Revision summary
Parliamentary committees are standing, financial, administrative and ad hoc. DRSCs since 1993 examine grants, bills and ministry policy with both Houses. PAC, Estimates Committee and COPU are the three financial committees. PAC works on CAG reports and is conventionally chaired by the Opposition. They institutionalise continuous financial scrutiny, not a veto on Supply. Weak follow-up of recommendations is the main limit on that institutionalisation.
Model answer
Introduction
Parliament cannot examine every clause and every rupee on the floor of the two Houses. Committees are how it institutionalises scrutiny: standing, financial, and ad hoc bodies that work across the year in a less partisan room.
Body
Structure of the committee system
- Committees are of three broad kinds: standing committees that are reconstituted regularly, ad hoc committees (select, joint, and inquiry) for a bill or a scandal, and administrative committees of each House (Rules, Privileges, Business Advisory).
- Departmentally Related Standing Committees, created in 1993 and later expanded, cover Union ministries; they examine Demands for Grants, bills, and long-term policy, and they have members from both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha.
- Each House also has subject committees of its own, such as the Committee on Petitions and the Committee on Subordinate Legislation, which watch rules made under statutes.
- Joint Parliamentary Committees are appointed by motion of both Houses when a bill or a controversy needs a single high-visibility probe.
- The Presiding Officers constitute most committees; party strength in the House is reflected in membership, which is why the system is parliamentary, not a separate fourth branch.
The three financial committees
- The Public Accounts Committee examines appropriation and finance accounts and the reports of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India; by convention its Chair is from the Opposition, and Rajya Sabha members sit with a Lok Sabha majority.
- The Estimates Committee, drawn from the Lok Sabha, examines whether money is well laid out within the policy that Parliament has voted, and it suggests economies and alternative forms of organisation.
- The Committee on Public Undertakings examines the reports and accounts of public sector undertakings and CAG reports on those undertakings; it is not a substitute for a company board.
- Together they follow the rupee after the Budget is passed, which the floor cannot do line by line.
Institutionalisation of Parliament
- Financial committees made scrutiny a routine of the calendar, not a one-day Budget speech: CAG reports go to PAC; undertakings go to COPU; estimates go to a Lok Sabha committee.
- Bipartisan membership and in-camera evidence create an institutional memory of ministries that dissolves less quickly than a Lok Sabha majority.
- They cannot withhold Supply; the House still votes the Demands. Institutionalisation is therefore examination and publicity, not a second budget veto.
- Limits are real: delayed CAG reports, poor ministerial implementation of PAC recommendations, party whips on sensitive findings, and the absence of a dedicated parliamentary budget office.
- DRSCs after 1993 extended the same method from money to ministries; financial committees remain the oldest core of that method, inherited from colonial Public Accounts practice and rewritten for a republican CAG under Articles 148 to 151.
How far
- They have institutionalised Parliament as a continuous audit forum, especially PAC with the CAG.
- They have not institutionalised Parliament as a co-equal fiscal policymaker; that still sits with the executive’s Budget.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD H[Houses of Parliament] --> D[DRSCs on ministries] H --> F[PAC Estimates COPU] H --> A[Ad hoc JPC Select] CAG[CAG Arts 148-151] --> PAC F --> I[Year-round institutional scrutiny]
Conclusion
The committee system is standing, financial, and ad hoc, with DRSCs wrapping ministries and three financial committees wrapping the rupee. PAC, Estimates and COPU have institutionalised year-round financial scrutiny; they have not taken the Budget away from the executive, and implementation of their reports is still the unfinished test.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Discuss the procedures to decide the disputes arising out of the election of a Member of the Parliament or State Legislature under The Representation of the People Act, 1951. What are the grounds on which the election of any returned candidate may be declared void? What remedy is available to the aggrieved party against the decision ? Refer to the case laws.
Next question on this syllabus topic (2022 · Q11). View answer →
-
Can PAC cut a ministry’s budget?
