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
-
"Development and welfare schemes for the vulnerable, by its nature, are discriminatory in approach." Do you agree? Give reasons for your answer.
Next question in the 2023 paper (Q17). 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 paper
Q1 · UPSC Mains 2023 · GS II · 10 marks
"Constitutionally guaranteed judicial independence is a prerequisite of democracy". Comment.
Indian Constitution
Democracy needs courts that can enforce the Constitution against the elected majority. Articles 50, 121, 124, 211 and 217, charged salaries, and a hard removal process are the main guarantees. The 99th Amendment and the NJAC were struck down in 2015 as a threat to independence of appointments. Independence is a prerequisite; opacity of the collegium is a separate reform problem, not a reason to remove the guarantee.
Q2 · UPSC Mains 2023 · GS II · 10 marks
Who are entitled to receive free legal aid? Assess the role of the National Legal Services Authority(NALSA) in rendering free legal aid in India.
Governance and Policy
Article 39A and the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, create the right to free legal aid. Section 12 names SC/ST persons, women, children, persons in custody, workmen, persons with disability, disaster victims, and the income-poor. NALSA heads the statutory system of State authorities, court committees, clinics and Lok Adalats. The system is wide in design and still thin in quality of trial representation. Assessment therefore credits outreach and asks for better fees, first-hearing counsel, and published coverage data.
Q3 · UPSC Mains 2023 · GS II · 10 marks
"The states in India seem reluctant to empower urban local bodies both functionally as well as financially." Comment.
Governance and Policy
The 74th Amendment and the Twelfth Schedule create municipalities but leave devolution to State law. Parastatals and State-appointed commissioners keep functions out of the elected council. Property tax is constrained; GST ended octroi and sent compensation to States, not cities. Late State Finance Commissions and approval for borrowing keep cities fiscally dependent. The statement is correct: functional and financial empowerment is still a State choice.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.