a joint sitting are met:

• The President of India issues a notification convening the joint sitting of both Houses.
• After such notification, no further proceedings on the Bill take place in either House separately.
• The President may summon the joint sitting at any time and place deemed appropriate.

The joint sitting is presided over by the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, or, in their absence, by the Deputy Speaker of the Lok Sabha, or in their absence, by the Deputy Chairman of the Rajya Sabha.
This arrangement reflects the supremacy of the Lok Sabha as the directly elected House representing the people.

Voting and Passage of the Bill

At a joint sitting:

• The members of both Houses meet together and discuss the Bill.
• The Bill is passed if it receives a majority of votes from the members present and voting.
• Once the Bill is passed in the joint sitting, it is deemed to have been passed by both Houses and is sent to the President for assent.

Since the Lok Sabha has more than twice the number of members as the Rajya Sabha, the will of the directly elected House generally prevails during joint sittings. This ensures that public mandate takes precedence in the legislative process.

Amendments at a Joint Sitting

At a joint sitting, amendments to the Bill may be proposed and considered, but only under specific conditions:

• Amendments must be necessary due to the delay in passing the Bill.
• They cannot include entirely new proposals unrelated to the disagreement between the Houses.

This restriction maintains the focus of the joint sitting on resolving the original dispute rather than reopening the entire legislative debate.

Exclusion of Money and Constitutional Amendment Bills

Article 108(1) clearly states that Money Bills (Article 110) and Constitutional Amendment Bills (Article 368) cannot be referred to a joint sitting.

• Money Bills can only be introduced in the Lok Sabha and require the President’s prior recommendation. The Rajya Sabha can only make recommendations, which the Lok Sabha may accept or reject.
• Constitutional Amendment Bills require a special majority in both Houses and cannot be decided through a joint sitting.

This ensures that financial control remains with the Lok Sabha and constitutional amendments retain the consensus of both Houses.

Historical Context and Examples

The concept of a joint sitting was inspired by the Westminster parliamentary system, where similar mechanisms exist to resolve legislative impasses.
Since the adoption of the Constitution, joint sittings of Parliament have been rare in India’s history. They have been convened only a few times:

1. The Dowry Prohibition Bill, 1961 – The first-ever joint sitting, which led to the passage of the law prohibiting dowry.
2. The Banking Service Commission (Repeal) Bill, 1977 – Convened after disagreement between the two Houses.
3. The Prevention of Terrorism Bill, 2002 (POTA) – The most contentious joint sitting, where the Bill was passed after being rejected by the Rajya Sabha.

These instances highlight that joint sittings are used only when essential, preserving the spirit of bicameralism while ensuring governance continuity.

Judicial Interpretation

While Article 108 has not been directly challenged often, the Supreme Court of India has clarified related constitutional principles through landmark judgments:

• Keshavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973): Established the basic structure doctrine, which implicitly limits Parliament’s legislative powers, ensuring joint sittings adhere to constitutional boundaries.
• Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975): Discussed legislative processes and emphasised that Parliament’s powers must conform to the Constitution.
• Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980): Reinforced the balance of power between Parliament and the judiciary, indirectly affirming procedural sanctity in law-making.

These rulings underline that joint sittings are a constitutional device to facilitate legislative harmony, not to override constitutional limitations.

Significance of Article 108

Article 108 performs several vital functions within India’s democratic framework:

1. Ensures Legislative Efficiency:Prevents prolonged deadlocks and legislative paralysis by providing a constitutional remedy.
2. Balances Bicameralism:Maintains cooperation between the directly elected Lok Sabha and the indirectly elected Rajya Sabha.
3. Preserves Democratic Legitimacy:Reflects the supremacy of the House representing the people, while still respecting the revisory role of the Rajya Sabha.
4. Strengthens Governance:Enables the passage of crucial legislation essential for national interest, even in the face of political disagreements.
5. Protects Parliamentary Independence:Allows disputes to be settled internally through a constitutional mechanism rather than external intervention.

Relationship with Other Constitutional Articles

Article 108 operates in harmony with several related provisions:

• Article 107: Governs the introduction and passage of Bills.
• Article 109: Specifies the special procedure for Money Bills.
• Article 111: Deals with Presidential assent to Bills.
• Article 118: Empowers Parliament to frame rules for the regulation of its procedure and conduct of business.

Together, these Articles form the procedural foundation of India’s legislative process.

Practical and Contemporary Relevance

Joint sittings under Article 108 are rare but serve as a vital constitutional safeguard against legislative gridlock. In practice:

• They reaffirm that disagreement between the Houses is a temporary procedural issue, not a permanent obstacle.
• They showcase the balance between deliberation and decision-making, ensuring neither House dominates the legislative process unreasonably.
• They enhance public confidence in Parliament’s ability to resolve conflicts constitutionally and democratically.

In the era of coalition governments and diverse party representation, this mechanism remains crucial for maintaining the functional harmony of Parliament.

Conclusion

Article 108 of the Indian Constitution provides a constitutional mechanism to resolve legislative disagreements between the two Houses of Parliament. By authorising the President to summon a joint sitting, it prevents legislative stagnation and upholds the efficiency of India’s bicameral system.