Article 199

Article 199 of the Constitution of India defines and regulates the classification, introduction, and procedural handling of Money Bills in the State Legislatures. It mirrors Article 110, which performs the same function at the Union level for Parliament. The Article ensures that all Bills dealing exclusively with financial matters—such as taxation, expenditure, and borrowing—are subject to a special constitutional procedure, preserving the control of the directly elected Legislative Assembly over public finances.

Constitutional Definition and Scope

Under Article 199(1), a Money Bill is defined as a Bill that contains only provisions dealing with matters specified in Article 110(1)(a) to (g). These provisions relate to the financial operation of the State, such as taxation, borrowing, expenditure, and audit. The Article thereby restricts the scope of Money Bills to purely fiscal and economic subjects, preventing their misuse for unrelated legislative purposes.
The matters that qualify a Bill as a Money Bill include the following:

1. Imposition, abolition, remission, alteration, or regulation of any tax levied by the State.
2. Regulation of borrowing of money by the State or the giving of guarantees by the State Government.
3. Custody, withdrawal, or payment of money from the Consolidated Fund of the State or the Contingency Fund of the State.
4. Appropriation of money out of the Consolidated Fund for specific expenditures.
5. Receipt of money into the Consolidated Fund or public account of the State, and audit of State accounts.
6. Imposition of a charge on the Consolidated Fund of the State or alteration of any such charge.
7. Any incidental matter relating to the above financial provisions.

A Bill dealing with subjects outside these seven categories cannot be classified as a Money Bill, even if it contains some financial implications.

Legislative Authority and Role of the Speaker

A defining feature of Article 199 is the exclusive authority of the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly to decide whether a Bill is a Money Bill. As per Article 199(3), the Speaker’s decision is final and binding, and cannot be questioned in any court of law.
This provision reinforces the Speaker’s constitutional responsibility as a neutral arbiter in maintaining the procedural integrity of legislative business. Once certified, the Bill carries a formal endorsement by the Speaker, and this certification is conclusive for all purposes of legislative procedure.
The rationale for this finality is to avoid judicial interference in legislative functions and to ensure expeditious handling of financial legislation.

Legislative Procedure for Money Bills

The legislative process for Money Bills under Article 199 follows a distinct and expedited procedure, reflecting the special nature of financial legislation:

• A Money Bill can only be introduced in the Legislative Assembly, never in the Legislative Council.
• The introduction must be recommended by the Governor of the State under Article 207(1).
• After passing in the Legislative Assembly, the Bill is transmitted to the Legislative Council for its recommendations.
• The Council must return the Bill within 14 days from the date of its receipt, with or without recommendations.
• The Legislative Assembly may accept or reject any or all recommendations of the Council.
• If the Council fails to return the Bill within 14 days, it is deemed to have been passed by both Houses in the form approved by the Legislative Assembly.

This process ensures that financial control rests with the directly elected House, while still allowing the Council to offer advisory input without the power to veto or delay essential fiscal measures.

Distinction Between Money Bills and Other Financial Bills

While all Money Bills are financial in nature, not all financial Bills qualify as Money Bills. A Financial Bill may contain provisions that relate partly to matters specified in Article 110 (and therefore Article 199) and partly to other legislative subjects.
The key differences are:

• A Money Bill deals exclusively with matters listed in Article 110(1); a Financial Bill may include other provisions.
• Money Bills can be introduced only in the Legislative Assembly, while Financial Bills can be introduced in either House, subject to the Governor’s recommendation.
• The Legislative Council has no power to amend or reject a Money Bill but may amend or reject a Financial Bill.

This distinction preserves the Assembly’s financial prerogative while retaining a broader legislative role for the Council in non-Money Bill matters.

Judicial Interpretations and Key Case Law

Several important Supreme Court decisions have shaped the understanding of Article 199 and the Speaker’s authority regarding Money Bills:

• Keshavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973): The Supreme Court’s landmark judgment on the basic structure doctrine indirectly reinforced that constitutional procedures, including those governing Money Bills, cannot be manipulated to undermine democratic principles.
• Raja Ram Jaiswal v. State of Bihar (1984): The Court affirmed that the Speaker’s certification of a Bill as a Money Bill is conclusive and cannot be questioned in court.
• Union of India v. R.C. Gupta (1991): The Court reiterated that judicial review does not extend to examining the Speaker’s decision to certify a Bill as a Money Bill, as it falls within the legislative domain.
• Mohd. Sadiq v. State of U.P. (2001): Clarified the procedural aspects of Money Bills in the context of state legislatures and reaffirmed the Speaker’s discretionary powers in certification.

Together, these cases underline the principle that constitutional procedures for Money Bills are insulated from judicial intervention, preserving legislative autonomy while maintaining procedural consistency.

Significance of the Speaker’s Discretion

The Speaker’s discretion under Article 199 plays a decisive role in determining how a Bill is processed and debated. Once a Bill is certified as a Money Bill:

• The Legislative Council’s role becomes consultative, not determinative.
• The Legislative Assembly retains exclusive authority to pass the Bill.
• The Governor’s assent under Article 200 is the final step for the Bill to become law.

However, this concentration of power in the Speaker’s office also requires the exercise of high constitutional responsibility and impartiality, as the classification significantly alters the democratic participation of the upper chamber.

Constitutional Purpose and Democratic Significance

Article 199 ensures that financial legislation remains under democratic control. The principle behind this Article—mirroring Westminster parliamentary traditions—is that the power of the purse belongs to the people, exercised through their elected representatives.
The Article thus serves several constitutional purposes:

• It prevents the Legislative Council from obstructing or delaying essential financial legislation.
• It guarantees prompt and efficient passage of budgetary and taxation measures.
• It maintains legislative accountability by ensuring that decisions affecting state finances are made by the House directly responsible to the electorate.

Contemporary Relevance and Debates

The classification of Bills as Money Bills has occasionally generated debate, particularly concerning potential misuse of the Speaker’s certification to bypass the upper chamber’s scrutiny. Legal scholars have called for greater transparency and precision in defining what constitutes a Money Bill to prevent dilution of bicameral oversight.