Examkin

Indian Polity and Governance

316 questions

All types316Multiple choice161Multiple select68Matching74Ordering13
Question 261Question →

Regarding the constitutional framework of the Indian judicial system, which of the following statements accurately describes a key jurisdictional distinction between the Supreme Court and High Courts in India?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The writ jurisdiction of High Courts under Article 226 is broader in subject-matter scope than that of the Supreme Court under Article 32, as High Courts can issue writs for both Fundamental Rights and ordinary legal rights.

Answer

The writ jurisdiction of High Courts under Article 226 is broader in subject-matter scope than that of the Supreme Court under Article 32, as High Courts can issue writs for both Fundamental Rights and ordinary legal rights.
Under Article 32, the Supreme Court can issue writs only for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights. Under Article 226, High Courts can issue writs for enforcing Fundamental Rights as well as 'for any other purpose' (ordinary legal rights). Therefore, in terms of subject-matter scope, the writ jurisdiction of the High Court is wider than that of the Supreme Court.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
Article 32 confers writ jurisdiction on the Supreme Court specifically for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Part III.
The right to move the Supreme Court under Article 32 is itself a Fundamental Right.
2
Analyze Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Article 226 confers writ jurisdiction on High Courts for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights 'and for any other purpose'.
The phrase 'for any other purpose' extends the High Court's writ authority to ordinary legal and statutory rights, making its subject-matter scope broader than that of Article 32.
3
Compare the territorial vs subject-matter scope of both courts.
While the Supreme Court has a wider territorial jurisdiction (entire territory of India), the High Court has a wider subject-matter writ jurisdiction.
Evaluating both constitutional clauses confirms that the High Court's subject-matter reach under Article 226 encompasses both constitutional fundamental rights and ordinary legal rights.

Key Concept

Writ Jurisdiction Comparison (Article 32 vs Article 226)
Estimated Time:1m 15s
Question 262Question →

Which of the following statements regarding the statutory jurisdiction and operational powers of the Lokpal under the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 are correct?

Select all that apply

Show answer & explanation

Answer: It possesses powers of superintendence over and can issue directions to investigating agencies, including the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), for cases referred by it.; The Prime Minister of India falls within its jurisdiction, subject to specified subject-matter exemptions such as international relations, security, public order, atomic energy, and space.; It is vested with the powers of a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, while conducting preliminary inquiries.

Answer

The correct statements are those concerning the Lokpal's superintendence over investigating agencies like the CBI for referred cases, the inclusion of the Prime Minister under its jurisdiction with specified exemptions, and its vesting with civil court powers during preliminary inquiries.
The correct statements accurately identify that the Lokpal exercises superintendence over investigating agencies (including the CBI) for cases referred by it, brings the Prime Minister under its purview with specific exclusions (such as international relations and atomic energy), and enjoys civil court powers under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, while conducting inquiries.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Evaluate the statement regarding superintendence over investigating agencies.
The statement is correct because Section 25 of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 grants the Lokpal powers of superintendence over any agency investigating cases referred by it.
Verify statutory oversight powers over investigating agencies.
2
Evaluate the statement regarding the Prime Minister's inclusion under Lokpal jurisdiction.
The statement is correct as Section 14 includes the Prime Minister within the Lokpal's purview, subject to specific exclusions like atomic energy, space, security, and international relations.
Determine the scope of jurisdiction over high constitutional functionaries.
3
Evaluate the statement regarding civil court powers during inquiry.
The statement is correct because Section 27 explicitly accords the Lokpal the powers of a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Assess the judicial powers granted to the statutory body during proceedings.
4
Evaluate the statement regarding suo motu powers.
The statement is incorrect because the Lokpal lacks statutory power to take suo motu cognizance and requires a written complaint to commence proceedings.
Examine the procedural trigger for Lokpal action.

Key Concept

Powers, jurisdiction, and procedural framework of the Lokpal under the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013
Question 263Question →

Which of the following constitutional provisions and principles concerning the Supreme Court and High Courts of India are correct?

Select all that apply

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The power of judicial review over legislative actions vested in the High Courts under Article 226 and the Supreme Court under Article 32 forms an integral part of the basic structure of the Constitution.; A High Court can issue constitutional writs under Article 226 for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights as well as for any other ordinary legal right.

