Indian Political Corner | All Updates & Discussions.

[Bang Galore]

Govt. itself is mulling the option and the speaker has the final decision on weather it is a money bill or not.
Besides, as i showed you, this has been done before from the previous two bills which was passed in May

Those were regular bills, a lot more leeway there. No such on a constitutional amendment. This bill has been introduced before as a constitutional amendment. No chance. The government will be risking a stinging rebuke from the Supreme Court.

 

[Echo_419]

It won't be a constitutional amendment bill if the speaker decides it. Govt. itself is mulling the option and the speaker has the final decision on weather it is a money bill or not.
Besides, as i showed you, this has been done before from the previous two bills which was passed in May

There you go Speaker is a Congress in stooge he will not support us

 

[Star Wars]

Those were regular bills, a lot more leeway there. No such on a constitutional amendment.

It simply can be labeled as a money bill and it seems that it can be under Article 110, from what i am reading...

There you go Speaker is a Congress in stooge he will not support us

Speaker of Lok Sabha . RS is useless in case of money bills.

If its rejected in RS and sent back to LS and LS passes again it is passed.
If RS ignores it for 14 days its passed anyway.

 

[Bang Galore]

It simply has to be labeled as a money bill and it seems that it can be under Article 110, from what i am reading...

You can label it anything you want, it still changes the constitutional position. No way out here.

 

[Star Wars]

You can label it anything you want, it still changes the constitutional position. No way out here.

If it is laballed as a money bill and it passes Lok Sabha its over... Its irrelevant weather it changes the constitutional position... its a convenient(or inconvenient for opposition) loop hole...

 

[Bang Galore]

If it is laballed as a money bill and it passes Lok Sabha its over... Its irrelevant weather it changes the constitutional position... its a convenient(or inconvenient for opposition) loop hole...

Nope. Won't pass muster. Money bills cannot alter the constitution.

 

[Star Wars]

Nope. Won't pass muster. Money bills cannot alter the constitution.

Constitution allows the Lok Sabha speaker to decide weather a bill is money bill or not...final call goes on Sumitra Mahajan

 

[Bang Galore]

Constitution allows the Lok Sabha speaker to decide weather a bill is money bill or not...final call goes on Sumitra Mahajan

No, you are now get into a silly argument. The constitution does not allow it. Period. The Supreme Court & before that, the President would give the government so much hiding if they attempted to do that. Would be grounds for the dissolution of Parliament if anyone was dumb enough to attempt such a trick.

 

[Star Wars]

No, you are now get into a silly argument. The constitution does not allow it. Period. The Supreme Court & before that, the President would give the government so much hiding if they attempted to do that. Would be grounds for the dissolution of Parliament if anyone was dumb enough to attempt such a trick.

What are you talking about, who said constitution did not allow ?

Money bill route to clear RS hurdle may not be easy, say experts - The Times of India

Constitution does allow the Lok Sabha speaker to give its final word, Its not illigal its a work around and there is absolutely nothing anyone can do about it...COnstution does expect the speaker to make a fair judgment but her word is final... Speakers decision is final and cannot be challenged in any court of law

Article 110 in The Constitution Of India 1949

If any question arises whether a Bill is a Money Bill or not, the decision of the Speaker of the House of the People thereon shall be final

There is nothing the president or anyone else can do about it

 

[Bang Galore]

What are you talking about, who said constitution did not allow ?

Money bill route to clear RS hurdle may not be easy, say experts - The Times of India

Constitution does allow the Lok Sabha speaker to give its final word, Its not illigal its a work around and there is absolutely nothing anyone can do about it.. dissolution of parliament is a bad joke...

No joke. You read some article & don't even go through them fully & don't see a difference between a bill that is a regular bill & one that changes the constitution.

From the article:
"In that context, Kashyap, a former Lok Sabha secretary general, cited examples of Land Acquisition Bill and GST Bill. He said, "Neither the Land Bill nor the GST Bill is a money Bill. Therefore, these bills could not be introduced as money bills". "

No one will try & pass the GST as a money bill. It is a constitutional amendment. If any government was stupid enough to do that, it will risk severe censure .

"It may be remembered that Article 122 provides immunity against challenges to the proceedings only on the grounds of procedural irregularities. A wrong decision taken under Article 110(3) is not a procedural irregularity and hence does not grant any immunity."

 

[Star Wars]

No joke. You read some article & don't even go through them fully & don't see a difference between a bill that is a regular bill & one that changes the constitution.

From the article:
"In that context, Kashyap, a former Lok Sabha secretary general, cited examples of Land Acquisition Bill and GST Bill. He said, "Neither the Land Bill nor the GST Bill is a money Bill. Therefore, these bills could not be introduced as money bills". "

No one will try & pass the GST as a money bill. It is a constitutional amendment. If any government was stupid enough to do that, it will risk severe censure .

"It may be remembered that Article 122 provides immunity against challenges to the proceedings only on the grounds of procedural irregularities. A wrong decision taken under Article 110(3) is not a procedural irregularity and hence does not grant any immunity."

Yes i read that same article now i am asking you to read from the constitution itself. If the Constitution Article 110(3) itself allows the speaker to give the final word. Once the speaker decides , its over.. I already gave you the link to the constitution which shows that it is allowed.There cannot be a wrong decision taken under Article 110(3) since it allows the speaker to give the final word.

Article 110 in The Constitution Of India 1949

If any question arises whether a Bill is a Money Bill or not, the decision of the Speaker of the House of the People thereon shall be final

 

[Bang Galore]

Yes i read that same article now i am asking you to read from the constitution itself. If the Constitution Article 110(3) itself allows the speaker to give the final word. Once the speaker decides , its over.. I already gave you the link to the constitution which shows that it is allowed.

Article 110 in The Constitution Of India 1949

If any question arises whether a Bill is a Money Bill or not, the decision of the Speaker of the House of the People thereon shall be final

The immunity is limited & will not apply to any amendment of the constitution.

"It may be remembered that Article 122 provides immunity against challenges to the proceedings only on the grounds of procedural irregularities. A wrong decision taken under Article 110(3) is not a procedural irregularity and hence does not grant any immunity."

 

[Star Wars]

The immunity is limited & will not apply to any amendment of the constitution.

"It may be remembered that Article 122 provides immunity against challenges to the proceedings only on the grounds of procedural irregularities. A wrong decision taken under Article 110(3) is not a procedural irregularity and hence does not grant any immunity."

If it is a wrong decision, since Article 110(3) allows the speakers word to be final... there cannot be any wrong doing...

If any question arises whether a Bill is a Money Bill or not, the decision of the Speaker of the House of the People thereon shall be final

It doesn't ask the speaker to adher to the rest of the clauses, it says if there are any questions speaker has the freedom to make a final decision.That is why opposition was asking to properly Define what a money bill is...

 

[Bang Galore]

Only if it is a procedural irregularity. Which it won't be if it is a wrong decision. Will be challenged. The courts will rule if that is the basis of the challenge.

In any case, there can be no changes of the constitution by this method. Period. There is a set method for those changes to be made & since this issues concerns the states, even they have to be on board.

 

[HariPrasad]

Congress shall continue to hamper the progress of country untill it is marginalized. We have to pay the prise of Congressee terror untill it is it becomes non significant force in RS.