Skip to main content

Article 203

Procedure in State Legislature with Respect to Estimates

Official heading: “Procedure in Legislature with respect to estimates.”

Check this article against the official editionAwaiting human legal review
Source edition
The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2026)
Source locator
Part VI, Article 203, printed pages 92–93
Last human source-link check
Not yet checked
Last human legal review
Not yet reviewed

AI-assisted source comparisons are noted with the citations below; the check date remains pending until a human confirms the link. The report link opens your email app; you choose whether to send it.

1. In One Sentence

Article 203 governs voting on budget estimates in the State Legislature, providing that charged expenditure is not submitted to vote, while other expenditure is submitted as Demands for Grants to the Assembly.

2. What It Means in Everyday Language

Article 203 outlines the parliamentary voting procedure for the State Budget, paralleling Article 113 for Parliament.

Non-Votable Estimates: Under Clause (1), estimates relating to expenditure charged upon the Consolidated Fund of the State are not submitted to the vote of the Legislative Assembly, though either House may discuss them.

Demands for Grants: Under Clause (2), so much of the estimates as relates to other expenditure is submitted in the form of Demands for Grants to the Legislative Assembly. The Assembly has the power to assent, refuse to assent, or reduce the amount specified in any demand (through Policy, Economy, or Token Cut Motions).

Governor Recommendation Required: Clause (3) mandates that no demand for a grant shall be made except on the recommendation of the Governor, preserving executive control over public spending.

3. Practical Illustrative Example

Everyday Scenario:

Opposition MLAs move an "Economy Cut Motion" to reduce a department's budgetary grant by ₹10 crore during budget discussions.

Core takeaway: Under Article 203(2), the Assembly has full power to debate and vote on reductions to voted demands for grants.
Illustrative Notice: The Legislative Council has no power to vote on demands for grants; voting power belongs exclusively to the Assembly.

4. Important Limits, Qualifications & Exceptions

Article 203 secures legislative control of the purse strings in State government.

  • Charged expenditure is non-votable but open to legislative discussion.
  • Voting on demands for grants is the exclusive prerogative of the Legislative Assembly.
  • Cut motions allow MLAs to scrutinize and check departmental spending.
  • No expenditure demand can originate without the Governor's recommendation.

5. Operative Constitutional Text

(1) So much of the estimates as relates to expenditure charged upon the Consolidated Fund of a State shall not be submitted to the vote of the Legislative Assembly, but nothing in this clause shall be construed as preventing the discussion in the Legislature of any of those estimates. (2) So much of the said estimates as relates to other expenditure shall be submitted in the form of demands for grants to the Legislative Assembly, and the Legislative Assembly 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. (3) No demand for a grant shall be made except on the recommendation of the Governor.
Transcription for reference; compare with the linked official editionNot yet verified by a human legal reviewer

6. Sources & Historical Assembly Deliberations

Assembly quotations are withheld until wording, dates, and attribution have been checked against the primary record.

Sources & Citation Metadata
  • •
    Constitutional TextThe Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2026)Cited PDF page
    Government of India (Legislative Department, Ministry of Law and Justice) • Part VI, Article 203, printed pages 92–93 • Human source-link check pending

    Primary PDF accessed and transcribed with AI assistance on 14 October 2026. Formatting and amendment annotation markers are omitted; operative wording is retained. This is not human legal review. Later amendments and commencement notifications have not been comprehensively checked.

Human legal review is pending; compare the text with the cited editionNon-partisan educational resource

Related Constitutional Articles to Explore: