The Lok Sabha shares many powers with the Rajya Sabha — but several constitutional functions belong exclusively to the Lower House. The most politically consequential is the no-confidence motion — the device that enables the Lok Sabha to remove the government. The 2014 Prelims tested this directly: there is no mention of "no-confidence motion" in the Constitution as a named procedure, and such a motion can be moved only in the Lok Sabha. Beyond the no-confidence motion, the Lok Sabha has exclusive powers over Demands for Grants, cut motions, the Speaker's decision on Money Bills, and the formal removal of certain functionaries. Hold these carefully.
No-confidence motion — the most consequential power
The Indian parliamentary system is based on the principle that the Council of Ministers is collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha (Article 75(3)). The constitutional consequence of this responsibility is that the government must enjoy the confidence of the Lok Sabha to remain in office. If the Lok Sabha withdraws its confidence, the government must resign or seek dissolution.
The constitutional text does not actually use the phrase "no-confidence motion." Article 75(3) talks of "collective responsibility" to the Lok Sabha. The mechanism for testing or expressing loss of confidence is developed through parliamentary practice and the Lok Sabha's Rules of Procedure (Rule 198 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha).
The 2014 Prelims tested precisely this — that the Constitution does not mention a "no-confidence motion" by that name, and that such a motion can be moved only in the Lok Sabha (since only the Lok Sabha can remove the government).
- There is no mention of a No-Confidence Motion in the Constitution of India.
- A motion of No-Confidence can be introduced in the Lok Sabha only.
How a no-confidence motion works: an opposition member gives written notice in the Lok Sabha. The Speaker reads the notice and asks how many members are in favour of the motion being taken up. If at least 50 members rise in support, the Speaker fixes a date for discussion. The motion is debated and voted on. If passed by a simple majority, the government is constitutionally bound to resign. The President may then ask the Prime Minister to continue till an alternative is formed, or may dissolve the Lok Sabha and order fresh elections.
One additional point on the practical operation of no-confidence motions worth holding for the exam. Since 1952, the Indian Parliament has seen 27 no-confidence motions moved in the Lok Sabha. Three have succeeded in bringing down governments — the Morarji Desai government in 1979, the V.P. Singh government in 1990, and the H.D. Deve Gowda government in 1997. Several others have led to government resignations or political crises even when the motion did not formally pass. The mechanism is constitutionally significant beyond its formal use; the threat of a no-confidence motion shapes government behaviour even when the motion is not actually moved.
Demands for Grants and cut motions
Article 113(2) of the Constitution provides: "No demand for a grant shall be made except on the recommendation of the President." Article 113(1) provides that estimates of expenditure (other than that charged on the Consolidated Fund) "shall be submitted in the form of demands for grants to the House of the People, and the House of the People shall have power to assent, or to refuse to assent, to any demand, or to assent to any demand subject to a reduction of the amount specified therein."
Two key points emerge. First, Demands for Grants are submitted to the Lok Sabha only — Article 113(1) explicitly says "the House of the People." The Rajya Sabha does not vote on Demands for Grants. Second, the Lok Sabha can assent, refuse, or reduce — but cannot increase any demand. The right of initiative on financial demands rests with the executive; the Lok Sabha's role is to scrutinise and approve.
Cut motions are devices used in the Lok Sabha to express dissatisfaction with a particular Demand for Grants. There are three types:
(i) Disapproval of Policy Cut — proposing that the demand be reduced to Re. 1, signalling complete disapproval of the policy underlying the demand.
(ii) Economy Cut — proposing a reduction by a specified amount, signalling that economy can be effected.
(iii) Token Cut — proposing a reduction of Rs. 100, used as a device to ventilate a specific grievance.
Cut motions are exclusive to the Lok Sabha. They cannot be moved in the Rajya Sabha. The Rajya Sabha can discuss the Budget but cannot move cut motions on Demands for Grants. The 2020 Prelims tested this — making cut motions was option (d), and not an equal power between the two Houses.
If a cut motion is accepted by the Lok Sabha, it amounts to a vote of no confidence in the government on that specific item. In practice, cut motions are rarely pressed to a vote — they are used as deliberative devices to raise discussion. The government uses its majority to defeat them when they are voted on.
Speaker's certificate on Money Bills
Under Article 110(3), the decision of the Speaker of the Lok Sabha on whether a Bill is a Money Bill is final. This certification power is exclusive to the Speaker of the Lok Sabha. The Chairman of the Rajya Sabha has no role in deciding whether a Bill is a Money Bill.
The implication of this exclusive power is significant. A Bill certified as a Money Bill by the Speaker bypasses the Rajya Sabha's amendment power. The Speaker's certification is conclusive — endorsed on the Bill when transmitting to the Rajya Sabha and when presenting to the President for assent.
The Supreme Court has generally held the Speaker's certification to be non-justiciable. In Rojer Mathew v. South Indian Bank Ltd. (2019), the Court hinted that egregiously incorrect certification might be reviewable, but the practical position remains that the Speaker's certification is final.
The exclusive Money Bill certification power gives the Speaker — and through the Speaker, the ruling party in the Lok Sabha — significant control over how a Bill is processed. The certification has been contentious in recent years; the Aadhaar Act 2016 and several other Bills were certified as Money Bills, allowing them to bypass the Rajya Sabha's amendment powers. For more, see money bill vs finance bill.
