The Office of the Deputy Speaker of the Lok Sabha is not merely a ceremonial seat but also a constitutional imperative. Mandated under Article 93 of the Constitution of India, this role is not just supplementary to the Speaker’s. It is vital for the uninterrupted functioning of the lower House of Parliament. However, in recent years, the Deputy Speaker’s position has fallen into unusual and troubling neglect.
Article 93 clearly states: “The House of the People shall, as soon as may be, choose two members of the House to be respectively Speaker and Deputy Speaker….”
The phrasing “as soon as may be” implies urgency, and not discretion. The Deputy Speaker’s role is not optional; the Constitution places this office on an equal footing with the Speaker in terms of its necessity to the parliamentary structure. Article 94 states that the Deputy Speaker remains in office until they resign, are removed, or cease to be a Member of Parliament.
The intent is clear: the Lok Sabha must never function without a second-in-command, a constitutional safeguard to ensure continuity, stability, and institutional balance.
The roots of this office can be traced back to the colonial period. The position originated in the Central Legislative Assembly under British rule, where it was known as the Deputy President. The first to hold the office was Sachidanand Sinha in 1921. By the time India achieved independence in 1947, the Deputy Speaker had already become an institutional fixture in legislative governance.
Post-Independence, during the Constituent Assembly (Legislative) sessions, a deliberate decision was made to maintain the role even before the Constitution was fully adopted in 1950. The first elected Deputy Speaker of India’s Lok Sabha was M.A. Ayyangar, a respected parliamentarian who also served as the acting Speaker following the sudden death of Speaker G.V. Mavalankar in 1956. His appointment during a crisis established a precedent for the Deputy Speaker’s importance as a ready and capable replacement.
Relevance in parliamentary practice
While the Speaker is the presiding authority of the House, no Speaker can physically preside over every session in its entirety. As noted by constitutional expert S.C. Kashyap in Dada Saheb Mavalankar: Father of Lok Sabha, the Speaker cannot chair proceedings for hours on end. The Deputy Speaker steps in during such absences, ensuring that proceedings continue without procedural disruption.
But the Deputy Speaker’s role extends beyond simply “filling in”. They can chair important sessions, preside over specific committees, and even handle sensitive debates that require a neutral and trusted authority. Notably, the Deputy Speaker, like the Speaker, is expected to act impartially once elected, regardless of party affiliation.
Historically, this office has also held symbolic importance in fostering bipartisan respect. A long-standing convention — though not legally binding — has been to offer the post of Deputy Speaker to the Opposition. This not only balanced power within the House but also helped to build trust and cooperation across the aisle. It has been a vital practice in reinforcing the non-partisan ethos that the Speaker’s office aims to uphold.
A growing constitutional vacuum
Despite its clear constitutional basis and historic continuity, the Deputy Speaker’s office has remained vacant for the entire term of the 17th Lok Sabha (2019–2024). As of this writing, the 18th Lok Sabha, formed after the 2024 general election, has also yet to elect a Deputy Speaker. This is not a procedural lapse; it is a constitutional anomaly.
Never before in India’s parliamentary history has the office remained vacant for such extended periods of time. The Constitution does not prescribe a rigid timeline for the election, but the phrase “as soon as may be” cannot be interpreted as “whenever convenient”. The delay — now running into multiple years — raises fundamental questions about adherence to constitutional mandates and respect for parliamentary norms.
Leaving the Deputy Speaker’s position vacant undermines the institutional safeguards established by the Constitution. It centralises procedural power solely within the Speaker and the ruling party, eliminating a vital counterbalance. In an emergency, such as the Speaker’s resignation, death, or removal, the lack of a designated second-in-command could lead to confusion or even a temporary leadership vacuum in the House.
The delay also signals a broader disregard for parliamentary conventions — especially the unwritten rule of offering the post to the Opposition. While not mandatory, this practice has historically promoted inclusivity and moderation in parliamentary functioning. Failing to fill the post is not just a passive oversight; it is an active sidelining of consensus politics.
The argument that there is “no urgency” to appoint a Deputy Speaker runs counter to the entire ethos of constitutional democracy. The framers of the Constitution foresaw the importance of redundancy in leadership. Positions such as the Deputy Speaker are not afterthoughts — they are foundational to the system’s resilience.
Moreover, restoring the practice of appointing a Deputy Speaker from the Opposition can help rebuild institutional credibility. In an era of increasing polarisation, such a gesture would not only honour democratic convention but also inject a degree of balance into legislative proceedings.
Need for legislative reform?
The ongoing vacuum raises a larger question: should the constitutional language be tightened to set a mandatory time frame for electing the Deputy Speaker? A specific deadline — for instance, within 60 days of the first sitting of the new Lok Sabha — could close this loophole of delay and warrant compliance.
Alternatively, a statutory mechanism could be introduced to allow the President to initiate the process within a time frame, upon advice from the Prime Minister or the Speaker. Either way, the current ambiguity is untenable in a functioning democracy.
The Office of the Deputy Speaker of the Lok Sabha is neither symbolic nor optional. It is a constitutionally sanctioned position designed to uphold the integrity and the continuity of legislative functioning. Disregarding it violates the Constitution’s letter and undermines the spirit of democratic balance.
It is time for Parliament to reaffirm its respect for constitutional norms and institutional integrity. Electing a Deputy Speaker is not just a formality — it is a test of the House’s commitment to rule-based governance. India’s Parliament must not fail this test any longer.
Vinod Bhanu is Executive Director of the Centre for Legislative Research and Advocacy (CLRA), New Delhi. Ravindra Garimella is the former Joint Secretary (Legislation), Lok Sabha, and currently Secretary to the Leader of Opposition, Rajya Sabha
Published – April 29, 2025 12:16 am IST