Before 2003, nothing in the Constitution stopped a Council of Ministers from growing as large as a government wanted. Article 75(1A) changed that, with a hard numerical cap.
MCQ QuestionsPolity0249
15%
of Lok Sabha strength — the hard cap Article 75(1A) sets on the Union Council of Ministers.
Since
2003
91st Amendment Act inserts Article 75(1A), in force from 7 Jul 2004
Recommended
10%
NCRWC’s proposed ceiling — Parliament set it higher, at 15%
State Floor
12 Min.
Article 164(1A) sets a minimum for States; Article 75(1A) sets none
In Practice
~81 Seats
15% of the Lok Sabha’s 543 elected members
Designed together: the same 91st Amendment also barred defectors from becoming Ministers — capping ministerial posts and closing the defection-for-office loophole at once.
✅ Must Know
Where Article 75(1A) Came From
- 91st Amendment Article 75(1A) was inserted into the Constitution by the 91st Amendment Act, 2003.
What It Caps
- Total Ministers It caps the total number of Ministers, including the Prime Minister, in the Union Council of Ministers.
The Cap Itself
- 15% The cap is fifteen percent of the total strength of the Lok Sabha.
Where It Sits
- Part V Article 75 itself sits in Part V, Chapter I of the Constitution, covering the Union executive.
The State-Level Parallel
- Article 164(1A) The same 91st Amendment also inserted a parallel provision, Article 164(1A), for State Councils of Ministers.
The State Cap Has a Floor Too
- Minimum 12 Article 164(1A) caps a State Council at fifteen percent of that state’s Legislative Assembly strength too. But it also sets a floor: not less than twelve Ministers, including the Chief Minister.
Ministerial Ranks Are Convention, Not Text
- UPSC 2022 The Constitution does NOT itself classify ministers into ranks like Cabinet Minister, Minister of State with Independent Charge, Minister of State, and Deputy Minister — that hierarchy is a matter of practice and convention, not constitutional text. The 15% cap under Article 75(1A), by contrast, is a genuine constitutional requirement. Asked as: “Consider statements about the Constitution’s classification of ministers and the 15% cap.” (UPSC CSP 2022, GS Paper I).
📘 Good to Know
No Limit Before 2003
- Pre-Amendment Before this amendment, the Constitution set no limit on Council of Ministers size, at either the Centre or the States.
Why Councils Grew Large
- Coalition Politics Some States had built abnormally large Councils. This was often a way to accommodate more legislators, and manage coalition politics.
A Lower Recommendation, Set Higher
- NCRWC The National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution had recommended an even lower ceiling: a maximum of ten percent of total House strength. Parliament ultimately set the cap at fifteen percent instead.
Passed vs. In Force
- 2003 vs. 2004 The 91st Amendment Act was passed by Parliament in 2003. It only came into force later, on 7 July 2004.
Strengthened Anti-Defection Too
- Same Amendment The same Amendment also strengthened the Anti-Defection Law. A legislator disqualified for defection cannot be appointed a Minister, for the rest of that term.
Test Yourself
🏆 Great to Know
No Floor at the Union Level
- Cap Without a Minimum Unlike its state-level counterpart, Article 75(1A) sets no minimum floor. It caps the Union Council of Ministers at fifteen percent, without guaranteeing any minimum number at all.
Two Changes, One Design
- Reducing Defection Incentive The two 91st Amendment changes work together by design. Capping ministerial posts, alongside disqualifying defectors from becoming Ministers, was meant to reduce the incentive to defect in exchange for a ministerial berth.
Roughly 81 Seats
- 543-Seat Lok Sabha With the Lok Sabha’s 543 elected seats, this caps the Union Council of Ministers at roughly 81 members, including the Prime Minister.
A Structural Fix
- Real Cost The cap addresses a structural problem, not just a symbolic one. Before 2003, an unusually large Council of Ministers could function as an informal way to reward political allies, and pre-empt defections, at real cost to the public exchequer.
Leave a Reply