Current Affairs Topics Archive
International Relations Economics Polity & Governance Environment & Ecology Science & Technology Internal Security Geography Social Issues Art & Culture Modern History

Simultaneous polls panel weighs bar on no-confidence motions in final year of government’s term

February 18, 2026 5 min read Polity & Governance GS Paper 2
On This Page ▼

What Happened

  • The Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) examining the Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill, 2024 on simultaneous elections is considering a proposal to bar no-confidence motions in the final year of a government's term.
  • The JPC is chaired by P.P. Chaudhary and has 39 members (27 Lok Sabha MPs and 12 Rajya Sabha members).
  • The panel chairperson noted that Panchayati Raj laws in many states already have similar restrictions barring no-confidence motions in the final year of a panchayat's term, providing a legislative precedent.
  • The Bill proposes amendments to Articles 83 (duration of Houses of Parliament), 172 (duration of state legislatures), and 327 (power of Parliament regarding elections).
  • A new Article 82A is proposed with six clauses to enable simultaneous elections.
  • Under the proposed framework, state assemblies elected after the "appointed date" but before the Lok Sabha term ends would have their terms curtailed to align with the Lok Sabha's five-year cycle.
  • The Kovind Committee (High-Level Committee on Simultaneous Elections, 2024) had recommended that any no-confidence motion be accompanied by a mandatory confidence motion for forming an alternate government.
  • If dissolution of a House becomes unavoidable, the newly constituted House would serve only the "unexpired term" until the next synchronised election cycle.
  • The Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill was introduced in Lok Sabha on 17 December 2024 and referred to the JPC on 19 December 2024.

Static Topic Bridges

No-Confidence Motion Under the Constitution

A no-confidence motion is a parliamentary procedure under Article 75(3), which states that the Council of Ministers shall be collectively responsible to the House of the People (Lok Sabha). Rule 198 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha governs the procedure: a motion requires support of at least 50 members for admission, and if passed by a simple majority, the entire Council of Ministers must resign. There is no requirement in the Constitution that a no-confidence motion be accompanied by an alternative government proposal. Since 1952, 27 no-confidence motions have been moved in Lok Sabha, with only one succeeding -- against the V.P. Singh government in 1990. A constructive vote of no-confidence (as in the German Basic Law, Article 67) requires naming an alternative Chancellor before the vote; the Kovind Committee examined but the committee's final position remained in favour of the existing parliamentary practice while proposing the companion confidence motion requirement.

  • Article 75(3): Collective responsibility of Council of Ministers to Lok Sabha
  • Rule 198 of Lok Sabha Rules: Procedure for no-confidence motion
  • Minimum 50 members required for admission
  • Simple majority required for passage
  • 27 no-confidence motions moved since 1952; 1 successful (1990, V.P. Singh government)
  • German Basic Law, Article 67: Constructive vote of no-confidence model

Connection to this news: The JPC is considering whether to bar no-confidence motions in the final year altogether or require a companion confidence motion, both of which would fundamentally alter the parliamentary accountability mechanism under Article 75(3).

Constitutional Amendments for Simultaneous Elections

The Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill, 2024 proposes amendments to Articles 83, 172, and 327. Article 83(2) currently provides that the Lok Sabha shall continue for five years from its first meeting unless sooner dissolved. Article 172(1) similarly provides a five-year term for state assemblies. The proposed Article 82A introduces the concepts of "full term" and "unexpired term" to synchronise election cycles. Any amendment affecting the duration of state legislatures would require ratification by at least half the states under the proviso to Article 368(2), as it pertains to the federal structure. The Bill does not amend Articles 85(2)(b) or 174(2)(b) dealing with the President's and Governor's power to dissolve Houses.

  • Article 83(2): Duration of Lok Sabha (five years unless sooner dissolved)
  • Article 172(1): Duration of state legislative assemblies (five years)
  • Article 327: Power of Parliament to make provisions regarding elections
  • Proposed Article 82A: New provision with six clauses for simultaneous elections
  • Article 368(2) proviso: Amendments affecting state legislatures need ratification by half the states
  • Article 85(2)(b): President's power to dissolve Lok Sabha
  • Article 174(2)(b): Governor's power to dissolve state assembly

Connection to this news: The proposal to bar no-confidence motions in the final year would require an additional constitutional amendment beyond what the 129th Amendment Bill currently provides, as it directly affects the parliamentary accountability mechanism rooted in Article 75(3).

Panchayati Raj and the Precedent of No-Confidence Restrictions

The 73rd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1992 inserted Part IX (Articles 243-243O) to constitutionalise Panchayati Raj Institutions. Article 243E provides for a five-year term for panchayats. Several state Panchayati Raj Acts contain provisions barring no-confidence motions against sarpanches or panchayat presidents during the first and/or last year of their term. For example, the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 and the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 contain such restrictions. These provisions were intended to provide stability to local governance and prevent frequent disruptions through politically motivated no-confidence motions.

  • 73rd Amendment Act (1992): Constitutionalised Panchayati Raj (Part IX, Articles 243-243O)
  • Article 243E: Five-year term for panchayats
  • Several state Panchayati Raj Acts bar no-confidence motions in the first and/or last year
  • Purpose: Governance stability at the local level

Connection to this news: The JPC chairperson explicitly cited Panchayati Raj legislation as a precedent, arguing that a similar restriction on no-confidence motions in the final year of parliamentary and assembly terms could ensure stability and protect the simultaneous election cycle from disruption.

Key Facts & Data

  • Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill, 2024: Introduced 17 December 2024 in Lok Sabha
  • Referred to JPC: 19 December 2024
  • JPC chair: P.P. Chaudhary; 39 members (27 LS + 12 RS)
  • Articles proposed for amendment: 83, 172, 327; new Article 82A
  • Kovind Committee: Recommended companion confidence motion with any no-confidence motion
  • No-confidence motions in Lok Sabha since 1952: 27 moved, 1 successful
  • 73rd Amendment (1992): Panchayati Raj constitutionalised
  • Ratification requirement: At least half the state legislatures for amendments affecting state legislature duration
  • Bill companion: Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2024 for simultaneous UT elections