Origination of financial Bills
Several categories of Bills must originate in the Lok Sabha and cannot be introduced in the Rajya Sabha.
Money Bills (Article 109(1)). A Money Bill cannot be introduced in the Rajya Sabha. Article 109 explicitly provides that a Money Bill shall not be introduced in the Council of States. Origination is exclusive to the Lok Sabha.
Finance Bills (Article 117(1)). A Finance Bill — being a Bill containing Money Bill matter plus other matter — must also originate in the Lok Sabha. Article 117(1) provides that a Bill or amendment making provision for any of the matters specified in sub-clauses (a) to (f) of Article 110(1) shall not be introduced or moved except on the recommendation of the President, and shall not be introduced in the Council of States.
Ordinary Bills involving expenditure from the Consolidated Fund (Article 117(3)). Such Bills must be passed by either House only after the President's recommendation. While the Constitution does not explicitly say these must originate in the Lok Sabha, in practice they typically do — and the financial-primacy principle suggests they should.
The exclusive origination of financial Bills in the Lok Sabha reflects the constitutional principle that the people's House controls the public purse. The Rajya Sabha can scrutinise and (for Finance Bills) amend, but cannot initiate financial legislation.
Collective responsibility — the constitutional foundation
The constitutional foundation for the Lok Sabha's exclusive power over the government is Article 75(3): "The Council of Ministers shall be collectively responsible to the House of the People."
This is the source of all the parliamentary-removal powers concentrated in the Lok Sabha. The phrase "House of the People" is critical — it specifically excludes the Rajya Sabha. The Council of Ministers is accountable to the Lok Sabha, not to the Rajya Sabha.
Three structural consequences follow:
One — only the Lok Sabha can remove the government. A no-confidence motion in the Rajya Sabha would have no constitutional consequence. Even if the Rajya Sabha unanimously expressed lack of confidence in the government, the government would not be required to resign. Confidence is a Lok Sabha matter only.
Two — the Prime Minister must be a Lok Sabha member or a Rajya Sabha member. The Constitution does not require the Prime Minister to be from the Lok Sabha specifically. Article 75 only requires that a Minister cease to hold office if they are not a member of either House for six consecutive months. So a Rajya Sabha member can be Prime Minister — Manmohan Singh, Indira Gandhi (briefly), and Deve Gowda have served as PM while being Rajya Sabha members. But the government's confidence must always be tested in the Lok Sabha.
Three — formal censure motions and adjournment motions on the executive's conduct have effect only in the Lok Sabha. The Rajya Sabha can pass its own motions, but they do not produce constitutional removal consequences.
Other exclusive Lok Sabha powers
Beyond the major financial and removal powers, the Lok Sabha has several other exclusive functions.
Election of the Speaker and Deputy Speaker (Articles 93 and 94). The Speaker presides over the Lok Sabha, decides points of order, and exercises wide procedural powers. The election is by Lok Sabha members from among themselves. The Rajya Sabha has no role.
Removal of the Speaker. The Speaker can be removed by a resolution of the Lok Sabha passed by majority of all then-members. The Rajya Sabha is not involved.
Disqualification of Lok Sabha members. Disqualification on grounds of defection (under the Tenth Schedule) or other grounds is decided by the Speaker (with judicial review available). The Chairman of the Rajya Sabha decides for Rajya Sabha members. There is no inter-House role.
Adjournment motion. An adjournment motion is moved to draw urgent attention to a matter of public importance. It can be moved in the Lok Sabha. The Rajya Sabha has its own equivalent (calling-attention notice, half-an-hour discussion, etc.) but the formal "adjournment motion" structure is largely a Lok Sabha device.
Discussion on Demands for Grants and supplementary Demands for Grants. The discussion process — including the constitution of departmentally related Standing Committees that examine Demands for Grants — operates primarily in the Lok Sabha, although the Rajya Sabha members participate in the joint Standing Committees.
What students must hold
The Lok Sabha's exclusive financial powers also extend to the discussion and voting on Supplementary, Additional, and Excess grants under Article 115. These supplementary financial demands — for spending in excess of, additional to, or unauthorised relative to the original Budget — are voted only in the Lok Sabha, following the same procedure as the principal Demands for Grants.
Six points carry the weight. One, Article 75(3) — Council of Ministers is collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha (not to Parliament generally, not to the Rajya Sabha). This is the constitutional foundation of all Lok Sabha exclusive powers over the government.
Two, no-confidence motion — exclusive to the Lok Sabha. The Constitution does not name it (the term comes from Rules of Procedure). The 2014 Prelims tested both points.
Three, Demands for Grants under Article 113 — submitted only to the Lok Sabha; the Rajya Sabha cannot vote on them. Cut motions (Disapproval, Economy, Token) are exclusive to the Lok Sabha.
Four, Speaker's certificate on whether a Bill is a Money Bill (Article 110(3)) — exclusive to the Speaker of the Lok Sabha.
Five, origination of Money Bills (Article 109), Finance Bills (Article 117(1)), and ordinary Bills involving expenditure (Article 117(3)) — must begin in the Lok Sabha.
Six, Election and removal of Speaker and Deputy Speaker — Lok Sabha only. For more, see Rajya Sabha powers for the contrast and money bill vs finance bill.