Article 183

Article 183 of the Constitution of India prescribes the constitutional framework for the vacation, resignation, and removal of the Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the State Legislative Council (Vidhan Parishad). This article ensures accountability, continuity, and procedural fairness in the leadership of the upper house of a State Legislature, thereby safeguarding the democratic and constitutional principles of legislative governance.

Constitutional Context and Purpose

Article 183 complements Article 182, which deals with the election of the Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the Legislative Council. Together, these provisions establish a comprehensive system for the appointment, tenure, and removal of presiding officers, ensuring that the upper house remains functional and its leadership accountable.
The inclusion of Article 183 in the Constitution aims to provide stability and fairness in the functioning of the Legislative Council while ensuring that these key offices remain occupied by individuals who command the confidence of the majority of the Council’s members.

Text of Article 183

The article reads as follows:

“A member holding office as Chairman or Deputy Chairman of a Legislative Council—(a) shall vacate his office if he ceases to be a member of the Council;(b) may at any time resign his office by writing under his hand addressed, if such member is the Chairman, to the Deputy Chairman, and if such member is the Deputy Chairman, to the Chairman; and(c) may be removed from his office by a resolution of the Council passed by a majority of all the then members of the Council:Provided that no resolution for the purpose of clause (c) shall be moved unless at least fourteen days’ notice has been given of the intention to move the resolution.”

Key Provisions and Explanation

1. Vacation of Office

• A person holding the office of Chairman or Deputy Chairman automatically vacates office upon ceasing to be a member of the Legislative Council.
• Membership may cease due to resignation, disqualification, or expiration of the term of office as defined under the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
• This ensures that presiding officers always remain legitimate members of the House, maintaining the principle of representation and accountability.

2. Resignation Procedure

• The Chairman may resign from office by submitting a written resignation addressed to the Deputy Chairman.
• Conversely, the Deputy Chairman must address his resignation to the Chairman.
• The resignation becomes effective once the notice is received, unless a later date is specified.
• This internal mechanism ensures that resignations remain a legislative matter, free from external interference.

3. Removal from Office

• Either the Chairman or the Deputy Chairman may be removed by a resolution passed by a majority of all the then members of the Legislative Council.
• Such a motion for removal requires fourteen days’ prior notice, allowing members adequate time for deliberation and avoiding arbitrary or politically motivated actions.
• This provision ensures that the collective will of the Council is reflected in the removal process, thereby reinforcing democratic legitimacy.

Procedural Safeguards

The procedural requirements in Article 183 serve as important constitutional safeguards:

• The 14-day notice ensures transparency and prevents sudden or politically expedient moves.
• The requirement of a majority of all the then members—not just those present and voting—sets a high threshold for removal, ensuring stability in the leadership of the Council.
• The process protects the offices of the Chairman and Deputy Chairman from arbitrary dismissal while maintaining their accountability to the House.

Tenure and Continuity

Unlike the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, whose term is linked to the Assembly’s duration, the Chairman of the Legislative Council continues in office even after the dissolution of the Legislative Assembly, since the Council is a permanent body not subject to dissolution. One-third of its members retire every two years, ensuring continuity in legislative and leadership functions.
The Deputy Chairman similarly remains in office until resignation, removal, or cessation of membership, thereby ensuring the upper chamber always retains presiding authority.

Significance of Article 183

Article 183 serves as a cornerstone of legislative stability and procedural integrity in the State Legislative Council. Its importance lies in the following aspects:

• Ensures democratic accountability: The Chairman and Deputy Chairman remain answerable to the members of the Council.
• Prevents concentration of power: The possibility of removal through a majority resolution ensures that these offices are not beyond legislative control.
• Maintains procedural fairness: The notice period and voting majority prevent misuse of power and promote informed decision-making.
• Facilitates leadership continuity: Provisions for resignation and replacement ensure that the Council’s leadership is never vacant for long.
• Protects institutional dignity: By stipulating formal processes for resignation and removal, the article upholds the decorum and prestige of the presiding offices.

Judicial Interpretations and Case Law

Several Supreme Court decisions, while not dealing exclusively with Article 183, have addressed the broader principles governing legislative presiding officers and the procedures of legislative bodies:

• K. K. Verma v. Union of India (1954): The Court underscored that presiding officers of legislative bodies occupy constitutional positions and must exercise their powers in accordance with the Constitution and procedural rules. The case affirmed the significance of due process in removal proceedings.
• State of Uttar Pradesh v. Raj Narain (1975): The Supreme Court highlighted the role of legislative majorities and procedural legitimacy in maintaining the integrity of parliamentary institutions, which directly influences the application of Article 183.
• Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975): The Court reaffirmed the importance of legislative procedures and presiding officers in sustaining democratic governance and rule of law.

These cases collectively emphasise that the removal of presiding officers must adhere strictly to constitutional procedures, protecting the autonomy and impartiality of legislative bodies.

Related Constitutional Articles

Article 183 is closely connected with several other provisions concerning the functioning of the State Legislature:

• Article 182: Provides for the election of the Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the Legislative Council.
• Article 184: Specifies the powers and duties of these presiding officers during sittings.
• Article 185: Restricts them from presiding when a motion for their removal is under consideration.
• Article 212: Bars courts from interfering in the internal procedures of the Legislature, including matters of resignation and removal.

Together, these articles create a complete constitutional framework for the leadership and internal governance of the Legislative Council.

Comparative Perspective

The framework under Article 183 parallels similar provisions for other presiding officers in Indian legislatures:

• Article 179 provides analogous rules for the Speaker and Deputy Speaker of the Legislative Assembly.
• At the Union level, Article 90 deals with the Deputy Chairman of the Rajya Sabha in similar terms.

This consistency across legislative bodies reflects the framers’ intent to ensure uniformity in parliamentary procedure throughout the federal system.

Practical Implications

In practice, Article 183 ensures that the Legislative Council continues to function efficiently despite changes in its leadership. The procedure for resignation and removal has been used sparingly, highlighting the political consensus often required to achieve a majority resolution.
For example, in States such as Maharashtra, Karnataka, and Bihar, which have bicameral legislatures, these provisions have provided a stable mechanism for transition and have safeguarded the impartiality of presiding officers during politically volatile periods.

Significance in Democratic Governance

The enduring relevance of Article 183 lies in its contribution to constitutional democracy and parliamentary accountability. It embodies the following democratic ideals:

• Rule of law: Leadership transitions must follow defined constitutional procedures.
• Collective confidence: The presiding officers serve only as long as they enjoy the trust of the majority of members.
• Continuity of governance: Legislative leadership remains stable, even in times of political change.
• Institutional autonomy: The Council retains control over its internal leadership, free from executive interference.