Answer

The correct statements are: (1) The power of judicial review vested in High Courts under Article 226 and the Supreme Court under Article 32 forms part of the basic structure of the Constitution; and (2) High Courts can issue writs under Article 226 for fundamental rights as well as for any other legal purpose.
The principle that judicial review under Articles 32 and 226 forms part of the basic structure was established in L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997). Furthermore, Article 226 explicitly allows High Courts to issue writs for fundamental rights as well as 'for any other purpose', making both statements accurate.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Evaluate the basic structure status of Judicial Review
Confirm that the Supreme Court's judgment in L. Chandra Kumar (1997) held judicial review under Articles 32 and 226/227 to be an unalterable basic structure component.
Judicial review ensures constitutional checks and balances across legislative and executive actions.
2
Analyze the legal nature of Advisory Jurisdiction under Article 143
Determine that Article 143 advisory opinions are non-binding recommendations provided to the President.
Precedential binding effect under Article 141 applies to judicial decisions resolving actual litigation, not advisory consultative opinions.
3
Examine the scope of High Court Writ Jurisdiction under Article 226
Verify that Article 226 contains the phrase 'for any other purpose', granting High Courts wider remedial jurisdiction than Article 32.
Article 32 is strictly limited to Fundamental Rights, whereas Article 226 encompasses ordinary legal and statutory rights.
4
Examine the power of Executive Officers regarding judicial writs
Identify that Governors exercise executive and legislative ordinance powers (Article 213), but have no jurisdiction to issue judicial writs.
Writ powers are exclusively vested in the higher judicial organs of the state.

Key Concept

Constitutional Jurisdiction and Basic Structure Doctrine of Higher Judiciary
Question 264Question →

Under the constitutional framework of the Union Executive, Article 74 of the Constitution of India governs the relationship between the President and the Council of Ministers. Which of the following statements correctly describes the constitutional position regarding the advice tendered by the Union Council of Ministers to the President?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The question whether any advice, and if so what advice, was tendered by Ministers to the President shall not be inquired into in any court of law.

Answer

The statement specifying that the question whether any advice, and if so what advice, was tendered by Ministers to the President shall not be inquired into in any court of law is correct.
Article 74(2) of the Constitution of India provides total judicial immunity to the advice tendered by Ministers to the President. It explicitly dictates that no court of law can inquire into whether any advice was given, or what the contents of such advice were.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze Article 74(1) and Article 74(2) of the Constitution of India.
Article 74(1) establishes that there shall be a Council of Ministers with the Prime Minister at the head to aid and advise the President, who shall act in accordance with such advice.
This establishes the parliamentary executive system where the formal head of state acts on the advice of the elected cabinet.
2
Examine the judicial non-justiciability rule under Article 74(2).
Article 74(2) lays down an absolute constitutional prohibition stating: 'The question whether any, and if so what, advice was tendered by Ministers to the President shall not be inquired into in any court.'
This provision safeguards Cabinet confidentiality and protects executive decision-making processes from judicial scrutiny, though underlying material supporting decisions may be subject to review under administrative law principles.

Key Concept

Non-justiciability of Ministerial Advice under Article 74(2)
Estimated Time:1m 0s
Question 265Question →

Which of the following represents the three core pillars of the 'Sevottam' model created by the Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances (DARPG) for evaluating and improving the quality of public service delivery in India?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Implementation of Citizen's Charters, Public Grievance Redress Mechanism, and Service Delivery Capability

Answer

Implementation of Citizen's Charters, Public Grievance Redress Mechanism, and Service Delivery Capability
The Sevottam framework consists of three mandatory modules: (1) Implementation of Citizen's Charters to publicly disclose commitments on standards of service delivery, (2) Public Grievance Redress Mechanism to ensure timely and effective resolution of public grievances, and (3) Service Delivery Capability to systematically enhance the administrative infrastructure and human resources needed to deliver services efficiently.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the origin and objectives of the Sevottam assessment model
Sevottam was created in 2006 by the Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances (DARPG) as a benchmark framework for public service organizations to achieve excellence in service delivery.
Understanding the model's design intent helps isolate its specific structural components.
2
Analyze the three core modules of the framework
Sevottam is structured around three key pillars: Pillar 1 focuses on Citizen's Charters (setting clear standards for public services), Pillar 2 focuses on Public Grievance Redress (establishing an effective mechanism for resolving complaints), and Pillar 3 focuses on Service Delivery Capability (building internal administrative capacity, infrastructure, and employee motivation).
These three pillars systematically address service commitments, feedback loops, and internal enabling conditions.

