Constitution of India
Article 78: Duties of Prime Minister as respects the furnishing of information to the President, etc.
Part V — The Union (Chapter I — The Executive)
Clause (a)
WHAT IT SAYS: The PM must communicate to the President ALL decisions of the Council of Ministers relating to Union administration and proposals for legislation. WHAT IT MEANS: Every Cabinet decision — policy or legislative — must be formally conveyed to the President; no decision can be withheld. KEY DOCTRINE: Doctrine of Informed President — the President cannot exercise constitutional judgment (e.g., under Art. 74 proviso, Art. 356) unless fully informed.
Clause (b)
WHAT IT SAYS: The PM must furnish such information relating to Union administration and legislative proposals as the President may call for. WHAT IT MEANS: The President has a RIGHT TO DEMAND information — the PM cannot refuse; this is a one-way constitutional obligation on the PM. KEY DOCTRINE: Presidential Right to be Informed — modelled on the British convention of the Sovereign's right to be consulted, to encourage, and to warn.
Clause (c)
WHAT IT SAYS: If the President so requires, the PM must submit for Council of Ministers' consideration any matter decided by an individual Minister but NOT yet considered by the full Council. WHAT IT MEANS: The President can force collective deliberation on decisions taken unilaterally by a single Minister — a check against ministerial autocracy. KEY DOCTRINE: Doctrine of Collective Responsibility (Art. 75(3)) — ensures Cabinet solidarity by preventing individual ministers from bypassing the Council.
Constitutional Inspiration
SOURCE(S): 1. United Kingdom — Unwritten Constitutional Convention (Bagehot's three rights of the Monarch) Original provision: The Sovereign has the right 'to be consulted, to encourage, and to warn' (Walter Bagehot, The English Constitution, 1867). What India kept: Codified the convention as a legally binding duty — making the PM constitutionally obligated to inform the President. 2. Government of India Act, 1935 — Section 9 (Administration of Federal Affairs) Original provision: The Governor-General acted through ministers on 'transferred subjects' and was kept informed of federal administration. What India kept: The structure of PM-President communication, but removed the Governor-General's discretionary/reserved powers. INDIA'S SPECIFIC ADAPTATIONS: 1. Codification of convention — Unlike the UK where this is purely customary, India wrote it into Article 78 to prevent evasion. 2. Clause (c) has no UK parallel — India uniquely empowered the President to force reconsideration of individual ministerial decisions by the full Council. 3. No enforceability mechanism — Unlike some provisions, Article 78 has no penal sanction, relying instead on constitutional morality.
Constituent Assembly Debate
DEBATED ON: 7 January 1949 (CAD Volume VII) Draft Article number: 65 KEY SPEAKERS: 1. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar — Moved Draft Article 65; supported it as a necessary codification of the PM's duty to keep the President informed. 2. One member (name not recorded in secondary sources) — Moved an amendment to insert 'as soon as they are made' in clause (a) to prevent delay in communicating decisions to the President. MAJOR DISAGREEMENTS: 1. Timeliness of communication — The amendment to add 'as soon as they are made' was discussed; the mover himself was not fully convinced of its necessity, arguing this was routine business better left to Cabinet Rules of Business. FINAL OUTCOME: Draft Article 65 was adopted WITHOUT any amendments — the Assembly accepted it as originally drafted by the Drafting Committee. NOTE: The debate was brief and largely uncontroversial. Article 167 (analogous duty for Chief Ministers toward Governors) was later adopted on 2 June 1949, with the Drafting Committee explicitly referencing the principles already accepted in Draft Article 65.
Landmark Judgments
LANDMARK JUDGMENTS: 1. U.N.R. Rao v. Smt. Indira Gandhi (1971) — SC held that Article 78 (along with Art. 74 and 77) presupposes a functioning PM and Council of Ministers even after dissolution of Lok Sabha; PM continues as caretaker. 2. Shamsher Singh v. State of Punjab (1974) — SC affirmed the President is a constitutional head who acts on ministerial advice; Article 78 ensures the PM is the sole channel of communication. 3. S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994) — SC discussed Arts. 74, 77, and 78 in context of President's Rule; affirmed that the PM's duty to inform President is integral to the constitutional scheme of executive accountability. 4. Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975) — SC reaffirmed that the PM's office carries constitutional obligations of accountability, including the duty under Article 78. NOTABLE DISSENTS (if any): 1. None specifically on Article 78 — the article has not been the subject of significant judicial dissent. SCHOLARS & JURISTS: 1. D.D. Basu — Article 78 converts unwritten British conventions into enforceable constitutional duties, ensuring the President is never left uninformed. 2. M.P. Jain — Clause (c) is a unique Indian innovation giving the President a supervisory role over individual ministerial decisions without overriding collective responsibility.