Constitution of India
Article 178: The Speaker and Deputy Speaker of the Legislative Assembly
Part VI — The States (Chapter III — The State Legislature, sub-heading: Officers of the State Legislature)
Article 178 (single, undivided article — no sub-clauses)
WHAT IT SAYS: Every State Legislative Assembly shall, as soon as may be, elect two of its own members as Speaker and Deputy Speaker; whenever either office falls vacant, the Assembly shall elect another member to fill it. WHAT IT MEANS: 1. Both Speaker and Deputy Speaker must be sitting MLAs — no outside appointment allowed. 2. Election must happen at the earliest opportunity after the Assembly is constituted. 3. Any vacancy (by resignation, removal, death, or cessation of membership) must be filled promptly by a fresh election from among members. 4. The article mirrors Article 93 (Speaker & Deputy Speaker of Lok Sabha) at the Union level. KEY DOCTRINE: Doctrine of Legislative Autonomy — the Assembly itself chooses its presiding officers without executive interference, safeguarding the independence of the legislature from the Governor or Council of Ministers.
Constitutional Inspiration
SOURCE(S): 1. British Parliament (House of Commons) — Office of the Speaker, evolved since 14th century (1376 onward). Original provision: The House of Commons elects its Speaker from among its members at the start of each parliamentary term to preside over debates and maintain order. What India kept: Election of Speaker from among members of the House; Speaker acts as impartial presiding officer with casting vote. 2. Government of India Act, 1919 (Montague-Chelmsford Reforms) — Section 72-C. Original provision: Introduced the offices of 'President' and 'Deputy President' of the Central Legislative Assembly in India in 1921. What India kept: The dual-office structure (Speaker + Deputy Speaker) and election by the House. 3. Government of India Act, 1935 — Sections 34 & 64. Original provision: Provided for Speaker and Deputy Speaker in Provincial Legislative Assemblies. What India kept: Identical structure extended to all State Assemblies under the new Constitution. INDIA'S SPECIFIC ADAPTATIONS: 1. No royal/executive approval required — Unlike the UK where the Speaker-elect formally seeks royal approbation, the Indian Speaker takes office immediately upon election by the House. 2. Speaker does not resign from party membership — Unlike the UK convention where the Speaker severs party ties, Indian Speakers retain party affiliation (though expected to act impartially). 3. Uniform application to all States — Unlike pre-1950 arrangements that applied only to certain provinces, Article 178 mandates the office in every State Legislative Assembly across India.
Constituent Assembly Debate
DEBATED ON: 2 June 1949 (CAD Volume VIII) DRAFT ARTICLE NUMBER: Draft Article 157 KEY SPEAKERS: 1. President (Dr. Rajendra Prasad) — Noted that Article 157 is similar to Article 76 (now Art. 93) relating to the Union, and that only verbal amendments existed. 2. Prof. K.T. Shah (Bihar) — Had given notice for a new Article 157-A but chose not to move it, stating the matter had been discussed and rejected earlier. MAJOR DISAGREEMENTS: 1. None — The article was adopted without any substantive debate or disagreement. 2. Prof. Shah's proposed Article 157-A (nature unspecified in records) was voluntarily withdrawn. FINAL OUTCOME: Draft Article 157 was adopted unanimously without amendments or debate, reflecting complete consensus on the necessity of the Speaker and Deputy Speaker offices in State Assemblies. PRESIDENT'S KEY REMARK: "There is no amendment to this article... which is of a very substantial nature. All are verbal amendments. This article is similar to article 76 relating to the Union."
Landmark Judgments
LANDMARK JUDGMENTS: 1. Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu (1992) — SC held that the Speaker acts in a quasi-judicial capacity under the Tenth Schedule and such decisions are subject to judicial review to ensure constitutional compliance. 2. K.K. Verma v. Union of India (1954) — SC underscored the constitutional significance of the Speaker's impartiality and autonomy in presiding over the Assembly. 3. Nabam Rebia v. Deputy Speaker (2016) — SC held that a Speaker facing a pending notice of removal cannot decide disqualification petitions under the Tenth Schedule; also ruled that the Governor cannot summon/prorogue the Assembly without aid and advice of the Council of Ministers. 4. Rameshwar Prasad v. Union of India (2006) — SC reiterated that Speaker's disqualification decisions under the Tenth Schedule are subject to judicial scrutiny under Articles 136 and 226. NOTABLE DEVELOPMENTS: 1. The Nabam Rebia ruling was flagged for reconsideration by a 3-judge SC bench (2022) in the Maharashtra political crisis, observing it "requires gap filling to uphold constitutional morality" — referred to a 5-judge Constitution Bench. SCHOLARS & JURISTS: 1. M.N. Kaul & S.L. Shakdher (Practice and Procedure of Parliament) — The Speaker is the principal spokesman and guardian of the privileges of the House, embodying its dignity and independence. 2. D.D. Basu (Commentary on the Constitution of India) — Article 178 mirrors Article 93 and ensures continuity of legislative authority by mandating prompt filling of vacancies in presiding offices.