Key Concept

Sevottam Model for Public Service Delivery and Citizen Charters
Question 266Question →

The constitutional framework of India equips both the Supreme Court and High Courts with the authority to issue writs, yet their scope and constitutional nature differ. Which of the following statements correctly highlights a fundamental distinction between the writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 32 and that of a High Court under Article 226?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: A High Court can issue writs for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights as well as for any ordinary legal right, whereas the Supreme Court under Article 32 issues writs specifically for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights.

Answer

A High Court can issue writs for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights as well as for any ordinary legal right, whereas the Supreme Court under Article 32 issues writs specifically for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights.
The correct statement accurately captures the subject-matter distinction between the two constitutional remedies. Under Article 32, the Supreme Court can issue writs solely for enforcing Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Part III. In contrast, Article 226 explicitly authorizes High Courts to issue writs for Fundamental Rights as well as 'for any other purpose'—meaning the enforcement of ordinary statutory and legal rights.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the subject-matter scope of Article 32 and Article 226.
Article 32 allows writ issuance specifically for Part III rights (Fundamental Rights). Article 226 adds the phrase 'and for any other purpose', extending High Court writ powers to legal rights beyond Fundamental Rights.
This establishes that the High Court's writ jurisdiction has a wider subject-matter scope than that of the Supreme Court under Article 32.
2
Evaluate the constitutional nature of the remedy under both articles.
Article 32 is itself a Fundamental Right, making the Supreme Court's jurisdiction non-discretionary for Fundamental Right violations. Article 226 is a constitutional remedy in Part VI, making High Court jurisdiction discretionary.
This helps rule out statements suggesting the Supreme Court can refuse Article 32 relief due to alternative legal remedies.

Key Concept

Distinction between Supreme Court (Article 32) and High Court (Article 226) Writ Jurisdiction
Estimated Time:1m 15s
Question 267Question →

Match the non-constitutional statutory bodies listed in List-I with their corresponding parent governing enactments in List-II:

Click a left item, then click its matching right item

Items

Central Vigilance Commission (CVC)
Central Information Commission (CIC)
Competition Commission of India (CCI)
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC)

Matches

Show answer & explanation

Answer

Central Vigilance Commission pairs with Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003; Central Information Commission pairs with Right to Information Act, 2005; Competition Commission of India pairs with Competition Act, 2002; National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission pairs with Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Each non-constitutional body listed is correctly matched with its specific governing Parliamentary statute. The CVC derives its statutory backing from the CVC Act of 2003; the CIC was established under Section 12 of the RTI Act, 2005; the CCI operates under the Competition Act, 2002; and the NCDRC operates under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the legislative origin of the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC).
CVC became a statutory body via Parliament enacting the Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003.
Tracing statutory evolution from executive creation to legislative backing.
2
Identify the legislative origin of the Central Information Commission (CIC).
CIC was constituted under Section 12 of the Right to Information Act, 2005.
Direct statutory provision identification.
3
Identify the parent governing enactment for the Competition Commission of India (CCI).
CCI was set up under the provisions of the Competition Act, 2002.
Regulatory framework mapping.
4
Identify the governing statute for the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC).
NCDRC functions under the apex statutory mandate of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Connecting statutory consumer governance bodies to updated legislation.

Key Concept

Statutory non-constitutional bodies derive their mandate, structure, and authority from specific Acts of Parliament rather than directly from constitutional provisions.
Question 268Question →

Match List-I (Constitutional Articles of the Union Executive) with List-II (Their Respective Provisions) and select the correct matching pairs:

