Article 349

Presidential Sanction Required for Early Language Legislation

Official heading: “Special procedure for enactment of certain laws relating to language”

Check this article against the official editionAwaiting human legal review

Source edition: The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2026)
Source locator: Part XVII, Article 349, printed page 207
Last human source-link check: Not yet checked
Last human legal review: Not yet reviewed

Open official PDF at this article Report a text or source error

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

Required prior Presidential recommendation before moving any Parliamentary Bill altering court or legislative languages during the Constitution’s first fifteen years.

2. What It Means in Everyday Language

Article 349 instituted a procedural cooling-off mechanism during the first fifteen years of the Republic (1950–1965).

No Bill or amendment seeking to change the language provisions of Article 348(1) (such as altering the use of English in superior courts) could be introduced or moved in Parliament without the previous sanction of the President.

The President was barred from giving sanction without first taking into consideration the recommendations of the Official Language Commission and the Joint Parliamentary Committee constituted under Article 344.

3. Practical Illustrative Example

Everyday Scenario:

In 1960, a Member of Parliament sought to introduce a private member’s bill to eliminate English from High Court proceedings.

Core takeaway: Article 349 barred the introduction of such bills without prior Presidential recommendation informed by the Official Language Commission.

Illustrative Notice: This transitional gatekeeping provision primarily applied during the initial 15-year constitutional window that concluded in 1965.

4. Important Limits, Qualifications & Exceptions

Article 349 served as a procedural safeguard against premature linguistic changes in superior courts.

Transitional bar: Applied strictly during the fifteen-year period from constitutional commencement.
Mandatory presidential screening: Required presidential recommendation prior to parliamentary introduction.
Advisory linkage: Tied presidential consent directly to the findings of the Article 344 Official Language Commission.

5. Operative Constitutional Text

During the period of fifteen years from the commencement of this Constitution, no Bill or amendment making provision for the language to be used for any of the purposes mentioned in clause (1) of article 348 shall be introduced or moved in either House of Parliament without the previous sanction of the President, and the President shall not give his sanction to the introduction of any such Bill or the moving of any such amendment except after he has taken into consideration the recommendations of the Commission constituted under clause (1) of article 344 and the report of the Committee constituted under clause (4) of that article.

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 XVII, Article 349, printed page 207 • 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