Article 208

Article 208 of the Constitution of India empowers each House of a State Legislature to regulate its own procedure and conduct of business. This provision ensures legislative independence and procedural autonomy, allowing each State Legislature to function efficiently within the framework of the Constitution. It is a key element of India’s federal parliamentary system, reinforcing the principle that the Legislature is the master of its internal proceedings.

Constitutional Context and Purpose

The inclusion of Article 208 in the Constitution stems from the need to grant self-governing authority to State Legislatures in managing their internal affairs. The article mirrors Article 118, which provides similar powers to Parliament. It reflects the belief that legislative bodies must possess procedural autonomy to maintain their dignity, independence, and effective functioning without undue interference from the executive or judiciary.
By defining how each House may regulate debates, voting, communication, and other internal matters, Article 208 upholds the doctrine of separation of powers and safeguards the Legislature’s institutional integrity.

Clause (1): Power to Make Rules

Under Article 208(1), each House of a State Legislature is empowered to make rules for regulating its procedure and conduct of business.
This means that:

• The Legislative Assembly and the Legislative Council (where it exists) have full authority to determine how they will conduct legislative business, debates, and voting.
• These rules must, however, remain consistent with the provisions of the Constitution, ensuring that procedural autonomy operates within constitutional boundaries.
• The power to frame such rules is exercised under the authority of the Speaker in the Assembly and the Chairman in the Council.

This provision guarantees that the Legislature functions independently of executive influence, while still adhering to constitutional norms such as openness, fairness, and democratic accountability.
Rules made under this clause typically deal with:

• The order and conduct of debates;
• Question Hour, Zero Hour, and motions;
• The introduction and passage of Bills, resolutions, and amendments;
• The formation and operation of committees; and
• The disciplinary control of members during proceedings.

Clause (2): Transitional Provisions and Continuity

Article 208(2) provides for the continuation of existing rules and standing orders that were in force in the corresponding provinces before the commencement of the Constitution. These remain effective until new rules are made under the current constitutional framework.
In addition, the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly or the Chairman of the Legislative Council may make adaptations or modifications to the old rules to bring them in conformity with the Constitution.
This clause ensured institutional continuity during India’s transition from colonial to constitutional rule, preventing legislative paralysis during the early years of the Republic. It allowed the existing procedural framework to function until the new Legislatures were fully empowered to draft their own procedural codes.

Clause (3): Rules for Communication Between the Two Houses

In states with a bicameral legislature, Article 208(3) authorises the Governor to make rules regarding communication between the two Houses of the Legislature — the Legislative Assembly and the Legislative Council.
However, this power is not absolute. The Governor must act after consultation with the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly and the Chairman of the Legislative Council.
This clause ensures coordination between the two Houses and provides for a clear procedural mechanism for:

• Transmission of Bills and messages between the Houses;
• Joint sittings or conferences, if required;
• Exchange of amendments and resolutions; and
• Harmonisation of legislative business to avoid procedural conflicts.

In practice, this promotes smooth legislative functioning and prevents procedural deadlocks in bicameral states such as Maharashtra, Karnataka, and Uttar Pradesh.

Features and Scope of Article 208

The key features of Article 208 include:

• Legislative Autonomy: Each House has full control over its internal proceedings.
• Constitutional Consistency: Rules must align with the Constitution, ensuring they do not infringe fundamental rights or constitutional mandates.
• Continuity: Pre-Constitution rules remain valid until replaced by new ones.
• Executive Coordination: The Governor’s role ensures procedural consistency in bicameral systems.
• Federal Balance: Each state enjoys procedural independence, strengthening India’s federal character.

Legislative Matters Covered Under Article 208

Rules framed under Article 208 commonly address:

• Order of business and scheduling of sittings;
• Introduction and passage of Government and Private Members’ Bills;
• Procedures for motions, resolutions, and amendments;
• Question Hour and Calling Attention Motions;
• Voting and division procedures;
• Formation of committees, including the Public Accounts Committee and the Committee on Estimates; and
• Maintenance of decorum and handling of disciplinary issues within the House.

Such rules are collectively referred to as the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business for the respective State Legislature.

Judicial Interpretation and Case Law

While no major Supreme Court case has directly challenged Article 208, judicial observations in related matters highlight the autonomy and privileges of legislative bodies:

• Keshav Singh v. Speaker, Legislative Assembly, U.P. (1965): The Supreme Court recognised that the Legislature has exclusive jurisdiction over its internal proceedings, though this autonomy is subject to judicial review if actions violate constitutional rights or procedures.
• Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975): The Court emphasised that legislative procedure is an integral part of democracy and must conform to constitutional norms.
• Raja Ram Pal v. Hon’ble Speaker, Lok Sabha (2007): Though concerning Parliament, this case affirmed that legislative privileges and internal rules are essential to maintaining the independence and dignity of legislatures.

These rulings collectively underline that Article 208 is a constitutional expression of legislative sovereignty, limited only by the supremacy of the Constitution itself.

Related Constitutional Provisions

Article 208 operates alongside several other provisions relating to legislative procedure and privileges:

• Article 118: Empowers Parliament to make its own procedural rules.
• Article 194: Grants powers, privileges, and immunities to State Legislatures.
• Article 207: Lays down special provisions regarding Financial Bills.
• Article 209: Authorises State Legislatures to make laws regulating recruitment and conditions of service of staff of their Houses.

Together, these Articles create a coherent framework for the independent functioning of legislative institutions in India’s federal structure.

Practical Implications in State Governance

In practical terms, Article 208 ensures:

• Autonomous law-making: Each House can tailor its procedures to its specific needs and political dynamics.
• Administrative efficiency: Standardised rules streamline legislative business and prevent procedural confusion.
• Continuity and stability: Transitional provisions guarantee uninterrupted legislative functioning during constitutional changes.
• Coordination in bicameral states: Governor-made rules facilitate communication between both Houses.

The rules framed under this Article thus serve as the operational manual of State Legislatures, ensuring order, decorum, and efficiency in law-making.

Significance and Constitutional Value

Article 208 is of profound constitutional importance as it upholds legislative independence, a cornerstone of parliamentary democracy. By granting each State Legislature the authority to regulate its own proceedings, it:

• Affirms the principle of self-governance at the state level;
• Protects legislatures from executive or judicial interference in internal matters;
• Preserves federalism by allowing procedural diversity across states; and
• Strengthens democratic governance by ensuring transparent and orderly legislative functioning.