Click a left item, then click its matching right item

Items

Article 56
Article 61
Article 67
Article 78

Matches

Show answer & explanation

Answer

Article 56 matches with Term of office of the President; Article 61 matches with Procedure for impeachment of the President; Article 67 matches with Term of office and removal procedure of the Vice-President; and Article 78 matches with Duties of Prime Minister as respects the furnishing of information to the President.
Article 56 specifies the 5-year tenure of the President. Article 61 establishes the procedure for impeaching the President for violation of the Constitution. Article 67 deals with the tenure and removal procedure of the Vice-President. Article 78 details the constitutional duty of the Prime Minister to keep the President informed about decisions of the Council of Ministers and legislative proposals.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify constitutional provisions related to the President's tenure and impeachment.
Article 56 lays down the President's 5-year tenure, while Article 61 lays down the detailed impeachment procedure for violation of the Constitution.
Under Part V of the Constitution, Article 56 governs presidential tenure, and Article 61 specifies the special parliamentary procedure for impeachment.
2
Examine constitutional provisions governing the Vice-President's office.
Article 67 defines the tenure of the Vice-President and the procedure for removal by a resolution passed by the Rajya Sabha and agreed to by the Lok Sabha.
Article 67 specifically outlines the removal process of the Vice-President, who serves as the ex-officio Chairman of the Council of States.
3
Evaluate provisions outlining the channel of communication between the Executive head and the Council of Ministers.
Article 78 obligates the Prime Minister to furnish information regarding Union administrative affairs and proposals for legislation to the President.
Article 78 is the constitutional link maintaining the flow of information between the Prime Minister and the President.

Key Concept

Constitutional Articles and Procedures of the Union Executive
Question 269Question →

Arrange the following historical milestones associated with the constitutional developments and framing of the Indian Constitution in their correct chronological order from earliest to latest:

Drag items to arrange them in the correct order

Show answer & explanation

Answer

The correct chronological sequence is: Announcement of the Mountbatten Plan (June 3, 1947), Royal Assent to the Indian Independence Act (July 18, 1947), Appointment of the Drafting Committee (August 29, 1947), and Formal introduction of the Draft Constitution in the Constituent Assembly (November 4, 1948).
The correct chronological order starts with the Mountbatten Plan announced on June 3, 1947, followed by the Royal Assent to the Indian Independence Act on July 18, 1947. Next, the Drafting Committee was appointed on August 29, 1947, and finally, the Draft Constitution prepared by the committee was introduced in the Constituent Assembly on November 4, 1948.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Determine the exact date for each event in the framing and constitutional transition period.
Announcement of Mountbatten Plan: June 3, 1947; Royal Assent to Indian Independence Act: July 18, 1947; Appointment of Drafting Committee: August 29, 1947; Introduction of Draft Constitution: November 4, 1948.
Accurate historical dates provide the baseline for chronological sequencing.
2
Sequence the events chronologically from earliest to latest.
June 3, 1947 -> July 18, 1947 -> August 29, 1947 -> November 4, 1948.
Ordering by timeline resolves the correct progression of events.

Key Concept

Chronology of Constituent Assembly Milestones and Transfer of Power
Question 270Question →

Match the Constitutional Articles related to the Indian Judiciary in List-I with their corresponding powers and constitutional provisions in List-II.

Click a left item, then click its matching right item

Items

Article 139A
Article 142
Article 144
Article 227

Matches

Show answer & explanation

Answer

Article 139A pairs with the power to transfer cases involving similar questions of law. Article 142 pairs with orders necessary for doing complete justice. Article 144 pairs with civil and judicial authorities acting in aid of the Supreme Court. Article 227 pairs with the High Court's power of superintendence over all courts and tribunals in its jurisdiction.
Each item in List-I correctly corresponds to its specific constitutional mandate under the Indian Constitution. Article 139A authorizes case transfers across High Courts to the Supreme Court. Article 142 empowers the apex court to pass orders for complete justice. Article 144 creates an obligation for civil and judicial executive arms to assist the Supreme Court. Article 227 vests superintendence over lower courts and tribunals within a High Court's jurisdiction.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the constitutional scope of Article 139A
Article 139A deals with the transfer of cases when cases involving identical or substantially similar questions of law are pending before the Supreme Court and/or multiple High Courts.
This provision helps prevent conflicting judgments across different High Courts on the same constitutional question.
2
Identify the mandate of Article 142
Article 142 equips the Supreme Court with broad constitutional jurisdiction to execute decrees or pass orders required for doing complete justice.
It ensures technical procedural hurdles do not impede equitable justice.
3
Analyze Article 144 and Article 227
Article 144 binds civil and judicial authorities to aid Supreme Court directives, while Article 227 gives High Courts power of administrative and judicial superintendence over tribunals and lower courts.
Article 144 ensures enforcement of apex court orders nation-wide, while Article 227 maintains state-level judicial hierarchy and administrative control.

