Part VI: The State Legislature

Article 197: Restriction on Powers of Legislative Council

Original Article:

Article 197. Restriction on powers of Legislative Council as to Bills other than Money Bills:

(1) If after a Bill has been passed by the Legislative Assembly of a State having a Legislative Council and transmitted to the Legislative Council—

(a) the Bill is rejected by the Council; or

(b) more than three months elapse from the date on which the Bill is laid before the Council without the Bill being passed by it; or

(c) the Bill is passed by the Council with amendments to which the Legislative Assembly does not agree;

the Legislative Assembly may, subject to the rules regulating its procedure, pass the Bill again in the same or in any subsequent session with or without such amendments, if any, as have been made, suggested or agreed to by the Legislative Council and then transmit the Bill as so passed to the Legislative Council.

(2) If after a Bill has been so passed for the second time by the Legislative Assembly and transmitted to the Legislative Council—

(a) the Bill is rejected by the Council; or

(b) more than one month elapses from the date on which the Bill is laid before the Council without the Bill being passed by it; or

(c) the Bill is passed by the Council with amendments to which the Legislative Assembly does not agree;

The Bill shall be deemed to have been passed by the Houses of the Legislature of the State in the form in which it was passed by the Legislative Assembly for the second time with such amendments, if any, as have been made or suggested by the Legislative Council and agreed to by the Legislative Assembly.

(3) Nothing in this article shall apply to a Money Bill.

Explanations:

Article 197 of the Constitution of India outlines specific procedures and limitations regarding the role and power of the Legislative Council of a state in relation to bills other than Money Bills. It provides a framework to ensure legislative continuity when there is disagreement between the Legislative Assembly and the Legislative Council. This article is crucial in states with a bicameral legislature, ensuring that legislative gridlock does not obstruct governance.

Clause-by-Clause Breakdown:

Clause (1) – Initial Procedure for Bills Passed by the Legislative Assembly:

Clause 1(a): If the Legislative Council rejects a Bill passed by the Assembly, the Assembly retains the option to reconsider and re-pass the Bill.

Clause 1(b): If the Council does not act on the Bill for more than three months, the Assembly may proceed to re-pass it.

Clause 1(c): If the Council amends the Bill and the Assembly disagrees, the Assembly can re-pass the Bill in its original or modified form.

Real-life Example: In Andhra Pradesh, legislative delays in the Council prompted the Assembly to re-pass a Bill to ensure timely governance.

Clause (2) – Second Passage by the Legislative Assembly:

Clause 2(a): If the Assembly re-passes the Bill and the Council rejects it again, the Bill is deemed passed.

Clause 2(b): If the Council does not act within one month, the Bill is deemed passed.

Clause 2(c): If the Council amends the Bill and the Assembly disagrees, the Assembly’s decision prevails.

Real-life Example: In Karnataka, the Assembly exercised its authority to pass a crucial Bill despite Council amendments.

Clause (3) – Exclusion of Money Bills:

This article explicitly excludes Money Bills from its scope, ensuring that financial matters are governed by Article 198.

Historical Significance:

Article 197 reflects the framers’ intent to balance the legislative powers of bicameral states, ensuring the Assembly’s primacy while respecting the Council’s revisory role. The provision safeguards against legislative deadlock, promoting effective governance.

Legislative History:

Article 197 of the Indian Constitution, initially presented as Article 172 in the Draft Constitution, was debated on 30th July and 1st August, 1949. It was subsequently adopted into the Constitution.

Debates and Deliberations:

During the debates, T. T. Krishnamachari proposed extending the period for the Council’s consideration from two to three months, citing the Council’s limited sitting periods. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar emphasized the necessity of allowing the Legislative Assembly to reassert its authority after the Council’s repeated delays or disagreements, highlighting the principle of democratic primacy. Members like Prof. Shibban Lal Saksena and Sardar Hukam Singh supported the proposal, noting its alignment with the broader goal of ensuring efficiency in state legislatures.

Other members, including Shri Brajeshwar Prasad, argued for a longer period for Council review, emphasizing the importance of a revisory mechanism to avoid hasty legislation. However, the majority consensus favored the balance proposed in Article 197, reinforcing the Legislative Assembly's primary role while maintaining the Council's advisory capacity. Ultimately, the debates culminated in the adoption of the current framework, which continues to guide state legislative processes effectively.

References:

• Constituent Assembly Debates, July 30, 1949, and August 1, 1949.
• Constitution of India, Article 197.
• State Legislative Processes in Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh.