Appropriation Bills

Article 94, Draft Constitution 1948

(1) The President shall authenticate by his signature a schedule specifying-

(a) The grants made by the House of the People under the last preceding article;

(b) The several sums required to meet the expenditure charged on the revenues of India, but not exceeding in any case, the sum shown in the statement previously laid before Parliament.

(2) The schedule so authenticated shall be laid before the House of the People, but shall not be open to discussion or vote in Parliament.

(3) Subject to the provisions of the next two succeeding articles, no expenditure from the revenues of India shall be deemed to be duly authorised unless it is specified in the schedule so authenticated.

Article 114, Constitution of India 1950

(1) As soon as may be after the grants under article 113 have been made by the House of the People, there shall be introduced a Bill to provide for the appropriation out of the Consolidated Fund of India of all moneys required to meet—

(a) the grants so made by the House of the People; and

(b) the expenditure charged on the Consolidated Fund of India but not exceeding in any case the amount shown in the statement previously laid before Parliament.

⁠(2) No amendment shall be proposed to any such Bill in either House of Parliament which will have the effect of varying the amount or altering the destination of any grant so made or of varying the amount of any expenditure charged on the Consolidated Fund of India, and the decision of the person presiding as to whether an amendment is inadmissible under this clause shall be final.

⁠(3) Subject to the provisions of articles 115 and 116, no money shall be withdrawn from the Consolidated Fund of India except under appropriation made by law passed in accordance with the provisions of this article.

Draft Article 94 (Article 114) was debated on 10 June 1949. It laid the procedure for passage of the Appropriation Bills.

The Chairman of the Drafting Committee moved an amendment to wholly replace the Draft Article with the following:

94. (1) As soon as may be after the grants under the last preceding article have been made by the House of the People there shall be introduced a bill to provide for the appropriation out of the Consolidated Fund of India all moneys required to meet-

(a) The grants so made by the House of the people; and

(b) the expenditure charged on the Consolidated Fund of India but not exceeding in any case the amount shown in the statement previously laid before Parliament.

(2) No amendment shall be proposed to any such Bill in either House of Parliament which will have the effect of varying the amount or altering the destination of any grant so made or of varying the amount of any expenditure charged on the Consolidated Fund of India, and the decision of the person presiding as to the amendments which are admissible under this clause shall be final.

(3) Subject to the provisions of the next two succeeding articles no money shall be withdrawn from the Consolidated Fund of India except under appropriation made by law passed in accordance with the provisions of this article.

The debates in the Assembly were based on this amendment. The Draft Article empowered the President to authenticate the Schedule. Through this Amendment, the Drafting Committee sought to give primacy to the Parliament, in particular the House of the People.

A member believed that the amendment inflicted ‘unnecessary formality’ to the procedure. He pointed out that the House of Commons adopted the passing of the Act route, as its votes had no legal validity. The amendment introduced voting in the House of the People along with the passing of an Appropriation Bill. This would be superfluous and time-consuming. Another member rebutted these concerns. He viewed this double-layered process as a measure of ensuring scrutiny.

A member of the Drafting Committee defended the amendment. He pointed out that the objective of the amendment was to merely substitute authentication of the President with the passing of the Appropriation Bill in the House of the People. This would ensure that the Parliament would have control over financial matters.

Another member was not too convinced with clause 2. He argued that it was restrictive and limited the ‘sovereignty of Parliament’. The issue of amendments to the Appropriation Bill could be left for the conventions or rules of the Parliament. There was no need to spell it in the Constitution.

The Assembly accepted the Drafting Committees amendment and adopted the Draft Article on 10 June 1949.