Key Concept

Constitutional Jurisdiction and Powers of Supreme Court and High Courts
Question 271Question →

When the Vice-President of India acts as President or discharges the functions of the President during a vacancy, which of the following statements correctly describes their constitutional status and entitlement to salary?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: They cease to perform the duties of the Chairman of the Council of States and are entitled to the salary and allowances of the President.

Answer

They cease to perform the duties of the Chairman of the Council of States and are entitled to the salary and allowances of the President.
According to Article 65(3) read with Article 97 of the Constitution of India, when the Vice-President acts as President or discharges the functions of the President, they enjoy all the powers, privileges, and emoluments of the President. Concurrently, they cease to perform the duties of the Ex-officio Chairman of the Council of States (Rajya Sabha) and are not entitled to the salary payable to the Chairman under Article 97.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the constitutional provisions governing the Vice-President when acting as President.
Article 65(1) states that during a casual vacancy in the office of the President, the Vice-President acts as President until a new President assumes office.
To establish the legal framework under Part V of the Constitution.
2
Evaluate the duties and salary restrictions under Article 65(3) and Article 97.
During this period, the Vice-President is entitled to all powers, immunities, and emoluments of the President and is barred from performing the duties of the Chairman of the Council of States or drawing the Chairman's salary.
To determine the exact functional and financial adjustments required by the Constitution.

Key Concept

Constitutional provisions regarding the Vice-President acting as President (Article 65 and Article 97)
Question 272Question →

Regarding the constitutional provisions governing the Union Council of Ministers under Article 75 of the Constitution of India, which of the following statements are correct?

Select all that apply

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The salaries and allowances of Union Ministers are determined from time to time by Parliament by law.; A person who is not a member of either House of Parliament can be appointed as a Minister, but ceases to be one if not elected within six consecutive months.; The President administers the oaths of office and secrecy to a Minister before the Minister enters upon their office.

Answer

The correct statements are that the salaries and allowances of Ministers are determined by Parliament by law, a non-member appointed as a Minister must secure a seat in either House within six consecutive months, and the President administers the oaths of office and secrecy before a Minister assumes office.
The statements confirming parliamentary determination of salaries, the six-month membership window for non-parliamentarian ministers, and presidential administration of oaths accurately reflect Articles 75(6), 75(5), and 75(4) of the Indian Constitution.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Evaluate the statement regarding collective responsibility of the Council of Ministers.
Article 75(3) mandates that the Council of Ministers shall be collectively responsible to the House of the People (Lok Sabha), not Parliament as a whole.
Collective responsibility is owed specifically to the popularly elected lower house to maintain executive accountability.
2
Evaluate the statement regarding ministerial salaries and allowances.
Article 75(6) empowers Parliament to determine ministerial salaries and allowances by law.
Parliament holds financial authority over executive emoluments.
3
Evaluate the statement regarding non-parliamentarians joining the Council of Ministers.
Article 75(5) permits a non-member to be appointed as a Minister, provided they become a member of either House of Parliament within six consecutive months.
This allows technical experts or leaders to join the Cabinet while maintaining democratic parliamentary tenure requirements.
4
Evaluate the statement regarding administration of oaths.
Article 75(4) requires the President to administer the oaths of office and secrecy according to the Third Schedule.
The President is the executive head of the Union who formalizes ministerial appointments.

Key Concept

Constitutional Provisions of Article 75 and Executive Accountability
Question 273Question →

Under the statutory framework established by the Disaster Management Act, 2005, the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) is laid down as the nodal statutory body for policy layout and coordination of disaster management in India. Who among the following serves as the ex-officio Chairperson of the National Disaster Management Authority?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The Prime Minister of India

Answer

The Prime Minister of India serves as the ex-officio Chairperson of the National Disaster Management Authority.
Under Section 3(2)(a) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) consists of a Chairperson and up to nine other members nominated by the Chairperson. The Prime Minister of India is the ex-officio Chairperson of the NDMA.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the governing statute for disaster management in India.
The relevant legislation is the Disaster Management Act, 2005.
Statutory non-constitutional bodies derive their composition and authority directly from their enabling enactments.
2
Analyze Section 3 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 regarding NDMA establishment and leadership.
Section 3(2)(a) specifies that the Authority consists of a Chairperson who is the Prime Minister of India ex-officio.
This top-tier leadership ensures cross-ministerial authority and rapid executive mobilization during national emergencies.

