RAS question
A joint sitting of both Houses of Parliament under Article 108 can be called to resolve a deadlock on:
Correct answer: (B) Ordinary Bills only (not Money Bills or Constitutional Amendment Bills).
A joint sitting under Article 108 can resolve a deadlock only on an ordinary Bill, not on a Money Bill or a Constitutional Amendment Bill.
Explanation
Article 108 is a deadlock-breaking device for Parliament when one House has passed a Bill and the other House rejects it, disagrees on amendments, or lets more than six months pass without passing it. The same article expressly says that this mechanism does not apply to a Money Bill. Money Bills follow Article 109 instead: after the Lok Sabha passes one, the Rajya Sabha can only recommend changes, and the Bill is deemed passed in the Lok Sabha's form if those recommendations are not accepted or if the Bill is not returned within fourteen days. Constitutional Amendment Bills are also outside Article 108 because Article 368 requires the amendment Bill to be passed in each House by the prescribed special majority.
Why the other options are wrong
- (A) Money Bills are expressly excluded from Article 108 and instead follow Article 109, where the Rajya Sabha's role is limited to recommendations.
- (C) Article 108 is not available for every type of Bill because it excludes Money Bills, while Constitutional Amendment Bills must separately satisfy Article 368 in each House.
- (D) Constitutional Amendment Bills are not resolved by a joint sitting; Article 368 requires passage in each House by the specified special majority.
Concept
This tests legislative procedure under the Parliament chapter, especially how different Bills move through the two Houses. RAS repeats it because Money Bills, ordinary Bills, and Constitutional Amendment Bills have distinct deadlock and voting rules.