No. It reports after expenditure. The House votes Supply. PAC’s power is exposure and recommendation, aided by the CAG.
-
Is a DRSC the same as a financial committee?
No. DRSCs cover a ministry’s policy and grants. PAC, Estimates and COPU are the specialised financial trio.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2025 · Q12 · GS II · 15 marks
Indian Constitution has conferred the amending power on the ordinary legislative institutions with a few procedural hurdles. In view of this statement, examine the procedural and substantive limitations on the amending power of the Parliament to change the Constitution. -
2024 · Q3 · GS II · 10 marks
"The growth of cabinet system has practkally resulted in the marginalisation of the parliamentary supremacy." Elucidate. -
2023 · Q4 · GS II · 10 marks
Compare and contrast the British and Indian approaches to Parliamentary sovereignty. -
2022 · Q11 · GS II · 15 marks
Discuss the procedures to decide the disputes arising out of the election of a Member of the Parliament or State Legislature under The Representation of the People Act, 1951. What are the grounds on which the election of any returned candidate may be declared void? What remedy is available to the aggrieved party against the decision ? Refer to the case laws. -
2021 · Q4 · GS II · 10 marks
To what extent, in your view, the Parliament is able to ensure accountability of the executive in India? -
2021 · Q15 · GS II · 15 marks
Do Department -related Parliamentary Standing Committees keep the administration on its toes and inspire reverence for parliamentary control? Evaluate the working of such committees with suitable examples. -
2020 · Q5 · GS II · 10 marks
"Once a speaker, Always a speaker'! Do you think the practice should be adopted to impart objectivity to the office of the Speaker of Lok Sabha? What could be its implications for the robust functioning of parliamentary business in India. -
2019 · Q12 · GS II · 15 marks
"Parliament's power to amend the Constitution is a limited power and it cannot be enlarged into absolute power." In the light of this statement explain whether Parliament under Article 368 of the Constitution can destroy the Basic Structure of the Constitution by expanding its amending power?(15).
More from this topic
Q12 · UPSC Mains 2025 · GS II · 15 marks
Indian Constitution has conferred the amending power on the ordinary legislative institutions with a few procedural hurdles. In view of this statement, examine the procedural and substantive limitations on the amending power of the Parliament to change the Constitution.
Parliament and State Legislatures
Article 368 uses Parliament’s Houses, not a standing constituent assembly, with special majority and no joint sitting. Federal provisions need ratification by at least half the States. Ordinary Acts cannot amend the Constitution. Kesavananda, Minerva Mills, Indira Gandhi and I.R. Coelho set substantive basic-structure limits, including judicial review and rights-DPSPs balance. NJAC 2015 shows the doctrine applying to institutional design, not only to rights texts.
Q3 · UPSC Mains 2024 · GS II · 10 marks
"The growth of cabinet system has practkally resulted in the marginalisation of the parliamentary supremacy." Elucidate.
Parliament and State Legislatures
Articles 74–75 keep the Cabinet responsible to the Lok Sabha; that is the legal core of parliamentary government. Whips and the Tenth Schedule, ordinances and money-bill classification have moved real initiation to the Cabinet. This is practical marginalisation of the floor, not a legal repeal of Parliament. PAC, standing committees, Rajya Sabha and the floor test still bite. Keisham Meghachandra pressed Speakers to decide disqualification on a clock. A narrower anti-defection law would restore some of the supremacy the quote says is lost. The examiner’s misspelling does not change the demand: show practice squeezing text, not text dying.
Q4 · UPSC Mains 2023 · GS II · 10 marks
Compare and contrast the British and Indian approaches to Parliamentary sovereignty.
Parliament and State Legislatures
Dicey’s British doctrine makes Parliament legally unlimited and bars courts from voiding an Act. India’s Parliament is created by the Constitution and bound by Articles 13 and 245. Kesavananda Bharati (1973) placed basic structure beyond Article 368. Westminster political forms are shared; legal sovereignty is not. Indian parliamentary sovereignty is therefore limited, unlike the classical British model.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.