Key Concept

Statutory Leadership of National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA)
Question 274Question →

With reference to the Cabinet Mission Plan of 1946 and the composition of the Constituent Assembly of India, consider the following statements:

1. Members from British Indian provinces were directly elected on the basis of universal adult franchise.
2. Seats allocated to each province were divided among three main communities—Muslims, Sikhs, and General—in proportion to their respective populations.
3. Representatives of the Princely States were to be nominated by the heads of those states.

Which of the statements given above are correct?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: 2 and 3 only

Answer

2 and 3 only
Under the Cabinet Mission Plan of 1946, the Constituent Assembly was framed as a partly elected and partly nominated body. Representatives of British Indian provinces were elected indirectly by provincial legislative assemblies using single transferable vote. Within each province, seats were allocated to three defined communities (Muslims, Sikhs, and General) according to population proportions. Representatives from Princely States were nominated by their respective rulers. Therefore, statements 2 and 3 are correct, while statement 1 is incorrect.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Evaluate Statement 1 regarding the election method of provincial representatives.
Statement 1 is incorrect. Members of the Constituent Assembly from British Indian provinces were indirectly elected by the members of the Provincial Legislative Assemblies using the system of proportional representation by means of a single transferable vote, not by direct universal adult franchise.
Direct election on the basis of adult suffrage was rejected at the time due to practical constraints and time limits under the Cabinet Mission Plan.
2
Evaluate Statement 2 regarding communal allocation of seats in provinces.
Statement 2 is correct. Seats allocated to each British province were divided among three principal communities—Muslims, Sikhs, and General (all except Muslims and Sikhs)—in proportion to their populations.
This communal grouping ensured representative proportion for religious groups as per the Cabinet Mission framework.
3
Evaluate Statement 3 regarding representation from Princely States.
Statement 3 is correct. The 93 seats allotted to the Princely States were to be filled by representatives nominated by the heads/rulers of the Princely States.
The Princely States were not part of British India and did not have elective legislative assemblies under the same framework, necessitating nomination by their respective rulers.

Key Concept

Composition and election scheme of the Constituent Assembly under the Cabinet Mission Plan (1946)
Estimated Time:1m 15s
Question 275Question →

Regarding the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) under the Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003, which of the following provisions are correct?

Select all that apply

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The Central Vigilance Commissioner holds office for a term of four years from the date of entering office or until attaining the age of sixty-five years, whichever is earlier.; The Selection Committee for recommending the appointment of the Central Vigilance Commissioner is chaired by the Prime Minister of India.

Answer

The provisions stating a 4-year or 65-year age tenure limit and the Prime Minister leading the selection committee are correct.
The statements confirming the 4-year/65-year tenure limit and the Prime Minister heading the appointment selection committee accurately reflect the provisions of the Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Evaluate the statutory tenure provision of the Central Vigilance Commission.
The Central Vigilance Commissioner serves a tenure of 4 years or until reaching 65 years of age.
This is mandated under Section 4(1) of the Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003.
2
Examine the composition of the recommendation committee.
The Prime Minister chairs the 3-member committee alongside the Home Minister and Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha.
Section 4(1) explicitly outlines the 3-member committee headed by the Prime Minister.
3
Verify post-retirement employment and constitutional status provisions.
Members are barred from future government employment, and the body is statutory rather than constitutional.
The CVC was established as a statutory body via parliament act in 2003, with strict post-tenure disqualifications.

Key Concept

Statutory framework, appointment, and tenure restrictions of the Central Vigilance Commission
Question 276Question →

Consider the following statements regarding the constitutional jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and High Courts in India:

1. The writ jurisdiction of a High Court under Article 226 is broader than that of the Supreme Court under Article 32 because it extends to non-fundamental legal rights.
2. The Supreme Court's power to grant Special Leave to Appeal under Article 136 applies to decisions rendered by tribunals constituted under laws relating to the Armed Forces.
3. The High Court's power of superintendence under Article 227 applies over all subordinate courts and tribunals within its territorial jurisdiction, excluding military tribunals.

