Article 85

Article 85 of the Constitution of India governs the sessions of Parliament, and the powers of the President of India regarding summoning, proroguing, and dissolving either House of Parliament. This provision ensures the continuity of legislative functioning and the timely conduct of parliamentary business, thereby upholding the democratic principle of accountability through regular legislative meetings.

Constitutional Framework and Purpose

Article 85 is part of Part V (The Union), Chapter II of the Constitution, which deals with the Parliament of India. It provides the constitutional mechanism for the organisation of parliamentary sessions and the termination of their sittings. The article vests significant powers in the President of India, reflecting the President’s formal role as the constitutional head of Parliament.
The key objectives of Article 85 are to:

• Ensure that Parliament meets regularly to legislate and oversee the executive.
• Regulate the beginning and end of parliamentary sessions.
• Maintain democratic continuity through periodic elections following dissolution.

The framers of the Constitution drew inspiration from the British parliamentary system, where the Crown formally summons and prorogues Parliament, but in India, the President exercises these powers on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, as mandated by Article 74.

Sessions of Parliament

A session refers to the period during which either House of Parliament meets to conduct its legislative and deliberative business. Under Article 85(1), the President of India has the authority to summon each House of Parliament at such time and place as he or she thinks fit.
However, the Constitution places a specific limitation:

There shall not be a gap of more than six months between the last sitting of one session and the first sitting of the next session.

This ensures that Parliament meets at least twice every year, promoting continuous legislative oversight over the executive.
In practice, Parliament usually holds three sessions annually:

• Budget Session (February–May)
• Monsoon Session (July–September)
• Winter Session (November–December)

This convention allows Parliament to discuss the budget, review policies, and debate key national issues at regular intervals.
The Supreme Court, in Keshav Singh v. Speaker, Legislative Assembly, U.P. (1965), emphasised the importance of regular parliamentary sessions as a core component of legislative accountability and constitutional governance.

Prorogation of Parliament

Prorogation refers to the formal termination of a parliamentary session by the President of India under Article 85(2)(a). It marks the end of a sitting cycle without dissolving the House.
Key aspects include:

• The President may prorogue either House or both Houses of Parliament.
• Prorogation is distinct from adjournment (which is a temporary suspension by the Presiding Officer).
• After prorogation, all pending notices, motions, and resolutions lapse, except for bills, which do not lapse and can be reintroduced in the next session.

In State of U.P. v. Raj Narain (1975), the Supreme Court examined the procedural implications of prorogation, underscoring that it is a formal act of closure that maintains the rhythm of parliamentary business.
The power to prorogue serves two purposes: it provides a constitutional pause between sessions for administrative preparation, and it allows the executive to manage the legislative calendar in consultation with the President.

Dissolution of the Lok Sabha

The dissolution of Parliament applies only to the House of the People (Lok Sabha), as the Council of States (Rajya Sabha) is a permanent chamber not subject to dissolution. Under Article 85(2)(b), the President has the power to dissolve the Lok Sabha, either automatically at the end of its term or earlier on the advice of the Prime Minister.
There are two forms of dissolution:

1. Automatic or General Dissolution – Occurs when the five-year term of the Lok Sabha (under Article 83(2)) expires. Upon dissolution, the House ceases to exist, and elections are held to reconstitute it.
2. Early or Premature Dissolution – The President may dissolve the Lok Sabha before the completion of its term, usually on the advice of the Council of Ministers or if no viable government can be formed (as in cases of a hung Parliament).

The consequences of dissolution include:

• All members of the Lok Sabha lose their seats.
• All pending business, such as bills and motions, lapse, except for bills pending in the Rajya Sabha, which may be reintroduced in the new Lok Sabha.
• The Election Commission of India must conduct fresh general elections to constitute a new House.

In Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975) and K. K. Verma v. Union of India (1970), the Supreme Court examined the scope and limits of presidential discretion regarding dissolution, reiterating that the President acts on ministerial advice and that such powers are subject to constitutional conventions and judicial scrutiny in cases of arbitrariness.

Constitutional and Legal Context

Article 85 operates alongside other constitutional provisions that regulate parliamentary procedures:

• Article 86 – Gives the President the right to address and send messages to either House.
• Article 83 – Specifies the duration of each House of Parliament.
• Article 87 – Provides for the President’s address at the commencement of the first session of each year and after every general election.

These interconnected provisions establish a comprehensive legislative framework that maintains the periodic functioning of Parliament.

Practical Implications

The constitutional requirement that Parliament must meet at least every six months ensures that the executive remains answerable to the legislature at regular intervals. The President’s role in summoning, proroguing, and dissolving Parliament upholds the principle of executive-legislative cooperation within the parliamentary form of government.
Prorogation and dissolution have significant practical effects:

• Prorogation allows administrative and political realignment between sessions.
• Dissolution resets the parliamentary cycle, facilitating the renewal of democratic mandate through general elections.

These mechanisms collectively ensure continuity, accountability, and stability in governance.

Judicial Interpretation

Indian courts have consistently upheld the constitutional propriety of presidential powers under Article 85 while maintaining the principle of separation of powers. The judiciary has refrained from interfering in routine summoning or prorogation decisions, recognising them as political and executive functions.
However, in cases where such powers are alleged to have been exercised malafide or unconstitutionally, judicial review remains available. The Supreme Court has clarified that constitutional discretion cannot be converted into arbitrary authority.

Historical and Contemporary Context

Following India’s independence, the pattern of three annual sessions of Parliament became a convention similar to that of other Westminster-style democracies. Over the decades, however, the length and frequency of sessions have varied according to political circumstances and government priorities.
In recent years, debates have intensified regarding the declining number of parliamentary sittings and the use of prorogation to manage political challenges. Critics argue for greater regularity and transparency in scheduling sessions to ensure sustained legislative engagement and executive accountability.

Significance of Article 85

Article 85 plays a pivotal role in maintaining the rhythm and legitimacy of parliamentary democracy in India. Its significance lies in:

• Ensuring that Parliament meets regularly to transact legislative and oversight business.
• Providing a constitutional mechanism for suspending or ending sessions in an orderly manner.
• Upholding the balance between the executive’s control over legislative timing and the legislature’s right to meet and deliberate.
• Enabling the renewal of the Lok Sabha through periodic dissolution and elections.