Joint Session of Indian Parliament: Identifying the Incorrect Statement

The question asks to identify the statement that is NOT correct regarding the Joint Session of the Parliament of India. Let's analyze each statement:

Analysis of Statements

• Statement 1: "So far, Joint sittings of the two Houses have taken place on three occasions."

  This statement is correct. Joint sessions have been held three times: in 1961 (Dowry Prohibition Bill), 1978 (Banking Service Commission Repeal Bill), and 2002 (Prevention of Terrorism Bill).

• Statement 2: "The President can summon both the Houses to meet for the Joint Session."

  This statement is correct. As per Article 85(1) of the Constitution, the President summons each House of Parliament to meet at such time and place as they think fit.

• Statement 3: "The Chairman of Rajya Sabha (Vice President) presides over a Joint Session."

  This statement is incorrect. According to Article 118(4) of the Constitution, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha presides over a Joint Session. If the Speaker is absent, the Deputy Speaker of the Lok Sabha presides. If they are also absent, the Deputy Chairman of the Rajya Sabha presides. The Vice President, in their capacity as Chairman of the Rajya Sabha, does not automatically preside over joint sessions.

• Statement 4: "Joint session is held to resolve a deadlock between the two Houses of the Parliament."

  This statement is correct. The primary purpose of a joint session, convened under Article 108, is to break a legislative deadlock when a bill passed by one House is rejected by the other, or amendments are disagreed upon, or the bill is not passed within six months.

Conclusion

Based on the analysis, the incorrect statement is that the Chairman of Rajya Sabha presides over a Joint Session. The Speaker of the Lok Sabha is the presiding officer.