Limit on size of Council of Ministers

Also called: Article 75(1A), Article 164(1A) · Topic: Union Executive: President, Vice-President, Prime Minister and Council of Ministers · NCERT: Class 11, Ch 4 "Executive"

Meaning

The limit on the size of the Council of Ministers is a ceiling added by the Constitution (Ninety-first Amendment) Act, 2003. Under it, the total number of ministers, including the Prime Minister (at the Centre) or the Chief Minister (in a state), cannot be more than 15% of the total membership of the Lok Sabha or of the state's Legislative Assembly. A state must also have at least 12 ministers [2][3].

It matters because it stopped "jumbo" ministries. These were very large Councils that governments used to reward allies and defectors, at a heavy cost to the public.

Explanation

How the cap works

• Centre, Art. 75(1A): total ministers, including the PM, must be ≤ 15% of the Lok Sabha's total strength [2][3].
• For a 543-member Lok Sabha, the cap is 81.

• The 15% is counted on the Lok Sabha only. Ministers who sit in the Rajya Sabha still count towards the cap.

• States, Art. 164(1A): total ministers, including the Chief Minister, must be ≤ 15% of the Legislative Assembly's strength [3].

• Floor of 12: every state must have at least 12 ministers [3].

• The floor matters for small states such as Goa, Sikkim and Mizoram, where 15% of the assembly would give a very small number.

• Every rank counts: the cap covers the whole Council of Ministers (all ministers of every rank, Art. 74). That means:

• Cabinet ministers
• Ministers of State (Independent Charge)
• Ministers of State

• Deputy ministers

• In force from 1 January 2004 [3].

The anti-defection parts of the same amendment

The 91st Amendment also made it harder to reward defectors with posts:

• Arts. 75(1B) and 164(1B): a legislator disqualified under the Tenth Schedule (the anti-defection law) cannot become a minister while the disqualification lasts. This normally means until they are re-elected [2].
• Art. 361B: such a person also cannot hold a remunerative political post. This is a paid government post given for political reasons, such as chairing a state corporation.

Why it was needed

• Coalition instability:
• In unstable coalition years, governments survived by giving ministries to allies and defectors.

• This created "jumbo" ministries.

• Cost:

• Each extra minister brings salary, staff, cars and offices.

• This put a heavy burden on the public purse.

• Two steps to stop it:

• Cap the size of the ministry.
• Shut the door on defectors who hope to become ministers.

Limits: how states get around the cap

• Parliamentary secretaries: legislators are given minister-like posts and perks without being called ministers.
• Cabinet rank for chairs: heads of boards and commissions are given "cabinet rank".
• Not counted: none of these posts is counted within the 15%.
• Such posts are often challenged in court as an office of profit (a paid government post that can disqualify a legislator).

In the Constitution and practice

• Source: the Constitution (Ninety-first Amendment) Act, 2003, in force from 1 January 2004 [3]. It inserted:
• Art. 75(1A): the Union cap [2][3]
• Art. 164(1A): the state cap, plus the minimum of 12 [3]
• Arts. 75(1B) and 164(1B): the bar on disqualified defectors becoming ministers [2]

• Art. 361B: the bar on disqualified defectors holding remunerative political posts

• Who applies it:

• The President appoints ministers on the PM's advice (Art. 75(1)) [2].

• So the cap in practice limits the PM's choice. In a state, it limits the Chief Minister's choice.

• Practice, June 2024:

• The President gave the oaths of office and secrecy to the PM and the Union Council of Ministers on 9 June 2024 [4].
• The Council had 72 members including the PM: 30 cabinet ministers, 5 Ministers of State (Independent Charge) and 36 Ministers of State.

• This is well below the cap of 81.

• Practice in states: some states have used parliamentary secretaries and cabinet-rank posts to go beyond the cap in effect. These posts have been challenged in court as offices of profit.

Don't confuse with

• Cabinet: the 15% cap applies to the whole Council of Ministers, not just the small inner Cabinet. The word "Cabinet" appears only in Art. 352(3), added by the 44th Amendment (1978).
• Minimum of 12: this floor applies only to states (Art. 164(1A)) [3]. The Union has a ceiling but no minimum.
• Art. 75(5), the six-month rule: a non-MP can be a minister for up to six consecutive months [2]. This rule is about who can be a minister. The 15% cap is about how many ministers there can be.
• Parliamentary secretaries and cabinet-rank posts: they get minister-like perks but are not counted within the 15%. They are tested under office of profit, not under Art. 164(1A).

Prelims Hooks

• 91st Amendment, 2003 (in force 1 January 2004): ministers may not exceed 15% of the Lok Sabha or assembly, including the PM or CM [3].
• Art. 75(1A) = Union cap. Art. 164(1A) = state cap plus a minimum of 12 ministers [2][3].
• The base is the Lok Sabha's total membership. It is not both Houses together. For 543 seats, the cap is 81.
• Arts. 75(1B) and 164(1B): a member disqualified under the Tenth Schedule cannot become a minister until the disqualification ends [2].
• Art. 361B (also from the 91st Amendment): a disqualified defector cannot hold a remunerative political post.
• Trap: "The PM is excluded from the 15% count." This is false. The PM and the CM are included.

Mains Points

• Has the cap worked?
• It ended jumbo ministries at the Centre and in the states.
• But states get around it with parliamentary secretaries and cabinet-rank posts for chairs of boards. These posts carry ministerial perks without being counted.

• Reform: count every post with ministerial perks within the 15%, and write clearer office-of-profit rules.

• Link to anti-defection:

• The cap and Arts. 75(1B), 164(1B) and 361B work together. They take away the "minister's post" reward that once drove defections and kept unstable coalitions alive.

• Gaps such as unofficial cabinet-rank posts weaken this aim.

• A flat 15% vs the needs of governance:

• The 12-minister floor shows that a flat percentage does not suit small states.
• In large states and at the Centre, the cap forces leaders to combine departments. This saves money but can overload ministers.
• Answers can weigh efficiency and thrift against adequate administration.

Related concepts

• Council of Ministers
• Cabinet
• Minister of State (Independent Charge)
• Collective responsibility
• Individual responsibility

Read more

• The Council of Ministers and the Cabinet