Which of the statements given above are correct?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: 1 and 3 only

Answer

Statements 1 and 3 are correct.
The option selecting statements 1 and 3 only is correct. Article 226 gives High Courts broader subject-matter writ powers ('for any other purpose') than Article 32. Additionally, both Article 136(2) and Article 227(4) constitutionally exclude courts-martial and military tribunals from the respective Special Leave Appeal and High Court superintendence jurisdictions.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Evaluate Statement 1 regarding Writ Jurisdiction scope (Article 32 vs Article 226).
Article 32 allows writ petitions strictly for enforcement of Fundamental Rights, whereas Article 226 enables High Courts to issue writs for Fundamental Rights as well as 'for any other purpose' (ordinary legal rights). Statement 1 is correct.
Constitutional provisions explicitly define the remedy scope under Article 226 wider than Article 32.
2
Evaluate Statement 2 regarding Special Leave Petition under Article 136.
Article 136(2) explicitly states that nothing in Article 136(1) applies to any judgment, determination, sentence or order passed by any court or tribunal constituted under any law relating to the Armed Forces. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Armed forces tribunals are constitutional exceptions to Article 136.
3
Evaluate Statement 3 regarding High Court Superintendence under Article 227.
Article 227(4) explicitly specifies that the power of superintendence does not extend to any court or tribunal constituted by or under any law relating to the Armed Forces. Statement 3 is correct.
Military courts are statutory exceptions to High Court administrative and judicial superintendence under Article 227.

Key Concept

Scope of Writ Jurisdiction and Exceptions to Supreme Court / High Court Authority
Question 277Question →

Match the Committees of the Constituent Assembly of India in List-I with their respective Chairpersons in List-II.

Click a left item, then click its matching right item

Items

Steering Committee
Fundamental Rights Sub-Committee
States Committee (Committee for Negotiating with States)
Order of Business Committee

Matches

Show answer & explanation

Answer

Steering Committee corresponds to Dr. Rajendra Prasad; Fundamental Rights Sub-Committee corresponds to J.B. Kripalani; States Committee corresponds to Jawaharlal Nehru; Order of Business Committee corresponds to Dr. K.M. Munshi.
The Constituent Assembly appointed several committees to handle specific tasks of constitution-making. The Steering Committee was headed by Dr. Rajendra Prasad, the Fundamental Rights Sub-Committee by J.B. Kripalani, the States Committee by Jawaharlal Nehru, and the Order of Business Committee by Dr. K.M. Munshi.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the leadership of the Steering Committee.
Dr. Rajendra Prasad chaired the Steering Committee.
As President of the Constituent Assembly, he led procedural and steering committees.
2
Identify the chairperson of the Fundamental Rights Sub-Committee.
J.B. Kripalani chaired the Fundamental Rights Sub-Committee.
While Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel chaired the main Advisory Committee, J.B. Kripalani headed the sub-committee specifically responsible for fundamental rights.
3
Identify the chairperson of the States Committee.
Jawaharlal Nehru chaired the States Committee.
Nehru headed key federal committees, including Union Powers, Union Constitution, and the States Committee.
4
Identify the chairperson of the Order of Business Committee.
Dr. K.M. Munshi chaired the Order of Business Committee.
Dr. K.M. Munshi managed the scheduling and prioritization of legislative business within the Assembly.

Key Concept

Committees of the Constituent Assembly and their Chairpersons
Question 278Question →

With reference to Public Interest Litigation (PIL) and judicial provisions under the Constitution of India, which of the following statements are correct?

Select all that apply

Show answer & explanation

Answer: A PIL can be entertained by both the Supreme Court under Article 32 and High Courts under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.; The traditional rule of locus standi is relaxed in PIL matters to permit public-spirited citizens to file petitions on behalf of vulnerable social groups.

