A deadlock between the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha calls for a joint sitting of the Parliament during the passage of 1. Ordinary Legislation 2. Money Bill 3. Constitution Amendment Bill Select the correct answer using the codes given below:

Correct Option A joint sitting of both Houses of Parliament, as provided under Article 108 of the Constitution, can be convened by the President to resolve a deadlock between the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha regarding the passage of an Ordinary Legislation. A deadlock is deemed to occur when: - One House rejects a Bill passed by the other House. - The Houses have finally disagreed as to the amendments to be made in the Bill. - More than six months elapse from the date of the reception of the Bill by the other House without the Bill being passed by it. This provision for a joint sitting is not applicable to Money Bills or Constitution Amendment Bills. - Money Bills (Article 110) are primarily the prerogative of the Lok Sabha, with the Rajya Sabha having limited powers to delay or suggest amendments. - Constitution Amendment Bills (Article 368) require passage by both Houses separately by a special majority; there is no provision for a joint sitting in case of a disagreement. Incorrect Options Options (b), (c), and (d) are incorrect because a joint sitting of Parliament is not permissible for Money Bills or Constitution Amendment Bills. - For Money Bills, the Lok Sabha holds superior powers, and the Rajya Sabha can only delay it for a maximum of 14 days. - For Constitution Amendment Bills, both Houses must pass the Bill separately by a special majority. If there is a disagreement, the Bill lapses, and a joint sitting cannot be convened to resolve such a deadlock.

IAS 2012 — Political Science Indian Polity

2012mcqmedium

A deadlock between the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha calls for a joint sitting of the Parliament during the passage of

Ordinary Legislation
Money Bill
Constitution Amendment Bill

Select the correct answer using the codes given below:

Official previous-year question

Verified 2 Aug 2026.

Options

A1 only
B2 and 3 only
C1 and 3 only
D1, 2 and 3

Did you get this right?

Solution

Correct Option

A joint sitting of both Houses of Parliament, as provided under Article 108 of the Constitution, can be convened by the President to resolve a deadlock between the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha regarding the passage of an Ordinary Legislation. A deadlock is deemed to occur when:

One House rejects a Bill passed by the other House.
The Houses have finally disagreed as to the amendments to be made in the Bill.
More than six months elapse from the date of the reception of the Bill by the other House without the Bill being passed by it.

This provision for a joint sitting is not applicable to Money Bills or Constitution Amendment Bills.

Money Bills (Article 110) are primarily the prerogative of the Lok Sabha, with the Rajya Sabha having limited powers to delay or suggest amendments.
Constitution Amendment Bills (Article 368) require passage by both Houses separately by a special majority; there is no provision for a joint sitting in case of a disagreement.

Incorrect Options

Options (b), (c), and (d) are incorrect because a joint sitting of Parliament is not permissible for Money Bills or Constitution Amendment Bills.

For Money Bills, the Lok Sabha holds superior powers, and the Rajya Sabha can only delay it for a maximum of 14 days.
For Constitution Amendment Bills, both Houses must pass the Bill separately by a special majority. If there is a disagreement, the Bill lapses, and a joint sitting cannot be convened to resolve such a deadlock.

Your note

IAS Indian Polity in other years

Indian Polity 2026 Indian Polity 2025 Indian Polity 2024 Indian Polity 2023 Indian Polity 2022 Indian Polity 2021 Indian Polity 2020 Indian Polity 2019 Indian Polity 2018 Indian Polity 2017 Indian Polity 2016 Indian Polity 2015

More IAS Indian Polity questions

Consider the following statements with reference to the Constitution of India: 1. There is no Article in the Constitution of India that specifies that the Constitution of India will be officially called the 'Constitution of India'. 2. There is no Article in the Constitution of India that specifies that the Indian Independence Act, 1947 and the Government of India Act, 1935 stand repealed. 3. There is no Article in the Constitution of India that mentions 26th January, 1950 as the date of the commencement of the Constitution of India. Which one of the following conclusions based on the above statements is correct?

2026hard

'X' was addressing a seminar on the meaning of the term 'law' as provided under Article 13, Part III of the Constitution of India. 'X' explained that the meaning of the term 'law' in the Constitution of India was very comprehensive. It included ordinances, orders and even rules and regulations. 'Y' pointed out that the term 'law' in Article 13 also included custom or usage having in the territory of India the force of law, to which 'X' was not convinced. Based on the above, select the correct conclusion from the options given below:

2026medium

In a multi-ethnic district where both economic competition and historical grievances frequently led to community tensions, a flashpoint has arisen with a Government decision to allocate land for a waste management facility near a tribal hamlet, sparking protests by the tribal community, which claimed that the land was sacred and critical to their cultural identity. At the same time, urban residents and local industries supported the project, citing severe solid waste challenges and health concerns due to lack of a proper disposal site. The conflict has escalated with road blockades, social media campaigns, and allegations of police excesses. As a responsible Government official, you are tasked with resolving the situation through mediation, ensuring a sustainable outcome that balances environmental needs, tribal rights, and urban public health. Consider the following statements with reference to the above: 1. A successful conflict resolution process must begin with acknowledging the cultural concerns of the protesting tribal community before discussing technical alternatives. 2. The Government should move ahead with the project without delay to address urban health concerns, which outweigh the sentiments of a small group. 3. Creating a multi-stakeholder dialogue platform — including tribal leaders, environmental experts, and municipal representatives — to build mutual understanding and help de-escalate tensions. 4. Conducting an independent Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) and sharing findings transparently with both sides to facilitate evidence-based decision-making. Which of the statements given above would contribute to the resolution process?

2026medium

Ms. X is a mid-level civil service official working in the urban development department of a major city. Recently, she was involved in approving a contract for a public infrastructure project — a new community park. During the approval process, she received a piece of confidential information indicating that one of the shortlisted contractors had a history of poor workmanship and allegations of corruption in other cities, though nothing had been legally proven. The Head of the Department, Mr. Y, advised her not to disclose this information to the project committee or the public because it could delay the project and damage the city's reputation. However, Ms. X believed that withholding such information compromised transparency and public trust. What amongst the following should Ms. X do now? 1. Immediately disclose the information to the project committee and the public 2. Recommend removing the contractor from the shortlist to protect the project's integrity 3. Propose a 'limited disclosure' to an oversight committee, while keeping the information confidential from the public for the time being Select the answer using the code given below :

2026medium

Consider the following statements about the Committee on the Welfare of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes of the Parliament of India: 1. Although members of this Committee are elected from both Houses of Parliament, the Chairperson of this Committee is appointed by the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha. 2. Twenty members are elected by the Rajya Sabha and ten members by the Lok Sabha. 3. No Minister, except for the Union Minister of Social Justice and Empowerment, is eligible to be a member of this Committee. 4. Members are elected for a fixed term of two years from the date they enter their office. Which one of the following conclusions based on the above statements is correct?

2026medium

View all Indian Polity questions

Keep practicing Indian Polity

Work through every IAS Indian Polity PYQ, year by year.

Browse all Political Science topics

Correct Option

One House rejects a Bill passed by the other House.
The Houses have finally disagreed as to the amendments to be made in the Bill.
More than six months elapse from the date of the reception of the Bill by the other House without the Bill being passed by it.

This provision for a joint sitting is not applicable to Money Bills or Constitution Amendment Bills.

Money Bills (Article 110) are primarily the prerogative of the Lok Sabha, with the Rajya Sabha having limited powers to delay or suggest amendments.
Constitution Amendment Bills (Article 368) require passage by both Houses separately by a special majority; there is no provision for a joint sitting in case of a disagreement.

Incorrect Options

Options (b), (c), and (d) are incorrect because a joint sitting of Parliament is not permissible for Money Bills or Constitution Amendment Bills.

For Money Bills, the Lok Sabha holds superior powers, and the Rajya Sabha can only delay it for a maximum of 14 days.
For Constitution Amendment Bills, both Houses must pass the Bill separately by a special majority. If there is a disagreement, the Bill lapses, and a joint sitting cannot be convened to resolve such a deadlock.