Answer

The correct statements are those affirming that PIL can be filed under Article 32 and Article 226, and that the traditional doctrine of locus standi is relaxed in public interest petitions.
The statements confirming that PIL can be entertained under Article 32 (Supreme Court) and Article 226 (High Courts), and that the rule of locus standi is relaxed for public interest cases, are correct based on Indian constitutional law jurisprudence.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Evaluate constitutional provisions governing Public Interest Litigation (PIL).
Articles 32 and 226 empower the Supreme Court and High Courts respectively to entertain PIL petitions for enforcing fundamental and public rights.
Judicial precedents have firmly established epistolary jurisdiction and PIL under both Articles 32 and 226.
2
Examine the doctrine of locus standi in PIL jurisprudence.
The strict rule that only an aggrieved person can file a writ petition is relaxed in PIL cases.
This relaxation ensures access to justice for marginalized citizens who cannot approach the court on their own.
3
Check Article 227 limitations regarding Armed Forces tribunals.
Article 227(4) explicitly removes military courts and tribunals from High Court superintendence.
Armed Forces courts operate under dedicated statutory systems exempt from Article 227.
4
Determine the scope of PIL against private entities.
PIL cannot be maintained for purely private contractual disputes against non-state actors.
PIL requires a public interest element, breach of public duty, or involvement of state action.

Key Concept

Public Interest Litigation (PIL) and Constitutional Jurisdictional Limits
Question 279Question →

The President of India generally acts on the aid and advice of the Union Council of Ministers headed by the Prime Minister. However, the Constitution permits the exercise of situational discretion under specific conditions. In which of the following scenarios is the President empowered to exercise situational discretion without relying on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Appointment of the Prime Minister when no single political party or coalition commands a clear majority in the Lok Sabha

Answer

The appointment of the Prime Minister when no single political party or coalition commands a clear majority in the Lok Sabha represents a situation where the President exercises situational discretion.
The President of India possesses situational discretion (discretion arising out of parliamentary circumstances) in appointing the Prime Minister when no political party or pre-poll alliance commands an absolute majority in the Lok Sabha.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Examine the constitutional framework governing aid and advice under Article 74.
Article 74(1) mandates that the President shall act in accordance with the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers headed by the Prime Minister in executing executive duties.
India follows a parliamentary system of government where real executive authority resides in the cabinet.
2
Identify recognized instances of situational discretion vested in the President.
When no party holds a majority after a general election, or when a Prime Minister dies in office without an obvious successor, the President must use personal judgement to appoint a Prime Minister under Article 75(1).
An outgoing or non-existent council of ministers cannot render binding advice on who should form the next government when the parliamentary mandate is indecisive.
3
Evaluate the constitutional restrictions on other executive and legislative functions.
Ordinance promulgation (Article 123), clemency decisions (Article 72), and emergency declarations (Article 352) strictly require Council of Ministers or Cabinet recommendation.
The Supreme Court has consistently held (e.g., Shamsher Singh case, 1974) that constitutional satisfaction of the President means the satisfaction of the Council of Ministers.

Key Concept

Situational Discretion of the President of India
Question 280Question →

With reference to the Pitt's India Act of 1784, consider the following statements:

1. It established a Board of Control to manage political affairs, thereby introducing a system of dual government.
2. It empowered the Governor-General to override his council in extraordinary circumstances.
3. The Company's territories in India were for the first time called the 'British possessions in India'.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: 1 and 3 only

Answer

The correct combination is '1 and 3 only'.
The option stating '1 and 3 only' is correct. The Pitt's India Act of 1784 established the Board of Control to direct political, civil, and military operations while leaving commercial functions with the Court of Directors, establishing a dual system of control. Additionally, it declared company territories as 'British possessions in India' for the first time. The power to override council decisions was introduced later by the Act of 1786.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze statement 1 regarding the Board of Control and dual government.
Statement 1 is correct. The Pitt's India Act of 1784 established a 6-member Board of Control to supervise civil, military, and revenue affairs, leaving commercial affairs to the Court of Directors, thus creating a dual system of governance.
To verify the administrative structure created by the 1784 Act.
2
Analyze statement 2 regarding the Governor-General's power to override his council.
Statement 2 is incorrect. The power of the Governor-General to override council decisions in special situations was enacted under the Act of 1786 (specifically to meet Lord Cornwallis's demands), not the 1784 Act.
To distinguish provisions of the Pitt's India Act of 1784 from subsequent amendatory legislation.
3
Analyze statement 3 regarding the terminology 'British possessions in India'.
Statement 3 is correct. The 1784 Act explicitly designated the East India Company's territories as the 'British possessions in India' for the first time.
To check legal nomenclature changes under British parliamentary control.

Key Concept

Key provisions and structural changes introduced by the Pitt's India Act of 1784 versus the Act of 1786
PreviousPage 14 / 16Next
Indian Polity and Governance Practice Questions — State PSC Exam — Page 14 | Examkin